Central Park Incident

[Coyoacan]

I saw the video when it first came out and saw a woman who play-acted on the phone to the police while torturing her dog for sound effects and using the colour of the man's skin in the hope that he would be shot on sight by the police.

It turns out that, as a feminist, I should have seen a poor woman, scared of a man in an isolated area, making a call for help and giving a limited physical description of the man.

In one discussion, where I suggested solidarity with the mothers of teenage black boys who never know if their sons would come home again when they left the house, that that is not a feminist issue.

Does feminism trump the fight against racism?

Very good point about handmaiden.

Would you like to be told to stop using the word "handmaiden"?

I never use it. I really dislike it.

I suppose my thought generally is that there really is never a necessity to put one over the other in terms of racism or sexism. It's not at all uncommon for both to be at play in different ways and we really don't need to decide on which one "wins".

I'm not convinced this woman was scared, but I can't say for sure she wasn't either. So maybe that did influence her response. In general I think the way things are done now in the US seems to lead to a lot of escalation, and I would not tell anyone of any sex or race that confronting people in that particular way about dogs off leash, or filming it, was a good idea. It seems very likely to lead to some sort of incident and I think the public shaming method of approaching issues is bad. I would especially not think it was a great idea for men to approach women in this way, even if they are in the right about the issue at hand.

She sure walked into it, though, and it's difficult to feel sorry for her.

How is the Karen meme any more misogynist and reductionist that the use of the term "handmaiden"?

I think handmaiden is probably worse than Karen overall, but I don't really think Karen is mainly about a race thing anyway - that's not how I understand it's origins.

Nope, that's not a case of a woman being scared of a man in an isolated area, that's a racist being annoyed that someone who she sees as beneath her told her to keep her dog on a leash and very deliberately using the reasonable fear black men in America have of the police in an attempt to punish the person who asked her to be a more responsible pet owner.

I'm glad the dog is no longer with her either, she was choking the poor thing to the point where I was worried it was going to pass out.

I don't know a single feminist who thinks that women's behavior was in any way reasonable so I'm not sure where the idea that there's some sort of feminist support for her actions comes from.

No feminist I know has supported the woman in the video

Yeah! But it wasn't just the AIBU thread I was referring to but also an interaction I had on facebook with an American feminist who I have since unfollowed.

I'd say unfollowing that person was a good call.

Nope, that's not a case of a woman being scared of a man in an isolated area, that's a racist being annoyed that someone who she sees as beneath her told her to keep her dog on a leash and very deliberately using the reasonable fear black men in America have of the police in an attempt to punish the person who asked her to be a more responsible pet owner.

Maybe. But the fact is that we don't know if she felt intimidated or not. We can only guess from what we see on the video as far as her voice and body language sound.

What if she had given the impression that she was intimidated - it's not a cray idea that a woman might be, there are women who post here who are nervous of all kinds of interactions with men that seem non-threatening to me. Would we be obligated to decide her racism outweighs any issues around fear of male violence, or vice versa? I don't think that's how it works.

I don't know a single feminist who thinks that women's behavior was in any way reasonable so I'm not sure where the idea that there's some sort of feminist support for her actions comes from.

NotCisNorTerf - an FWR regular - believes Ms Cooper is the victim and Mr Cooper the aggressor. She is doubling down on her postition on the second AIBU thread on this topic, and attempting to gaslight the many horrified posters who contributed to the original 1000 post thread; who in the vast majority supported Mr Cooper having watched the video over and over. Her posts are sickening. She reminds me of abusive men who try to fuck your mind up by repeatedly telling you that you are not seeing/feeling what your every sense is telling you you are. Here is her latest comment:

He was the aggressor in this case! Watch the video ffs. He went after her.

But you know that.

Straight out of the gaslighter's handbook.

Well then imo she's made the wrong call in this case. One random person does not equal general feminist support for calling the cops on black men because they ask you to put a leash on your dog, though.

The video was filmed by his sister wasn't it?

