Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 28: Why He Simply Cannot Shut Up
Forensic Behavioral-Somatic and Ethical Commentary
Photo by Steven Johnson via Unsplash
Some men cannot keep silent, even when silence is the only strategy that could save them. In his desperate performance, Johnston illustrates a textbook case of compulsive self-sabotage layered with literary narcissism.
Like a moth fixated on its own reflection in a flame, he writes, deletes, writes again, each line meant to reclaim a sense of power long since evaporated. He imagines himself the unseen puppeteer — the “intellectual” who can redefine reality through selective metaphors and poorly disguised allusions.
But these writings do not mystify; they clarify. They reveal not sophistication, but an unrestrained impulse to be witnessed — to confirm that he is still alive in the public consciousness, even as each sentence tightens the narrative noose around him.
What he calls “philosophical fragments” are, in fact, impulsive confessions dressed up in second-rate symbolism. His belief in some imagined “audience of sympathizers” is merely a hallucination created by an ego unwilling to accept defeat.
He cannot stop. He must not stop. Because the moment he does, he is forced to face the void: the realization that no amount of color-coded posts, no references to Hanoi, no pseudo-literary “loans” can obscure what he has become.
And so, he keeps typing. Each post is an unintentional legal exhibit, a psychological breadcrumb trail, a perfect study for forensic analysis classes in how not to handle reputational collapse.
This is not a tragic hero arc. This is not a misunderstood artist narrative. This is a slow-motion self-destruction dressed in the clothes of intellectual vanity.
And he calls it art.
Public Post published by Pat Johnston (captured June 29, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
The published excerpt above exemplifies a deeply embedded pattern of self-sabotage and narrative disintegration. Rather than presenting himself as a reflective intellectual or a misunderstood scholar, the author repeatedly exposes his own fascination with control dynamics, transactional intimacy, and emotional debt.
The language—oscillating between performative detachment and gleeful degradation—reveals a core need to demonstrate power over both subjects (“the Mamas”) and readers. Far from clarifying his innocence, this piece cements a persona of calculated voyeurism and manipulative bonding.
In forensic terms, this is not merely an autobiographical slip but a strategic maladaptive disclosure: a compulsive impulse to reassert dominance, even at the cost of reputational collapse. It suggests an inability to regulate self-exposure, mirroring behavioral dysregulation often seen in individuals who repeatedly undermine their own social positioning (self-sabotage pattern).
For observers—especially within academic or journalistic spheres—this excerpt functions as direct evidence of narrative incoherence and confirms a high-risk communication profile. In simpler terms: each line further alienates potential sympathizers and solidifies a public perception of the author as an unreliable narrator of his own story.
Journalists often recognize such figures as classic examples of self-destructive publicity: those who crave attention while lamenting exposure, constructing their own downfall in real time.
Photo by Jad Limcaco via Unsplash
It is difficult to comprehend how a father — a self-proclaimed scholar of ethics and literature — can repeatedly choose public self-destruction over quiet accountability.
When he publishes cryptic posts, sends performative gestures, and publicly reinvents his narrative, he does not stand alone. His children, bystanders to his chaos, inherit the collateral shame he refuses to confront.
He did not just betray a partner. He betrayed the very people he claims to protect: his own family.
If he cannot protect his own legacy from decay, what exactly is he trying to teach others? If he cannot shield his children from the debris of his performative downfall, how can he claim moral authority?
True accountability does not require an audience — but true irresponsibility ensures one.
Why Some People Can’t Help But Ruin Themselves
When self-destruction feels safer than silence, some individuals turn every warning into a stage.
They crave attention more than resolution, prefer chaos over repair, and would rather be publicly burned than quietly irrelevant.
This isn’t just narcissism — it’s a compulsive devotion to self-sabotage, a tragic performance in which they become both the arsonist and the ash.
Lawyers can’t fix it. PR firms can’t rebrand it. Even authorities watch, stunned, as the actor sets fire to every exit door — just to prove they’re still in control of the flames.
Public Post published by Pat Johnston (captured June 29, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
And again, we observe a compulsive urge to broadcast — this time dressed up as pseudo-poetic “climate commentary.” Despite the attempts at layered metaphors and forced shock value, the writing ultimately reveals a deeper insecurity: a desperate need to assert intellectual and sexual relevance at any cost. Rather than reflecting insight, each fragmented line becomes a silent plea to be witnessed, a faint echo of someone grappling with his own insignificance. When a man can no longer control his impulses to perform, even the planet becomes another stage for his self-absorbed confessions.
Public note published by Pat Johnston (captured Jul 3, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
Johnston’s latest text performs exactly the paradox he denies: an obsessive engagement masquerading as disdain.
By invoking “syllabus,” he inadvertently validates the very educational and analytical framing he tries to reject. The insect imagery (locusts, moths, buboes) reveals a projection of internal decay rather than a true dismissal of external critique.
His rhetorical stance — “You think anybody cares?” — betrays a fundamental tension: the desire to be both victim and rebel, both transcendent artist and fragile ego under siege.
Ironically, the piece becomes a live syllabus specimen itself: a raw, unfiltered display of defensive affect regulation, captured in real-time.
The phrase “nobody cares” is a classic defensive projection.
Statistically, 24,490+ documented views contradict this assertion.
Such statements typically emerge from individuals seeking to minimize perceived reputational threat while experiencing high internal vigilance.
