Woman calls cops another Black Jogger

Post Reply New Topic

https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=387467&p=8828942#p8828942

https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=387467&p=8829234#p8829234

Thank you for the perfect examples of "ableism" (Rather disappointing to see on a site designed around supporting those on the spectrum). While no-one has stated she definately was "autistic" (it was only hinted at in the video by her lawyer stating she was on the spectrum - But isn't that a common claim "everyone is on the spectrum"), seeing assertions such as:
A person cannot be "Autistic"\"on the spectrum" because:

Or a person cannot have been using "stilted speech" (associated with ASD) or some other speech related difficulty (possibly related to situational stress) because:

This does run counter to:
Quite a few people on the spectrum don't process language as rapidly as typical peers. As a result, they may take longer to make sense of a statement, craft an appropriate response, and then say what's on their mind.
and
People with Hfa know the dictionary definitions of words but fail to comprehend the emotional significance of them. Experts have said; “They know the words but not the music”.
which would suggest the possibility that what she said was merely a description of what was occurring with no "emotional" (or other) understanding of why (or how) it would be perceived by NT society.

It is exceedingly disappointing to see opinions expressed on a site dedicated to those with ASD that are specifically crafted by their author to inform those on the spectrum (or, indeed, anyone who reads them) that those with ASD lack the ability to succeeed in employment (or have no hope for advancement), or that they are "cognitively impaired" if they are unable to act in a manner that the author believes those who are not "on the spectrum" would, with similar inferences as to the person's "value" within society.

In fact, those types of bigoted remarks appear crafted to present those on the spectrum as "second class citizens" (if not a drain on society), with no significant employment prospects (particularly that they have no hope for advancement), which I see as deeply offensive (both in general, and as a personal matter). I would hate to think how a young person on the spectrum would feel (potentially after being told for years that they were "worthless" because they were different) were they to see someone on an ASD site making categorical statements that imply they had no hope of gaining a " high level position in a major finance firm", despite their abilities\interests being in that area... It comes across in much the same manner as someone in the 1950's/1960's telling a person they would never amount to anything because of the colour of their skin.

There's a big difference between:
* Stating someone cannot have ASD because of their job\employment level
and
* Stating a person must be talented in a given area to have a particular role\employment level

The former implies a belief that ASD is only possible to be a negative thing, which would prevent those on the spectrum having any possibilty of succeeding in a particular field (or in general), while the latter (still being somewhat problematic) indicates their belief that a person's skills can help them succeed, giving a more positive feeling to any person on the spectrum who may read it, and so providing hope to them.

Wasn't Einstein and Newton supposed to be autistic?

Connect the dots...

@Brictoria are you saying that having HFA is a green card to being racist?
Even if Amy Cooper could demonstrate autistic traits (even you are hesitant to claiming she has a diagnosis because we both know she doesn't) that doesn't mean she is not capable of not knowing right from wrong or how to weaponise race (which is what she clearly did).

All this useless pontificating and pages and pages of unsubstantiated claims aren't going to get her job back with FT or get her 1 penny of compensation.

Also for the umpteeth time your accusation that I am being "ableist" is false, Amy Cooper is not disabled or has a disability. You are siding with her lawyer because you see this as an opportunity for her to exact vengeance on FT and somehow legitimise her conduct against a black man, That;s your only interest in this story, I know that and you know that.

So is Elon Musk, and if he acted like Central Park Karen he would also be facing charges.

Did I make such an assertion? Please provide a quote indicating this... (Setting aside the fact that there have not been any charges placed against her in regards to "racist" actions on her behalf - either directly, or as subsections of the charges placed and later dismissed, and so her being "racist" is a purely subjective claim in this case).


Please provide a reference to where I claimed to know that she doesn't...I was simply relaying additional items of information, not passing judgement on it.


Setting aside that the prosecutors (who know a lot more about the incident than I (or you) did not lay any charges related to race - hence assertions of "weaponising race" are unfounded) - people react quite differently under stress (which will manifest and affect people differently depending on the circumstances behind it) than they would normally...For example, as "TheRobotLives noted, using "stilted language".


How else can someone interpret a comment saying a person can't be autistic (or on the spectrum) because "She worked in a high level position in a major finance firm in one of the most competitive job markets in the world."?
Based on plain reading: Either she is autistic\on the spectrum, and so "couldn't have that job",
OR
she isn't autistic\on the spectrum, which is why she has the job

There's no way (that I can see) of reading that which suggests she could be autistic\on the spectrum and have the job, hence it being an "ableist" remark.