No, @OhLookHeKickedTheBall, he filmed it. His sister posted it.

You said you didn't know a single feminist who supports Amy Cooper. I gave you a single feminist who supports Amy Cooper.

How is the Karen meme any more misogynist and reductionist that the use of the term "handmaiden"?

"Handmaiden" is intended as a useful term in feminist discussion that women can apply to any woman, regardless of race, based solely on her patriarchy-supporting behaviour. There are comparable terms for male supporters of patriarchy: "misogynist" and "neckbeard" spring to mind.

"Karen" is intended as a useful term in Black civil rights discussion, but it is only applied to white women who abuse racial privilege, not to all white people. To my knowledge, no comparable term for white men exists, even though white men shoot and kill Black men and often get away with it. Comparable terms for Black people who support white supremacy would be "Uncle Tom".

So what is happening here is that white women are being held to a higher standard of behaviour than white men, even both enjoy white privilege and white men enjoy male privilege as well. This is patriarchal thinking and its a symptom that patriarchy is being replicated within the Black civil rights movement, which isn't likely to end well for Black women.

Another way of thinking of this is that she was BVU in calling the police and was outright criminal in torturing her dog, but by blaming her for any violence inflicted by the racist and mostly male police, you are invoking the first rule of misogyny: that women (in this case Ann Cooper) are responsible for what men (the police) do. A woman should be able to call the police without anyone being at risk of being shot at or choked to death. If the police are violent racists, that's on them.

Great, you found one feminist who supports Amy Cooper, congrats. Still doesn't mean most of us do.

And "made the wrong call"? Good bit of minimising. She's clearly gutted Mr Cooper isn't in jail or dead.

And I am not her, so if you'd like to argue with her I suggest that you go do so. I am not going to engage with any attempt to suggest that feminists in general are in favor of cops killing black men.

What bollocks. She enjoyed the power of telling Mr Cooper that she would be telling the police an African American was attacking her. She knows what police do to black men and she wielded that power for herself. She wouldn't have been an innocent bystander in the killing of a black man for not reason. Through her false accusations, she would have been the instigator of a lynching.

A woman should be able to call the police without anyone being at risk of being shot at or choked to death. If the police are violent racists, that's on them.

And before anyone says "well she knows the police are like that and used that as a weapon", if the police weren't racists, that wouldn't be an option for her.

In a civilised society, it should not be possible for one person to weaponise the police or any other state body against another person, there should be safeguards against that. The recent "Harry The Owl" case (aka Miller vs Humberside Police and Royal College of Policing) was all about the undermining of such safeguards in respect of freedom of speech.

In a society where the police are racist, it puts the victim of a crime committed by a person of colour in an awful position whereby they cannot get justice without putting the perp's life at risk. This undermines the principle of universal access to justice and equality before the law.

Stokely Carmichael said "If a white man wants to lynch me, that's his problem. If he's got the power to lynch me, that's my problem. Racism is not a question of attitude; it's a question of power." Take away the ability to weaponise the police and you take away Ann Cooper's power. The NYPD is the real, structural problem here, not one entitled racist white woman.

I am arguing with her, thanks.

@bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg, you started off well but ended up twisting yourself in knots to avoid addressing the issue at hand, a white women.

"Karen" is intended as a useful term in Black civil rights discussion, but it is only applied to white women who abuse racial privilege, not to all white people. To my knowledge, no comparable term for white men exists, even though white men shoot and kill Black men and often get away with it. Comparable terms for Black people who support white supremacy would be "Uncle Tom".

So what is happening here is that white women are being held to a higher standard of behaviour than white men, even both enjoy white privilege and white men enjoy male privilege as well. This is patriarchal thinking and its a symptom that patriarchy is being replicated within the Black civil rights movement, which isn't likely to end well for Black women."

Black women have coined this term because as you stated, it works to describe a particular type of race weaponising white woman. On a systematic level, black women will tell you that this isn't rare, and poses as much of an issue for black women as any form of sexism. Any!

