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?

Except that's not what happened. But carry on pretending it did if it makes you feel good.

The young man himself told what actually happened. Is he lying as well? She was entitled to claim the bike.

I refuse to believe you actually believe what you wrote. Just daft.

She claimed the bike because the bike was available.

The "self-own" video above seems to make its argument on the premise that "planning to rent the bike" is not the same thing as "rented the bike" and that the young man cannot make an argument that he possessed the bike when in fact he was simply standing next to the bike for six minutes while he was waiting for his rental window to re-open.

I think the video makes a valid point, actually. If you are using the bike for the free 45 minute ride, then that privilege requires you to give up the bike for 5 min before you re-rent it. "Give up" does not mean "stand over the bike and physically prevent anyone else from renting it." It means, "put the bike back into general use." That 5 min is meant to allow others to access the bike if needed. I think a reasonable way to use that 5 min reset period is that, if no-one shows up in that 5 min who wants the bike, you are free to re-rent it and ride again. However if someone else shows up at 4 min and wants to use the bike, you release the bike to them, because the whole point of the 5 min reset period is to give others access to the bike.

The 'self-own" video's point is, in part, that if she had shown up and wanted the bike a couple minutes later, the young man would have had a good argument because then the bike would have been accessible for him to rent again because the reset period would have been over. However, if that were the case, he would have simply scanned the bike and officially rented it. The fact that she was able to scan the bike and rent it under her own account indicates that he had not actually rented the bike. He was claiming he had rented the bike when he had not.

@aloris Yes, I agree. The electric bikes are not so easy to get which is why Sarah would have preferred that one.

This video gives a clear picture of what may have happened. The young man in the lilac top gave her his bike at the end.
r

That makes sense in many scenarios but in his one the young men didn't step away. And there were more of them than of her. I doubt they felt all that intimidated.

I take it you and your children are white? No one with black or brown children doubt even for a second that those boys felt threatened and intimidated.

I don't think either they or the woman felt scared. Having said that fear can cause a fight reaction in people . I'm willing to accept that possibility. I'm also aware that the woman could have been motivated by racism. I just don't think the video makes it clear either way .

To be fair though @Lndnmummy I am not black myself and I live in the UK, so my experiences don't count for much. The USA has a very systemic racism against those who are black or native, it seems.

so to recap on the video upthread:

• the young man did not have the bike booked, he was waiting for a time out to elapse so he could book it again without paying the higher charge and didn't want others to book it while he waited
• The woman booked it on her phone and the young man tried to prevent her from taking it, though it was hers at that point, then used his physical strength to push the bike back into the dock to take it off her account
• he then rebooked it on his phone to try to make it look like it was his all along and she was taking it from him
• another young man with better manners gave up the bike he wanted to use to the woman.

Karen is a pejorative word. It is a stereotype slur and therefore shouldn't be used.
It does not move discussion forward.

While what you say sounds logical, the reality of the situation is that she was a pregnant White woman confronting five Black teenage boys. No pregnant women would tussle with teenage boys anyway but because they were Black, she knew that she would be believed no matter what. That is what makes her a Karen. If it were a White man, a Black man or a Black woman, no one would have moved if they screamed for help. It would have caused no concern.

She did not scream, "I'm trying to rent a bike and they won't let me." This was not a theft. It was a dispute. She screamed the magic word, "stealing," knowing that people would naturally assume that she was being robbed of the bike by five Black boys. She could have gotten those boys killed.

"You're hurting my fetus?" No one would say that without an agenda. She was more aggressive toward five teenage Black boys than anyone I know and I'm Black. She didn't walk away for a reason. She knew that she had the upper hand.

I never rented a bike and I don't know the rules. However, common sense and concern over your "fetus," would cause any normal woman to rent another bike. Only a Karen would fight over a specific bike.

Or a tired, pregnant medic, who just wants to get home after a 12 hour shift. She is not responsible for other people’s actions.

