Woman calls cops another Black Jogger

Post Reply New Topic

Are you really complaining that LG is aware and keeps racist attitudes in our society in mind while you seem intent on consistently ignoring them while defending these sorts of actions? She isn't the one engaging in the problematic behaviour.

Carolyn Bryant was the first "karen". She lived with her lie virtually till her deathbed. 1955 is not that long ago.

Maybe in the emerging way it's used, but it seems wrong to trivialize her active role in a murder by comparing it to that woman who's going to ask to see your manager. She's a murderer and got away with it and it's not really something that should be turned into a punchline or a meme.



Let's not trivialize that.

Not quite sure what you're trying to say here?

LG was stating that black people are always suspicious: I was pointing out that thinking that black people are always suspicious was a racist statement\assumption she was making. I'm personally no more suspicious of them than any other person in any given situation, and prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt rather than claim "racism" when it suits my "side".

Actually if Christian Cooper was hypothetically shot by the police and the video wasn't uploaded then why would you think Amy Cooper would voluntarily divulge her lie to the police?

What "lie" are you referring to: That she had been threatened (her belief at the time) by an African-American male?

Usually, people who call 911 have to be asked to give a description of a perpetrator.

She volunteered that the alleged perpetrator was African-American.

I work in the criminal courts. I’m pretty aware of criminal court and police procedure.

LG was being sarcastic on the “black people are always suspicious” ,she’s not racist.
Karen’s think black folk are always suspicious.

Strangely enough, sarcasm doesn't really work all that well in typed messages...I'll have to take your word for it that it wasn't a racist statement, as it certainly read like one.

/\It helps to use the eye roll emoji when using sarcasm.

I hope both of these people have learned a valuable lesson.

You misunderstood. I was saying black people are always suspicious because people are often calling cops on them because of their inner bias about black people.

If you are aware of this racial issue, you would have understood what I was saying. funeralxempire totally understood my meaning because he is always the one calling out racism and pointing out racial issues many of us miss because of our white privilege.

I understood what you meant. When RobotLives said that its justifiable to report suspicious people, you said that this mindset might victimize blacks because blacks are *perceived to be* suspicious in some people's eyes. However, you were not saying blacks actually "are" suspicious, you were saying Whites are racist thats why they "wrongly see them" as such. And saying they are suspicious was just a sarcastic way of saying so.

I think the reason Brictoria took it too literally is due to the fact that people with Asperger take things literally and miss the sarcasm. I think this sarcasm was quite obvious. I might disagree with it, but I know what you meant.

But back to the main point of the discussion, the reason I disagree with your point is that I feel there is a double standard. If someone is perceived to be suspicious due to different kind of prejudice -- say, that person has Asperger and is socially awkward -- then its okay to report them; but if someone is perceived to be suspicious due to racial prejudice then its not. There is even a term for it, "protected minorities", if you are one of the "protected" minorities you can't be judged on this basis but if you are any other kind of minority then you can be.

Now, I understand that its a difficult question. On the one hand suspicious people "should" be reported since its better to prevent the crime than to face the consequences of a crime. But on the other hand prejudice should not be encouraged, whether it is racial prejudice or any other kind of prejudice. I guess there is no easy answer to this question. But whatever the answer is, I just don't like the double standard where blacks, gays and few other "protected minorities" are the only ones that can't be judged.

I'm not 'claiming racism when it suits my side', I'm saying 'anti-black racism is a reality and you don't get to pretend otherwise when it creates a better hypothetical situation for you, even if that hypothetical situation doesn't reflect reality'.

I'm tired of people treating racism like it's a mere hypothetical that doesn't actually have real world consequences. You're welcome to pretend racism isn't a relevant motive here but when you do so you're substituting your preference for reality. You're very creative when making excuses for this sort of behaviour but why invest so much effort unless you sympathize?

Racism is a reality, and reverse racism is a reality too. What both sides are guilty of is that they only admit one of the two and deny the other of the two. If you look at them together things don't look nearly as simple.

Reverse racism is largely a canard trotted out in an intellectually dishonest attempt at false equivalency.