Pregnant NYC Bike "Karen" was the victim, not the agressor

[littleripper]

Trial by social media for a pregnant woman who cried when a man tried to steal the bike she's hired is tried and hung by social media, and put on unpaid leave from her job, with no evidence or investigation:

https://www.bicycling.com/news/a43920956/pregnant-nyc-karen-on-video-trying-to-steal-a-black-mans-citi-bike/

https://news.yahoo.com/receipts-show-hospital-worker-accused-170920174.html

It turns out she had paid for the bike and he has no evidence he paid. But he is not the subject of the internets wrath, no consequences for him.

I hope she takes her employers to court and wins a massive settlement. Surreal levels of misogyny and hatred directed to a pregnant healthcare worker who did nothing wrong at all.

Will this ever be recognised for what it is?

I did engage but I didn't get a discussion. I got the
same as every other black woman, mother of black children and/or other ally. Dismissed, and rridiculed Someone even tried to demand my presence like a dog. (Hey @LangClegsInSpace the 1750's called they want their colonial mindset back). I love a good debate but what is happening here in my opinion is a display of unadulterated white supremacy, not a debate. There is divison as someone pointed out but Black women don't owe loyalty to white women who want equal seats to men in a system that, strip searches their underage girls, kills their mothers in childbirth or allows those few women who enter the workplace on parity with their white female peers, to be left far behind within 10-15 years.

I get that some posters are saying it's clear the woman is being racist. I'm not meaning to be disrespectful, but l don't see any proof of it. She didn't say anything racist or make reference to race. We cannot see her motives, only assume them. We don't know her behaviour was intended to cause harm. You can say behaviour like this has led to harm other times, but that isn't proof of her intent. I totally accept some people will see that video and make assumptions based on their experiences, but they are assumptions. The court of public opinion has judged her based on assumptions.

That's not discussion, that you hectoring other posters. Nobody here tried to strip search or kill anyone, what's the point of such hyperbole?

@nothingcomestonothing She didn’t claim anyone on here had. She said “in a system that” does those things.

I don’t understand feminists who say you can’t call something racist unless you can prove the person had an intentionally racist motive. Do you expect the same burden of proof to declare a man’s actions as sexist?

I see huge parallels between racism and sexism. People behaving like being accused of racism ruins people’s lives worse than being a victim of racism has clear parallels with the issue of sexual assault and rape. The narrative that white people are the real victims of racism because they get judged as racists and their lives can be ruined by “playing the race card” is so similar to the MRA argument that men are the ones really disadvantaged by sexism now because they can’t say anything nowadays and can just have their lives ruined by “crying rape” that I’m baffled that people who spend so much time in feminist circles don’t see it.

I haven’t necessarily agreed with the PP on everything but she has argued in good faith in the face of some really insensitive and tin-eared posts.

No but white feminists who refuse to acknowledge that whiteness can be weaponised are no better for black women than the patriarchy. You cannot see the racism because you choose not to. The only hectoring going on here is not by the black women. There is evidence galore to support all the black women have said about whiteness as a weapon.

I don't think that whiteness can't be weaponised, I've never said that. Of course white privilege exists. All I'm saying is that in this specific example, I didn't see it clearly being racially motivated. I take PPs point that me not seeing it doesn't mean it's not there, people can be covert in their actions and have bad intent. But we don't know. It's not like that woman who accused the birdwatcher in Central Park, that was clearly an attempt to smear a black man who did nothing wrong as a predator. This was one woman and a group of young men in an argument. Neither side comes out well, but only the woman was tried by public opinion.

I'd be pretty intimidated in this situation with males larger than me getting that close and I might even let out some involuntary tearless sobs as a result. That's the case regardless of race.

Thank you for engaging here, where can have a discussion, @Socrateswasrightaboutvoting .

I have thought about your post and have a lot to say so I'll break it up into a few posts.

I agree with the Masterclass quote.

Posters on this thread trying to twist, and deny the alternative perspectives of those, with the same gender, but lived experiences, determined by the colour or their skin/ethnicity.

Lived experience is important but so too are facts.

When facts are twisted, denied, made up in the spaces between what we know, or when people present their perspective from their lived experience as if it was fact, and expect it to be accepted as such in the absence of any other evidence - then we are in a dangerous place because we have no shared sense of basic reality.

I am aware that large swathes of academia would say 'Yes exactly! There is no Truth, only a myriad of truths and 'facts' should not be privileged over lived experience, especially the lived experience of oppressed groups.'

That's an interesting lens through which to examine the world if you have the privilege of being in an ivory tower with the luxury of paid time to gaze down your own navel. It's less interesting and a lot more dangerous when applied to real time individual interactions between actual human beings with actual lives.

This woman has lost her job (or is suspended and in danger of losing it?) and has been shamed and hounded by a huge number of people. Doubtless there will be some right wing backlash going on so these lads' safety is also compromised.

And for what? What has been won here?