Screenshot captured on July 3, 2025
Note on Naming:
The subject of these verses is identified by name due to the severity of the public threats made during that period.
Naming is not intended to humiliate, but to preserve the integrity of the record and reflect the seriousness of the documented behavior.
While the individual has since responded publicly, the response has not addressed the core evidence. In such cases, visibility remains necessary. Selective rebuttal is not accountability.
Full evidence archive submitted to QPS, TEQSA, AHRC, and Ethics Australia: View here.
Read the full series
- Entry 1: The Man Who Taught Me Ethics by Failing All of Them
- Entry 2: The Disappearance of the Public Poet
- Entry 3: The Hanging Tree Case Study
- Entry 4: Hidden Like Accountability
- Entry 5: The Collapse of Assumptions
- Entry 6: The Ethics of a Tinder Bio
- Entry 7: How He Ate Told Me Everything
- Entry 8: What Makes a Scholar Dangerous
- Entry 9: Fragment of Life, Fragment of Accountability
- Entry 10: Anatomy of Disappointment
- Entry 11: Legal Defense Challenges: A Framing Statement
- Entry 12: Six Years After Ronell – What Academia Still Doesn’t Get
- Entry 13: QUT and The Man Who Raped Me
- Entry 14: Why Sarcasm Toward Institutions Can Backfire
- Entry 15: P*ssy or Toxic Masculinity?
- Entry 16: Who is Your Favorite Comedian?
- Entry 17: And What is Your Favorite Song?
- Entry 18: Grant Proposal — Narrative Ethics as Survivor-Led Forensics
- Entry 19: The Coward Behind the Clone
- Entry 20: [URGENT HIRE] CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST
- Entry 21: [URGENT] Legal Counsel Needed for Complex Reputation Rehabilitation
- Entry 22: YOU’RE AN ABUSER. STOP CONTACTING ME
- Entry 23: Seeking Counsel for a Fallen Academic
- Entry 24: Internal Legal-PR Briefing
- Entry 25: For Journalists – Legal & Ethical Clearance Summary
- Entry 26: Symbolic Prostitution, Transactional Intimacy, or Just a “Loan”?
- Entry 28: Why He Simply Cannot Shut Up (you are here)
- Entry 29: Forensic Commentary on “LARGE Language Muddle”
- Entry 30: Don’t Just Threaten My Future. Because I’m Going To Archive Your Present
- Entry 31: Open Letter to the Person Who Tried to Break Me with Defamation
- Entry 32: Defamation, Harassment, Doxxing Class 101
- Entry 33: Confidential Crisis Recovery Proposal
- Entry 34: Forensic Behavioral-Somatic Report
- Entry 35: Forensic Commentary on the Tattoos
- Entry 36: QUT and the Abuser They Once Had
- Entry 38: When Poetry Becomes Revenge Porn
- Entry 40: A Man Built for Applause, Not Accountability
- Entry 41: Neurobehavioral Addendum
- Entry 43: Why Does It Sound Like a War Metaphor?
- Entry 44: Forensic Commentary on Racialized and Fetishizing Language in “Hidden Like Rice”
- Entry 45: Public Misuse of Former Academic Affiliation
- Entry 46: The Two Things That Didn’t Leave a Bad Impression
- Entry 47: When Affection is Just an Alibi (A Bundy-Inspired Reflection)
- Entry 48: Humbert, Lolita, and the Fetish of Fragility
- Entry 49: The Fetish of Smallness as Symbolic Violence
- Entry 50: Motif Risk Analysis
- Entry 52: Can an Abuser Be a Good Father?
- Entry 53: Who Protects the Children?
- Entry 54: From Blackmail to Children
- Entry 55: A Letter I’ll Never Send
- Entry 56: Outc(L)assed - Critical Race Analysis
- Entry 57: Forensic Breakdown: “A Voidance” by Johnston
- Entry 58: Johnston, Who Raised You?
- Entry 59: Public Financial Terms & Narrative Conditions
- Entry 60: What Kind of Future Do You Think Awaits You?
- Entry 61: Why I Believe He Has No Real PR or Legal Team
- Entry 62: Why I Can Legally (and Ethically) Call You a Pathetic Pig
- Entry 63: Tell Me You’re a Pathetic Pig Without Telling Me You’re a Pathetic Pig
- Entry 65: Did Your Mother Teach You To Speak Like This?
- Entry 66: Nobody Cares Anyway
- Reflection: The Miscalculation
(More entries coming soon)
→ [Back to Start: Introducing Mr. J, a Former Professor Series]
© 2025 Linh Ng. All rights reserved.
This publication is intended for educational and reflective purposes only.
Sharing the original link is welcomed and encouraged.
Please do not reproduce, redistribute, or translate this content — in whole or in part — without written permission.
This piece reflects both lived experience and critical analysis. It is not meant to be detached from its author or reframed without context.
Misuse or decontextualization may lead to formal clarification or takedown requests.
This work has been reviewed and quietly followed by scholars, educators, and ethics professionals across multiple sectors.
If your institution is engaging in critical discourse around narrative justice, symbolic coercion, or representational ethics, feel free to connect via Substack DMs or formal channels.
A regulatory case regarding this matter has already been classified under a protected status within national education integrity systems.
Should any reputational countermeasures or distortions arise, I reserve the right to publish the documented timeline, behavioral patterns, and contextual metadata.
All relevant documentation has been submitted through formal legal and regulatory pathways.
Photo cover by Sasha Freemind via Unsplash