As a feminist, why not deal with the issue at hand, white women weaponising their race. Surely that behaviour is counterproductive to the feminist cause?

Someone else being the bigger racist (in the case of white men) doesn't absolve you from being one too. Its not the responsibility of black women to protect racist white women because white men benefit from male privilege and they don't.

When we're the victims of both, we really couldn't give a flying fuck.

And anyway, we have names for white men too, I can assure you. However, if you feel strongly about the fact there are none as widely used, make one!

I'm not sure that holding racist white women to account is going to negatively impact us, we'll be fine using words we have created, I'm sure of it. Or, at the very least, we'll be as fine as we have been waiting on 'your' feminism to centre anyone else but you.

Black women get the double whammy and of pressed, 95% of us will say race impacts us more than feminism.

It's hard to follow your cause when you're so ignorant to the severity of ours. We need your help more.

The police aren't racists in a vacuum. It's part a continuum of the privileges white people enjoy. Amy Coopers decision that day to weaponise the threat of police against a black man can't be separated from police racism. She made the threat and the subsequent call, in full knowledge that, had the police turned up and seen her and Mr Cooper standing there, the immediate conclusion would have been that Mr Cooper had acted criminally. She didn't phone for help, she phoned for an assassin. People like her are what helped create the racist police in the first place.

An alternative view.

I'm torn about this one, if you read John Ronson's book about public shaming you can see the type of reaction seen here can ruin someone e's life and destroy them.

Home2018

As a feminist, why not deal with the issue at hand, white women weaponising their race. Surely that behaviour is counterproductive to the feminist cause?

As a feminist, I analyse power structures and institutional injustices.

I condemn racist behaviour of individuals, but I don't believe that that is the main issue at hand. Ann Cooper being publicly shamed and fired doesn't stop the next racist from weaponising the police against a Black person. I believe that police racism is the main issue as ending that will have a bigger effect than shaming one person can have. It seems self-evident that police racism will have a chilling effect on the ability of Black victims of crime and the victims of Black offenders (and there is overlap between the two) to obtain justice. Which is why I said "In a society where the police are racist, it puts the victim of a crime committed by a person of colour in an awful position whereby they cannot get justice without putting the perp's life at risk. This undermines the principle of universal access to justice and equality before the law." In hindsight, I should have also said that a person of colour who is the victim of crime is less likely to be believed by a racist police force, which also undermines the principles of universal and equal access to justice. We are already encouraged by some people not to call the police when we need help and I used to agree with that stance and the whole "prison industrial complex" and "school-to-prison pipeline" argument supporting it, until I realised that "community response" won't work for rape and murder and arson and GBH. The police alone have the necessary expertise and resources to intervene in and investigate serious crimes, and they should do that for Black people as they would for everyone else. The law should work fairly and safely for Black people, whether they are victims or accused, and the law can't work for Black people as long as the police are racist.

I find it interesting that the term "Karen" has made it into popular culture and the terms coined by Black women for comparable behaviour by white men haven't; I wonder if this is because we live in a culture where white men are the default human.

Gingerkittykat That National Review piece actually makes a very good point that I had not even thought of: that Amy Cooper (not Ann, damn my memory) might reasonably have thought that Christian Cooper was going to poison her dog. Why would a stranger in a park who doesn't have a dog carry dog treats?

ME: "Look, if you’re going to do what you want, I’m going to do what I want, but you’re not going to like it."
HER: "What’s that?"
ME [to the dog]: "Come here, puppy!"
HER: "He won’t come to you."
ME: "We’ll see about that." ... I pull out the dog treats I carry for just such intransigence. I didn’t even get a chance to toss any treats to the pooch before Karen scrambled to grab the dog.

From Mr Cooper's Facebook page, easily misinterpreted as a threat (esp the bit I bolded), and none of which was on the video.

She does seem genuinely scared in the video which is probably a massive over reaction but it doesn't mean she was acting vindictively.

How can you say she wasn't acting vindictively when she weaponised skin colour?!