Jack Stuef Picks A Fight With Someone His Own Size.

We don't like Jack Stuef.

Jack Stuef is a low level troll, a self-styled comic and self-styled journalist who was forced out of WONKETTE (think about that) for poor taste. Specifically, his taste in subjects for comedic journalism, such as handicapped children. Now Jack Stuef writes for Buzzfeed, which is sort of like Reddit without a downvote button.

So when Jack Stuef applied his talents, formerly devoted to mocking the disabled, to a hit-piece on Matthew Inman of The Oatmeal, we thought Inman would shrug it off. Inman, after all, is the internet equivalent of a former samurai turned buddhist monk, living on a mountaintop, a samurai who has abandoned the sword for a life of contemplation of the idea of a sword, who can now kill with a stick, or a blade of grass, or the Shao Lin Buddha Finger. Such a man does not lower himself to street brawls with thugs like Jack Stuef.

Still, even a master swordsman must defend himself from time to time: This is the result.

You're welcome.

Last 5 posts by Patrick Non-White


  1. Dan Irving says

    Hell – I don't think Stuef has the intellectual capacity to even understand how mortal his wounds are let alone comprehend the enormity of the asswhupping Inman just handed him.

    In the words of the Interwebs: N00b got pwnd!

  2. XxdiexforxyouxX says

    Mr. Oatmeal was Internet-famous before the censorious douchebaggery of the FunnyJunk thing. After that, he was even more widely known. I believe Jack is targeting Oats because he knows that'll bring in an audience, and that is sad and pathetic.

  3. Art says

    I thought the whole thing was kind of lame until the big paragraph about Inman's kids….that he doesn't have.

  4. Art says

    I believe Jack is targeting Oats because he knows that'll bring in an audience, and that is sad and pathetic.

    If I was that size I'd try to bring in an audience with my powerful gravitational field.

  5. Kristin M says

    This is why I read The Oatmeal, because when ever people try to bring him down by being awful (and stupid, and bad lawyers, and bad journalists, etc.) he responds with truth, humor, and a charity fundraiser.

  6. JRM says

    The rough accusations are these:

    1. The comics writer/artist has repeatedly stated that his goal is to make money via comics.

    2. The artist has modified his comics in an effort to make more money.

    3. The artist, an atheist, talks about his atheism but not as much because it's unpopular.

    4. The artist limits his blog postings because he's worried about blowback and wants to sell merch.

    5. The artist says that business skills are the most important skills an artist can have.

    6. The artist is annoyed by what he views as unfounded criticism.

    Yeah. That artist has a name: Scott Adams.

  7. C. S. P. Schofield says

    I have to say; that idiot has the fat, squishy, never-really-experienced-hardship look of a guy I once had to coldcock because he got drunk and attacked the Lady I later married. If you run into this jerk in person, I would keep him away from alcohol if at all possible.

  8. says

    Jesus… all this time I thought "neckbeard" was some sort of figure of speech. Now I'm beginning to wonder if there are people out there who literally have pencils for necks or wears asses as hats.

  9. Caudex says

    Jack B., there are indeed men with pencils for necks. I had one for a classmate. The guy had a pedo stache, was skinny, wore a greasy trenchcoat, and watched porn in class. We called him Pencilneck.

  10. Connie says

    Step 1. Pick a successful internet icon
    Step 2. Insult him with incorrect and childish accusations
    Step 3. Profit

    Mmmm, he better rethink step 2. I don't think it's working.

    I wasn't a big fan of Matt's until recently, when I realized just how smart the mind is behind the poop and fart jokes. He is a master, just as described above.

  11. says

    The pic on his Twitter profile is a much younger and thinner Stuef, from the look of it. Also, no tweets since exchanges four days ago about his Inman article.

  12. Scott Jacobs says

    I thought the whole thing was kind of lame until the big paragraph about Inman's kids….that he doesn't have.