While what you say sounds logical, the reality of the situation is that she was a pregnant White woman confronting five Black teenage boys. No pregnant women would tussle with teenage boys anyway but because they were Black, she knew that she would be believed no matter what. That is what makes her a Karen.

She didn't go looking for an argument though - she booked a bike on her phone, and when she found the bike she'd booked the young man tried to stop her from taking it. She didn't go out to have a confrontation knowing she'd be believed, she booked a bike and went to take it, and the young man tried to stop her because he'd had it previously and wanted to have it again soon. She wasn't fighting over a specific bike for the sake of it, that was the bike booked on her account and if she'd let them take it she would have been liable for a $1200 fine if it wasn't returned. She didn't cause this.

That word is misogynist. If it's not used for men or there isn't an equivalent word for men, it's misogynist. Would you say about any other group 'only a xxxx would do x'?

Aggressors do take videos though! Kids video themselves doing unkind things and then posting on SM. Videoing doesn't indicate anything.

100% This

Every single mother of black and brown children know how this went down. We know. Yet the endless 'whataboutery' from Karens will never ever stop. It is soul destroying. I can not fathom how people who are so invested in feminism and equal rights are so blind to racism. It is eye opening to say the least.

I have 'brown' children, am I allowed to have an opinion now without you calling me a misogynist slur?

We all know 'how this went down' because it's on the video. The woman booked a bike which was free to be booked, and the young man tried to stop her taking it because he wanted to book it later. He was in the wrong. Stop trying to justify your prejudice against this woman with your assumptions about stuff that did not happen in this case.

Every single mother of black and brown children know how this went down. We know. Yet the endless 'whataboutery' from Karens will never ever stop. It is soul destroying. I can not fathom how people who are so invested in feminism and equal rights are so blind to racism. It is eye opening to say the least.

No, actually. Every single mother of black or brown children doesn't think this. You have been told that Karen is offensive and misogynistic yet still use it. Why is that? Are you being deliberately provocative?

Or maybe just a GF - that's what it looks like.

They weren't children or boys, they were young men, some were adults.

Except that isn't what happened at all. She didn't book the bike in advance. She used her phone to scan the QR code while the 17-year-old boy was still holding the handlebars. And screamed for help, erroneously claimed that he was injuring her unborn child, grabbed his phone, cried (or pretended to cry). The ugly racist context is evident. Was she conscious that her behaviour was racist? Maybe not, but that doesn't matter.

You cannot call dibs on a bike.

The young man was hogging in in between reduced cost rides. the bike was free to be rented out by anyone where not in use, and the nurse rented it. The young man then didn't let her use it and intimidated her.

It's all there for everybody to see, the recording, the receipts and the young man's sister's statements.

My understanding is that you book a bike, the system tells you the code of it and you go to that bike and scan it on your phone. Though I've never used it so I accept I might be wrong on the process but that's how I thought it worked.

And the ugly sexist context here is evident - the male who had no right to the bike was blocking it, yelled at the woman trying to take what was hers because he wanted it later, used his greater physical strength to try to intimidate her and stop her from taking what she had booked, and to push the bike back into the dock so he could book it. Was he conscious that his behaviour was sexist? Maybe not, but apparently that doesn't matter.

Exactly

This is so wrong. HE did NOT 'use his strength to intimidate her'. SHE used her whiteness to pretend that she was in danger to intimidate HIM.
That is what happend.

The even uglier racist context is pretty damn evident too.

He did! He tried to physically block her from the bike, which wasn't his, and he used his greater strength to push the bike back into the dock, to take it off her account so he could put it on his account. He couldn't have done that if he didn't have his greater male physical strength. And how was she 'pretending' to be in danger? How could she know she wasn't in danger when she was surrounded by shouting young men bigger and stronger than her?

You are so determined to see this as racist that you are totally ignoring the sexism in what he did.