I'm also curious as to the specific quantity which is being hidden behind "umpteeth": Is it 1,2,5,10, how many? (It would also be interesting to have links to these incidents to see if there may have been a basis for the assertion...)

And your evidence for this is? All we have is her lawyer making a remark which suggests the possibility, so I would love to know what facts\evidence you have that disproves the suggestion...

It's interesting, too, that you appear to believe that a person's "disability" status can be determined though an observation of the person for a little as a couple of minutes - As though hidden conditions (for example depression, anxiety disorders, certain medical conditions, etc. (even ASD, for that matter)) do not exist and to imply that a person can only be considered "disabled" if their disability is readily visible\observable in such a short period of time:

Source: https://www.invisibledisabilityproject.org/unseen-zine/2017/6/5/calling-out-ableism-just-got-easier

No, I am providing facts that do not align with prior reporting, or which hadn't been publicly available previously, to assist those who may be interested in the events to have a greater quantity of information on the subject, and so a better understanding of it - Some may change their mind (in either direction), some may not...

See above. It would be appreciated if you would cease attempting to claim knowledge of my intentions, given you have yet to correctly state them - The lack of any supporting evidence when making such claims indicates a lack of factual basis for the assertion (this comes across as an attempt to "attack the messenger" because their message isn't what you wish to see\hear (or others to, for that matter)).

As above. Please provide evidence to substantiate this, or cease making baseless claims about myself.

You mean the single charge (which had nothing to do with "race") which was withdrawn in a manner which prevents later charges being placed against her for the incident, and which clears her of any of the "crimes" you have claimed she was "guilty" of throughout?

You do remember that it was posted in this thread (as well as published on many media platforms) that the charges were dropped, and the only legal action taking place at present is Ms Cooper suing her former employee, don't you?

Autism (disability) is not part of her present lawsuit.

“she was alone in the park and frightened to death,” according to the lawsuit.
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2021/0 ... uit-racist

Barnes did not suggest she is on the spectrum, he stated it. What his statement did suggest is that an “autism defense” might be added.

As said earlier I have no idea if she is autistic, or if she has a diagnosis of any kind. Despite the statement that she is on the spectrum being seemingly a casual aside I doubt that this was the case.

We have enough problems with with the autism defense propagating a stigma that autistics are mass killers. Adding the belief that mind blindness makes us susceptible to being racists is the last thing we need. Arguably a racism stigma is as bad or worse then a mass shooter stigma. With mass shooters there is sometimes degree of empathy and excuse making for them, they were bullied, they grew up in a dysfunctional family, they had too easy access to weapons etc. Racism often does not get any tolerance, not that the racism was a microagression, not that the racist person was of his time, not that the racist person also did good. The attitude is we have heard these excuses for over 300 years, no more, no way. People are not going to get empathy for being autistic in this climate. While the question of Amy Cooper’s neurology is interesting should an autism defense be used it will be of distant secondary importance to any possible stigma.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 25 Jul 2021, 11:30 am, edited 2 times in total.

And related to this, but from the opposite direction - please read my most recent PM to you. Hmm, given events in this thread - re-read the one before it too.

rather like all the so-called "good germans" after the war.

If racial characterizations such as Uncle Ben, Aunt Jemima are racist, then what about characterizing a white woman as a *Karen*, is also racist?

That's her argument in her lawsuit.

She claims FT characterized her as a *Karen*, and that's sexual and racial discrimination.

According to Damon T Hewitt from the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (A civil rights legal expert based in NY)

the (Amy Cooper's) case has no grounds and called it inappropriate, adding that Ms. Cooper’s lawsuit does nothing to connect her former employer’s actions to racial discrimination. “I think it’s frankly inappropriate to hijack civil rights statutes with these kinds of claims,” “I’m not going to say a white person can never face discrimination. I would not say that. But in this instance, there just seems to be no claim at all.”
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2021/0 ... uit-racist

Given Amy Cooper is making this a civil rights case as a white woman it looks like she is just going to waste the court's time.

If Hewitt's interpretation is correct then its possible the state could take further action against her for making an inflammatory claim of racism against a corporation and abusing the law for personal benefit.

So, you don't believe that "white" people can be the victims of discrimination due to their "race"?

Or is it that you simply believe that people of one race should be expected to accept treatment due to their race that people of another race would not?

Your previous attempts to claim Amy Cooper was a victim of "ill-treatment" haven't exactly stacked up Brictoria.

How so: The prosecutors, with all the evidence available to them, found nothing to support charges related to this having been a racially motivated incident, as some claimed - Had there been anything, she would have been charged under a law related to this...