    Oh, it gets better. Neckbeard had the following to say when it was pointed out that the profile he showcased wasn't actually Inman…

    "Still waiting for word from @oatmeal's people on whether that SodaHead profile is real, but I now believe it's fake"

    This one is extra special because he drags someone else into the affair…

    "Not sure where his family photos came from, but this is the woman in the "marriage" and "preganant" photos: @magsroth"

    "So I apologize to Matt Inman for the error, if that is indeed someone's fantasy profile of him "

    ".@rossluippold No he's not married now and I don't think he has kids. I think that's the fantasy aspect "

    And this person summed up Jackie's talent with this one tweet…
    "HA, 'I don't THINK he has kids'. The cornerstone of every great journalistic article – guessing."

  13. says

    I was wondering when you guys would pick up on this :P

    Once again, Inman FTW.

    I'm kind of wondering if there are any real legal ramifications for all the blatant lies and defamation in that article.

  14. Scott Jacobs says

    I think the investigation into that, John, might explain while Stuef's well-used pie-hole has been shut the last few days.

  15. says

    "Jack Stuef Picks A Fight With Someone His Own Size."

    Wha… There's two people with penises that small?

    Oh. Never mind. I see what you meant.

    I'm-athinkin' Stuffed should learn the old gladiator salute: "Ave Caeser! We who are about to die… " Because he seems bound and determined to kill his (pardon the phrase) literary career.

  16. Caudex says

    Stuef is a terrible journalist. I worked for a small-town newspaper for two years, and even they had better standards than ol' Neckbeard up there.

  17. TomB says

    "The pic on his Twitter profile is a much younger and thinner Stuef, from the look of it."

    Well, considering he got fired from Wonkette. There's a very good chance he hasn't eaten in the past year. So it might be a current picture showing his severe emaciation.

  18. says

    Forgetting about what Steuf is or isn't, so many people are talking about Inman's response as if it isn't whiny and self-aggrandizing and also full of shit.

    Steuf focused on Inman's SEO past – which Inman downplays as short and insignificant – because INMAN talked about it a lot in an interview. When he wanted to be seen as a savvy marketer, he was an SEO wizard. When he realizes that makes him look like a hack, SEO was a minor part of his past that meanies bring up.

    Inman said he didn't have a publicist, which is almost certainly a lie. The publicist gave her name and that name is a person on LinkedIn who is not Inman's mom and who lists her job as… the oatmeal's publicist.

    And ceaseless whining about how good he is and how much family he supports and a lot of self-congratulation.

    Steuf fucked up by writing about a parody account. Clearly. But that error was corrected within hours and well before Inman posted his TL;read it anyway response without acknowledging that Buzzfeed had made the correction.

    You don't have to like Steuf to find Inman's response pathetic. And the cartoon usually sucks too, because it is niche-audience catnip without actually being all that funny.

  19. says

    Charles… Carreon? Do I smell a whiff of butthurt?

    Or is it really Steuf masquerading in a Charles Carreon sock?

    Are you really going to defend a man who made fun of a downs syndrome infant, over a man who raised money for charity, and purchased a house for his sister and her adopted kids?

    I'm not saying Inman is perfect or a great guy (he is a horrible person :P) but at least he usually mocks people who can defend themselves if they want >_<

  20. Scott Jacobs says

    No, that's the Charles that sometimes posts here.

    His dislike of Inman's reply is notable only in how exceedingly predictable it is.

  21. a_random_guy says

    I will have to agree with Charles. This was an "attack" that should have simply been ignored. It would have gone away. Now we have the Streisand effect: there will be a lot more clicks on Stuef's basically stupid article than otherwise. For a bonus we have Inman's post, which reads like a whiny teenager wondering "why don't people liiike me, why are they so meeaaan to me?"

    Really, both sides have shown themselves to be pretty pathetic…

  22. says

    Everyone deserves a defense, yo. Sorry to ruin your party by disagreeing with the consensus. And I'm more anti-Inman (Carreon-shredding, aside) than pro-Steuf. This is exactly the forum that should recognize the difference.