She's got a good lawyer, the original video has been taken down, loads of journalists and commentators have been made to apologise, biased presumptuous articles have been deleted and if her employer does not reinstate her then she appears to have a rock solid case to sue them. Based on the facts. Not all the facts are known and it may turn out her case is not so strong but the strength or weakness will still be based on the facts and not on alternative perspectives from groups with different lived experiences.

The world is as it is and not as some people think it ought to be. Without facts there can be no justice.

By the way I don't have 'the same gender' as anyone, I don't have a gender, but I expect we are both the same sex.

Beware of any movement that requires you to think in lockstep.
White women and women from different ethnic communities have the same problem, namely the Patriarchy.

Women on these boards argue like fuck about patriarchy! We certainly don't think in lockstep. We argue about what it means, whether it's a useful term, whether it even still exists in the west etc.

My own view is that it's useful in theoretical discussions between feminists because it's shorthand for a whole load of stuff that still hangs over us from relatively recent times when we actually still were ruled by our fathers, but outside of that academic context I no longer use it except for actual literal patriarchies like Iran or Afghanistan.

Partly that's because I think women in those countries need a strong, clear word to describe the system they live under, in a similar way that a PP advocated for the word 'violence' to only refer to actual violence. Diluting strong words like patriarchy, violence, white supremacy, male supremacy, genocide etc. to cover all sorts of non-life-changing perceived injustices, means that there are no adequate words left to describe how bad things are when the shit really hits the fan.

Partly it's because 'the patriarchy' has become a thought-terminating cliche when applied to any situation in the west, whether we like it or not. People who agree it's 'the patriarchy' are spared from thinking any more deeply about the situation. Those who disagree simply roll their eyes and stop listening. Nothing is gained, nobody becomes wiser. What is the point?

We are over there talking with black people and allies who meet us half way in our discussions.

You and your friends were over there picking apart, seriously misrepresenting and sneering at individual posts from this thread. @LilyMumsnet has now confirmed that there is a blanket ban on TAAT across the site. I am glad that has been made clear.

I read BMN fairly frequently and I learn a lot. I don't post there because it's not my space. I can't remember ever seeing the CRT enthusiasts over there meeting anyone half-way.

We are over there talking because we don't play nicely with people who think they can summon us over like chattel. This is not 1750.

No, the year is 2023 and you are on an anonymous internet forum where the rules basically boil down to 'play nicely' and the same rules apply to all of us across the site.

Nobody can 'summon' you 'like chattel' any more than anyone here can be 'silenced' unless they are banned. Post or don't post and post wherever you want. People will agree or disagree and will form opinions accordingly.

Stand or fall by your words, same as the rest of us, and if you want a private forum to have TAAT then set one up.

“Women of today are still being called upon to stretch across the gap of male ignorance and to educate men as to our existence and our needs. This is an old and primary tool of all oppressors to keep the oppressed occupied with the master’s concerns. Now we hear that it is the task of women of colour to educate white women – in the face of tremendous resistance – as to our existence, our differences, our relative roles in our joint survival. This is a diversion of energies and a tragic repetition of racist patriarchal thought.”
― Reni Eddo-Lodge, Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race

It's not the task of Reni Eddo-Lodge as a women of colour to educate white women so why do you think it is your task? Why are you quoting a piece called 'Why I'm no longer talking to white people ...' at a white woman? Are you talking to me or not? Please decide.

Aside from my son (who I'm responsible for sending forth into the world) I have wasted zero time or effort educating men. That's a job for the decent men. Women don't have time for that shit.

I didn't respond quick enough so you are claiming I have refused to have a discussion and have treated you like a dog?

Fucking hell 👀

I think we are finished here. Go well.

I don’t understand feminists who say you can’t call something racist unless you can prove the person had an intentionally racist motive. Do you expect the same burden of proof to declare a man’s actions as sexist?

But as far as I can see, no one on this thread has argued (I certainly haven't) that because we live in a world where men oppress women and are consistently violent to them, these boys/men must have been sexist amd misogynist in this interaction. So in a situation where newspapers and mainstream sm commenters are putting out articles and posts which carry enough weight to ruin a life, yes, I do want a strong burden of proof.

I see huge parallels between racism and sexism. People behaving like being accused of racism ruins people’s lives worse than being a victim of racism has clear parallels with the issue of sexual assault and rape.

Not really sure how this is relevant. To take your parallel, yes, being a victim of sexism/sexual assault is shit. But if a man were suspended from his job, relieved death threats, and was forced into hiding based on the kind of "evidence" we've seen in that video, I would feel sorry for him while still feeling sorry for victims of sexism/rape/assault. I don't see one as contradicting the other.

Do you accept that men can be sexist without saying anything sexist or making any sexist remarks? If you do, then extrapolate this to racism.

So in a situation where newspapers and mainstream sm commenters are putting out articles and posts which carry enough weight to ruin a life, yes, I do want a strong burden of proof.

And this where many black women see that you just don’t get it do you? Many black people believe that she was racist and was racist in uniform - as an employer who works in a diverse community and presumably will have many black people advising on why what she did was racist - and an employee who works in healthcare where there are already disparate outcomes for black people - do you think that they should do nothing? I said that I am sad that she has lost her job but it transpires she has been suspended - so what should her employer do?

