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?

[PopcorningLikeAHappyGuineaPig]

@nothingcomestonothing

Well amongst other things you did say

I'm inclined to agree with Ben Crump. It's fair to say she's likely someone who is capable of 'white women tears' and telling people 'this black man has threatened me' when nothing like that has happened.

You judged this woman as 'likely' a racist and a liar. Based on the colour of her skin.

Judging someone by/for the colour of their skin. There's a word for that, funnily enough.

[LangClegsInSpace]

Sorry for dragging posts across from there to here, it should not be necessary because MNHQ should apply the same rules regarding TAAT across all topics.

[LangClegsInSpace]

Yes, having to resort to proximity talks is fucking hilarious isn't it?

If you had any decent arguments you would come here and make them.

[LangClegsInSpace]

Beware of any movement that is #NoDebate and can only argue in slogans, whether that's 'TWAW' or 'white women's tears'.

Beware of any movement that requires you to think in lockstep.

Beware of any movement that is incapable of talking to you and instead retreats to an echo chamber to talk about you.

Many women here have spent a decade navigating that kind of shite and we are not fooled.

[user1477391263]

Beware of any movement that can only argue in slogans.

This is a great one and I’m remembering it for future reference!

[skullbabe]

To bring this back to the case at hand -the entire interaction the bike was active and the boy kept saying that he had rented the bike and was trying to show her his receipt and the app on the phone. He was showing everyone. She tried to take his phone (not sure why). She didn’t say that she had rented the bike herself or do the same as him and demonstrate on the app. She the started shouting for help. When her colleague arrived she started crying. Her colleague assessed the situation and I’m paraphrasing why don’t you take the bike off your account and just let her have it. They refused as is their right. She went and rented another bike. The biking app will not allow you to rent 2 bikes at once - she would have had to have docked the first bike to take away the other bike. She has produced 2 receipts - one with a $0 charge and the second one for her second ride. The receipts are not identified as being linked to her nor are they time stamped. But taking this on face value - she would have had 2 charges if the bike was not docked by the boy to allow him to take it because it would have been linked to her account. But we know from the video that it wasn’t linked to her account because of what her colleague said to the boys - take it off your account to let her have it.

Being charitable to her - she may have thought she reserved the bike but it was not linked to her account so could be a glitch in the system which could have be solved by just checking her app. What so many people object to is her behaviour during this misunderstanding - you will notice that she started to cry only after someone attended to her shouting. You will also notice how quickly she stopped and how she had no other visible signs of crying. Many of you in this thread have acknowledged that some women can and will use distress to manipulate a situation - it is especially fraught when the racial dynamics between the 2 people are at play because they can cause life or death situations for the black people involved.

[nothingcomestonothing]

@LangClegsInSpace

Beware of any movement that is #NoDebate and can only argue in slogans, whether that's 'TWAW' or 'white women's tears'.

Beware of any movement that requires you to think in lockstep.

Beware of any movement that is incapable of talking to you and instead retreats to an echo chamber to talk about you.

Many women here have spent a decade navigating that kind of shite and we are not fooled.

This.

The tactics of some posters on this thread have been eye opening, to say the least.

[nothingcomestonothing]

@skullbabe

it is especially fraught when the racial dynamics between the 2 people are at play because they can cause life or death situations for the black people involved.

I agree, and the whole situation could have been handled differently by both parties. But by the same token, a lone woman in a confrontation with a group of men is also going to feel and possibly be very vulnerable.

The issue for me is not so much who was right or wrong, or who behaved perfectly (no one, we're all human). It's that this woman was assumed to be wrong, assumed to be a liar and a racist, villified on social media and suspended from her job. On no evidence other than the fact she was white.

[LilyMumsnet]

Hi all

Please can we ask that you avoid discussing other threads elsewhere on the boards? We have a blanket ban on threads about threads as it makes things quite tricky to moderate. If it continues then we may have to delete this thread.

[skullbabe]

@nothingcomestonothing

@skullbabe

it is especially fraught when the racial dynamics between the 2 people are at play because they can cause life or death situations for the black people involved.

I agree, and the whole situation could have been handled differently by both parties. But by the same token, a lone woman in a confrontation with a group of men is also going to feel and possibly be very vulnerable.

The issue for me is not so much who was right or wrong, or who behaved perfectly (no one, we're all human). It's that this woman was assumed to be wrong, assumed to be a liar and a racist, villified on social media and suspended from her job. On no evidence other than the fact she was white.

The evidence she was wrong was throughout the video - it wasn’t an assumption. Her behaviour put those boys at risk - by pretending to cry she was calling on someone to rescue her. She is the one who tried to touch the boy. You cannot see this situation from those boys perspective and that is fine but you need to understand that many women here can because they understand the additional dynamics at play. And watching that video they absolutely saw those dynamics at play.

I’m sad she has lost her job because - it’s tough out there but she was representing her employer when she behaved as she did in uniform. They cannot have somebody front facing who has demonstrated this behaviour - sure, if there was no video and a simple complaint, they would have sent her to a equality and diversity refresher and reflective work and continued her employment but they cannot do that now this was so public. Her lawyer (employment) will certainly argue the case for her but it is not on people to say that her behaviour was not harmful.