    Scott: Thanks for … something? Recognizing me? I don't know. Happy Channukah, anyway.

  23. says

    @a_random_guy – I didn't read Inman's post like a whiny teenager, I read it as a guy who wants the record set straight. If you don't call out crappy journalism, then it will continue to exist, flourish even.

    Also, I followed this whole thing without once clicking on the original post by Stuef. He hasn't made a since cent off of me.

    Sure, Matt could have ignored it, and it might have been a really classy move, however, it's insanely hard to ignore that urge to bite back. It's human nature, I'll bet that most of us here would have a hard time resisting the urge as well. So, to belittle Matt for defending himself, it's a bit hypocritical.

  24. Ollie says

    I think parts of Inman's response sounded whiny, but overall the tone seemed to be setting the record straight (and a little old-fashioned eye-for-an-eye at the end)

  25. says

    @Charles – Everyone certainly deserves a defense, but when your last exploit was "shamelessly making fun of a mentally deficient toddler", it tends to make any defense paper-thin.

    I, myself have a hard time seeing Matt in a bad light, does he make horrible choices, sure, but as he has demonstrated before, he knows when he goes too far, and apologizes for it and learns from his mistake. Also, his recent philanthropic efforts make it even harder to come down on him for feeling the need to defend against meritless dreck from a pathetic hack.

  26. says

    Jesus Christ. Stop being so sanctimonious over a fucking joke. It wasn't a good joke. It WAS, obviously, offensive, but holy shit. Did you stop watching Louis CK, too? Probably not, even the ones who angrily reply "YES I MOST CERTAINLY DID!"

  27. says

    I've never watched Louis CK ;)

    I just see no redeeming value in Stuef. Both he and Inman make terrible jokes about really offensive topics, the big difference between them is that Matt has the good sense to apologize when he's crossed a line (though I wasn't personally offended by the F5 rape joke), and he has a philanthropic side that we've been seeing more of recently. Stuef just seems like an absolute douche with no redeeming qualities who's only goal was to smear someone who's actually contributing in some small way to humanity and profit from it.

  28. Caleb says

    I must admit to being genuinely confused at the "rape joke" furor. Was it crude, insensitive, and offensive? Yes of course! It's The Oatmeal. You'd have a difficult time finding any material on his website not deemed "off-color" in polite society. Why all the outrage over this particular tasteless joke and not any of the others?

    The thing that lessens Inman most in my eyes is that he backed down at all.

  29. LT says

    I, personally, found the F5 key joke hilarious. My old laptop's F5 key has a groove in it from me pounding on the poor thing so often. This coming from someone who usually finds rape jokes inexcusably offensive.

    Was Inman a bit whiny in his defense? Yes. But dammit, Neckbeard the Bloated was aiming low and making bullshit up, and that kind of crap is bound to make even the thick-skinned get kind of rage-faced. Sometimes the Oatmeal offends me. Sometimes it's hilarious. And usually something awesome comes of it either way. So I can completely understand his response, and empathize. He handled it better than I would have.

  30. Kevin says

    I must admit to being genuinely confused at the "rape joke" furor.

    Well I haven't looked into it, but I'd give 2 to 1 odds that the SRS crowd had something to do with it. Whipping up furors over "rape jokes" that aren't even actually rape jokes, but simply include the word rape in them, is right in their wheelhouse. In fact I wouldn't even be surprised if Stuef himself is an SRS goon, what with the line about "jest[ing] about sexual violence in the language of Reddit"… and hell, even making fun of disabled children whose parents' politics you disagree with is solidly in their wheelhouse as well.

    Again, I'm just speculating here, but the whole affair does seem to have the distinct odor of the SRS "Fempire" about it.

  31. Scott Jacobs says

    I just see no redeeming value in Stuef.

    Don't be silly… He converts oxygen into highly useful carbon dioxide, which the plants in his basement apartment would need, if they weren't plastic.