Not really sure how this is relevant. To take your parallel, yes, being a victim of sexism/sexual assault is shit. But if a man were suspended from his job, relieved death threats, and was forced into hiding based on the kind of "evidence" we've seen in that video, I would feel sorry for him while still feeling sorry for victims of sexism/rape/assault. I don't see one as contradicting the other.

Very interesting. I presume you believe that people can do sexist things without talking about someone’s gender or making sexist remarks. If you do - do you think that they should warrant censure if it happens? And is the reason it doesn’t always happen is because of patriarchy? Because it sounds to me that what you are saying via a vis racism is that you want people of colour to have the same response of society as patriarchy which is a shrug. I think the response of society to this event is the right one and we should be pushing for a societal response to patriarchy to be similar to this one - we have a long way to go on that front. We can always feel sorry for someone who is being told off or being punished - we’re human, however we cannot extend our empathy to not allowing for outcomes of behaviour (be it sexism or racism) to happen.

Do you accept that men can be sexist without saying anything sexist or making any sexist remarks? If you do, then extrapolate this to racism

Of course they can be, but we wouldn't know about it! All I can judge someone on is what actually happened. Not what I think they're thinking in their head, thinking what you want to is legal no matter how much I suspect I won't agree with you. You can't know or police that.

If this was a man arguing with a group of women, might he be a sexist? He might. Should he be called a sexist, judged as such? No, because he didn't actually do anything sexist.

And this where many black women see that you just don’t get it do you? Many black people believe that she was racist

But that's what I'm saying, it's a belief. A belief isn't a fact, it isn't proof. I don't think anyone should suffer consequences from what I think they meant, saying lots of people think someone is x doesn't mean they are x. Should the man in my made up scenario suffer consequences because I think he's a sexist? No, he hasn't done or said anything sexist. Unless you think no man should ever have an argument with women, no matter the circumstances, he's done nothing he should be punished for.

we cannot extend our empathy to not allowing for outcomes of behaviour (be it sexism or racism) to happen.

She got in an argument with some people. That was the behaviour. That's it. Everything else is interpretation, you should be judged on what you actually do or say, not on what others decide you meant by it. The man in my example can think whatever sexist bollocks he likes in his own head, or not, but he should be judged on what he actually said or did.

Lived experience is important but so too are facts.

When facts are twisted, denied, made up in the spaces between what we know, or when people present their perspective from their lived experience as if it was fact, and expect it to be accepted as such in the absence of any other evidence - then we are in a dangerous place because we have no shared sense of basic reality

Or this, which is a much more eloquent way to say what I was trying to say

I worry that trial by mob will be reinstated. They might come for the white women first but it won't end there....

If this was a man arguing with a group of women, might he be a sexist? He might. Should he be called a sexist, judged as such? No, because he didn't actually do anything sexist.

I have repeatedly told you it is not the argument that people have issue with. I have also informed you as to what the thing is that people have found racist and why. You may not want to accept it but her behaviour in the moment was at best meanspirited and at worst racist. You want to give her benefit of the doubt. Black people cannot afford to.

Victim yeah right two sides to every story:

No one bothered to contact us to find out Michael’s story,” she said in a low voice during an interview on Wednesday. “They write all of these things about him, but no one bothered to ask him what happened or look at his receipts.”
Michael interjected: “That’s because if they have my side of the story, she doesn’t have a case.”

Sarah Jane Comrie Update: Citi Bike Teen's Mother Speaks Out (newsone.com)

What about the pile on this guy has faced? Being called a thug and thief. No outrage over that. You cannot use abusive tactics when you are wrong. If I am in the wrong it is better to accept it and not cry dramatically.

Be objective fgs whether it is race, gender etc.. I see a lot on this thread siding with her just because she is a woman. That is not justice. You need to understand the other side of the story as well and many other untold stories e.g. when you go on a elevator and I have seen women hold tightly on to their bags when someone black comes on because of the stereotypes they are prone to crime it is the same in shops as well security guards always focusing on black individuals.

She was screaming like she was being violently attacked or mugged which did not happen. Imagine if someone thought she was being mugged and pulled out a gun and shot the guys that has happened in the past especially in America. There is a way in dealing with a situation screaming like you been violently attacked is not the thing to do.

Thank you for posting that link @SleepDreamThinkHuge I hope everyone on this thread reads the interview (and sees the receipts that Michael provided). These are heartbreaking words from Michael's mother, but they put the whole incident into context:

“So with a white woman standing right there and screaming for someone to help, if the police had come, and my son was standing there, they are going to shoot him. If he runs, they are going to shoot him.

“Everyone is taking her side because she is rich, and she is white, and she hired a lawyer, and the lawyer is defending her. They put it all over the television, and no one tried to find out who the boy is who could have lost his life. They didn’t find out who the family is. Everybody just ignored us like we don’t matter.”