[ChardonnaysBeastlyCat]

It was the men’s behaviour that put the woman at risk. They kept crowding her, shouting at her and one of them was physically threatening by putting his hand on the handlebar, across her body and touching her abdomen while doing that.

I’m surprised you missed all that.

Of course she cried. She’s also pregnant, with hormones all over the place.

[inamarina]

@nothingcomestonothing

This.

The tactics of some posters on this thread have been eye opening, to say the least.

I also agree with @LangClegsInSpace, especially with this:

Beware of any movement that is #NoDebate and can only argue in slogans, whether that's 'TWAW' or 'white women's tears'. 

Beware of any movement that requires you to think in lockstep. 

[inamarina]

@skullbabe

To bring this back to the case at hand -the entire interaction the bike was active and the boy kept saying that he had rented the bike and was trying to show her his receipt and the app on the phone. He was showing everyone. She tried to take his phone (not sure why). She didn’t say that she had rented the bike herself or do the same as him and demonstrate on the app. She the started shouting for help. When her colleague arrived she started crying. Her colleague assessed the situation and I’m paraphrasing why don’t you take the bike off your account and just let her have it. They refused as is their right. She went and rented another bike. The biking app will not allow you to rent 2 bikes at once - she would have had to have docked the first bike to take away the other bike. She has produced 2 receipts - one with a $0 charge and the second one for her second ride. The receipts are not identified as being linked to her nor are they time stamped. But taking this on face value - she would have had 2 charges if the bike was not docked by the boy to allow him to take it because it would have been linked to her account. But we know from the video that it wasn’t linked to her account because of what her colleague said to the boys - take it off your account to let her have it.

Being charitable to her - she may have thought she reserved the bike but it was not linked to her account so could be a glitch in the system which could have be solved by just checking her app. What so many people object to is her behaviour during this misunderstanding - you will notice that she started to cry only after someone attended to her shouting. You will also notice how quickly she stopped and how she had no other visible signs of crying. Many of you in this thread have acknowledged that some women can and will use distress to manipulate a situation - it is especially fraught when the racial dynamics between the 2 people are at play because they can cause life or death situations for the black people involved.

The receipts are not identified as being linked to her nor are they time stamped. But taking this on face value - she would have had 2 charges if the bike was not docked by the boy to allow him to take it because it would have been linked to her account. But we know from the video that it wasn’t linked to her account because of what her colleague said to the boys - take it off your account to let her have it. 

This makes me wonder if there was an issue with the app and both parties involved had reserved the same bike?
If her receipts are real, wouldn’t the $0 charge indicate that she had indeed reserved a bike which she didn’t end up using/ that was docked shortly after she collected it? I can’t re-watch the video at the moment - did the boy re-dock the bike?

[Lndnmummy]

So Karen was not the victim after all then. Who would have thought?

[skullbabe]

@ChardonnaysBeastlyCat

It was the men’s behaviour that put the woman at risk. They kept crowding her, shouting at her and one of them was physically threatening by putting his hand on the handlebar, across her body and touching her abdomen while doing that.

I’m surprised you missed all that.

Of course she cried. She’s also pregnant, with hormones all over the place.

He is holding the handlebars to stop her taking the bike. She is trying to pull the bike away from him. She made contact with him by doing that. The boys all around her were also non threatening- you had one boy sitting on another bike looking at his phone whilst waiting for things to play out, one on another bike behind them all, one filming and one arguing with her. The one filming joined in the argument but the other 2 were not involved at all except to try and say “it doesn’t matter”. That you can’t see that is your issue. She also did not cry. It is evident from how quickly she stopped.

Hopefully she gets her job back but she behaved badly.

[skullbabe]

@inamarina

The receipts are not identified as being linked to her nor are they time stamped. But taking this on face value - she would have had 2 charges if the bike was not docked by the boy to allow him to take it because it would have been linked to her account. But we know from the video that it wasn’t linked to her account because of what her colleague said to the boys - take it off your account to let her have it. 

This makes me wonder if there was an issue with the app and both parties involved had reserved the same bike?
If her receipts are real, wouldn’t the $0 charge indicate that she had indeed reserved a bike which she didn’t end up using/ that was docked shortly after she collected it? I can’t re-watch the video at the moment - did the boy re-dock the bike?

Absolutely seems like an app issue which could have easily been resolved by her accepting that the bike was under him when she saw it on his phone. But she didn’t. And here we are.

[Walrussy]

I might be wrong but hasn't the guy now released receipts showing he had already hired the bike but ended his ride/docked it five minutes before Sarah hired it? So showing that it was actually hers?

[ChardonnaysBeastlyCat]

The way I see it she’s on the bike. He is pushing her off it.

[Walrussy]

I'm also slightly surprised no one's mentioned the ableist slur about the baby. Is 'retarded' an acceptable word in the US?

[inamarina]

@skullbabe

Absolutely seems like an app issue which could have easily been resolved by her accepting that the bike was under him when she saw it on his phone. But she didn’t. And here we are.

But what if there was an issue and the bike really was under his and her name?

[nothingcomestonothing]

@Lndnmummy

So Karen was not the victim after all then. Who would have thought?

We don't know who was at fault in terms of who had booked the bike, possibly neither party if there was some kind of glitch in the booking system.

But some people have already decided that the woman is at fault, that she was faking crying, that she was lying and that she was a racist. We do tk kw any