  32. dex says

    Inman could have left out the story about his fan with cancer and his sister's new baby and I'd've been alright. But the response overall was great fun.

  33. AlphaCentauri says

    I get annoyed by the political correctness of complaining about jokes that use the word "rape" but don't actually deal with sexual violence or women suffering harm, especially when most people seem to think it's just fine to make jokes about prison rape as long as they don't use the word "rape."

  34. says

    Prison rape jokes are always funny, because they allow the educated and well-off, who by and large don't go to prison, to make fun of the misfortune of the ignorant and poor who often do, without incurring the risk of social stigma.

  35. Scott Jacobs says

    Against what better judgement I might have claim to…

    Patrick, I do not quite believe it is a societal "us vs them" issue when it comes to prison rape.

    Usually, it is a specific group talking about a specific person.

    Like the 20-year old who, annoyed that his 2 week old son had, at 4am, disrupted his all-night gaming marathon, punched the kid in the face, finished his game, went to bed, and woke up with the child's mother at 2pm to find his child long dead. He then discussed covering up the child's death, possibly with a kidnapping.

    I've seen (and made) prison-rape jokes about him. I don't feel bad, and I certainly don't think it is because I'm well-off and he's not and so I think it is "ok" to do it without being looked down upon by society.

    I know that YOU know that I care very little what society thinks.

    There is a special kind of person I make such jokes about. Polanski, that asshole, Kimberlin and their ilk.

    I don't cheer when some random person – good or not – dies or suffers…

    But I laughed my ASS off at the gif of Saddam's body being batted at by a cat.

    See the difference?

  36. says

    I think Inman is a douchecanoe, but less of a douchecanoe than Stuef and his ilk because he's occasionally a douchecanoe for charity.

    As I see it, there a lot of tiresome people, mostly on the Internet. I wish they'd all find a way to use it for good.

  37. SPQR says

    Charles writes: "You don't have to like Steuf to find Inman's response pathetic."

    And you don't have to like Inman to find Steuf's faux journalism in need of ridicule … which Inman supplies appropriately.

  38. Narad says

    Everyone deserves a defense, yo. Sorry to ruin your party by disagreeing with the consensus.

    "Deserves"? Yo, not especially. One thing that you seem to be failing to grasp is that this really isn't much about journalism, despite the grasping in your initial attempt. Stuef attempted to play the social game known as "Heroes and Villians" and lost very badly.

  39. Analee says

    Look what you all did! YOU MADE KEN USE CAPSLOCK AND BOLD PRINT! Nice things and why we can't have them, people.

    On the topic at hand: If you're going to call yourself a journalist, you should fact-check your articles before you publish them. Unless they're being published on The Onion, because that site doesn't require fact-checking.

  40. says

    If I didn't know any better, mainly because the very thought makes my intestines want to leap up and throttle my brain for the merest idea, I would suggest that maybe Jack Stuef could be the long lost love child of Crystal Cox and Charles Carreon.

  41. Scott Jacobs says

    Making Ken use text-modifying HTML code risks another "I've italicized the internet" incident.

  42. flip says

    What makes that response brilliant is the use of font sizes combined with rage. Brilliant!


    Steuf fucked up by writing about a parody account. Clearly. But that error was corrected within hours and well before Inman posted his TL;read it anyway response without acknowledging that Buzzfeed had made the correction.

    He also screwed up by not knowing what the charity fundraising was for in regards to the lawsuit.

    Personally, I read it as a guy who deals with a lot of criticism, and on one occasion got annoyed enough with misinformation to post a rebuttal. Imagine all the times he's kept his mouth shut over stuff that bothered him. — I've even done this myself, kept my mouth shut and then in a moment of fury, blogged about something that to an outsider, would have seemed over the top. And I neither like nor follow The Oatmeal outside of reading about the Carreon case here, I can just understand the immediate frustration.

  43. AlphaCentauri says

    The whole funnyjunk escapade started the same way, with Inman writing a blog post mocking a clueless critic who has failed to notice the beam in his own eye. That worked out very well for Inman, the National Cancer Society, and everyone's web traffic (even Tara's). It's not a surprise that he'd consider it worth doing again, especially after Steuf got to the part about the imaginary female spouse and the imaginary children.

  44. a_random_guy says


    I agree completely. Anybody is very likable. It would be a disgrace if nobody didn't like anybody. Everybody should like anybody! Did that make any sense? I hope not…

  45. Damon says

    I didn't think Inman was very whiney. Stuef's article was more of a hit piece, so it warrrant's Inman's response. Sadly, Inman only used one not both barrels.

  46. Rob says

    So, am I the only one who read Ken's reply in a "THIS. IS. SPARTA!!!" voice?

    I came this >< close to making an animated .gif of Leonidas shouting THIS IS POPEHAT while kicking the dude into a pit filled with ponies last night, but I got tired and went to bed instead.

  47. Scott Jacobs says

    Also, to make the .gif accurate, you would have had to make Leonidas about a foot shorter, made him pasty white, and given him a spare tire. :)

  48. Laura K says

    Guys now I have an image of Ken's wife with her hands on her hips saying, "Stop kicking people into the black pit of death, honey!"

  49. Just Plain Brian says

    I'd hate to mispronounce this turdweasel's name when I talk about this – does "Stuef" rhyme with "doof"?

  50. Artor says

    Holy Jeebus Fucknutz on a pogo stick! I wish I can be as awesome as Matthew Inman when I grow up! Unfortunately, I'm 42 & nowhere near, so I'll go on wishing, but wow!
    And I totally want to see that .gif of Ken kicking an internet marketeer into the Pit of Pony.

  51. LT says

    @Rob- If I were not at work and about to go to the dentist's office, I would be so, so very tempted to do that. That is a beautiful image.

  52. Rob says

    It's 2.28 mb, which is about standard for an animated .gif. People still on dial-up will choke on it, but that's about it.

  53. says

    I agree with Charles.

    I fully support Inman's position with regards to the Carreons, cancer, bear love and Nicola Tesla. At the same time, I find the Oatmeal to be predictable, largely unimaginative and unfunny, and his public responses to criticism to be self-righteous and whiny.

  54. jrevelater says


    I don't find Oatmeal unfunny or unimaginative, quite the opposite, although alot of his comics deal with cats so I might concede predictable.

    I wish you would point out his whiny, self-righteous response to HONEST and FAIR criticism as I can't find such a thing.

    I can find the infamous "Let me Loooooveee youuuuu" lambast he gave Funny Junk and Carreon over their mutual attempted extortion of Inman after he had the outrageous gall to complain about the wholesale copying of his website.

    Also, I can find this recent smackdown of a "journalist" named Stuef who, riding the wave of criticism over Inman's rape joke, wrote a lie a misinformation filled critique, while the author himself lived in a glass house so brittle it literally exploded.

    But perhaps you may be so kind as to enlighten all of us as to the whiny responses to the fair criticism you seem to be aware of.

  55. Connie says

    I am ashamed to admit that I found myself harrumphing over a continuity error in the 'This is Popehat' awesomeness.

    I am not ashamed to admit that I laughed so loud my coworkers shot me a funny look.

  56. Rob says

    I am ashamed to admit that I found myself harrumphing over a continuity error in the 'This is Popehat' awesomeness.

    He doffed the hat so it wouldn't accidentally fall into the pit. With the ponies. ;)

  57. Ancel De Lambert says

    The F5 joke was hilariously funny and genius, for the simple reason that it made you feel sympathy for A LUMP OF PLASTIC.

  58. says

    Personally, I found the part about Mr. Stuef claiming he contacted Mr. Inman for comment but actually contacted his mother (who was bewildered the whole time) to be the most entertaining part of this incident.