Karens

    I am intrigued by this brand new stereotypical enemy of the left, Karens. One month there's all these new heroines, the suburban woman centrist voters who helped give us a Democratic House of Representatives and are going to save us from Trump. And they are cis, and have kids and a husband, and are going #MeToo. The next month very similar women,  they are ridiculed if not totally despised. Got me thinking: is Hillary Clinton a Karen? Who else? Just ran across--this woman looks like another unfortunate Karen, worthless even as a token?

    White women had about three months in the driver's seat of the intersectional coalition https://t.co/2c8dcSvPgt

    — Wesley Yang (@wesyang) July 3, 2020

    Comments

    Hillary's an uberKaren - think of her as Rorschach's statue.


    How about this that just popped into my brain for a theory. All those educated millennial lefty protesters, maybe it's just that they really really hate their mother? She helicoptered and helicoptered and helicoptered, and then they got away for a while and then they got stuck back with her at home for coronavirus lockdown? And now she wants to be part of their very own intersectional movement? NO WAY! laugh She got: privilege! Bad woman!

    (And mom better not dare try to fit in by saying she's no longer cis!)


    Tell the Oldz to get off our Woodstock.


    If it helps, there's a Wikipedia page for the term. :) 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_(slang)

    It was created April 21, 2020 and has had a few hundred edits since so lots of opinions about Karens, I guess.  Fwiw, I picture her as a stereotypical Junior Leaguer. 

    I did like the page creator's story of how the Karen slur originated better than how it has since been edited and contested.

    The origins of Karen as an internet meme predominately date back to an anonymous Reddit user, Fuck_You_Karen, who would make posts ranting about and denigrating his ex-wife Karen, who he alleged had "taken" both his children and, later, his house during divorce proceedings. The unintentional entertainment value provided by the posts led to the creation of a subreddit in 2017, r/FuckYouKaren, to both compile a narrative and share memes about the posts. Since Fuck_You_Karen delete his account, the subreddit has since refocused to memes about the stereotype in general rather than one specific woman.


    Out in the real world, a Karen calls police on a black couple making improvements on their home. Karen was upset and asked if the couple had a permit. No permit was required. No police action was taken. The local housing authority saw nothing wrong. 

    Karen's neighbors subsequently organized a protest at Karen's home. The protestors were majority white. White women were part of the protest. Their is no break in the multiracial solidarity.

    https://people.com/human-interest/woman-calls-police-black-neighbors-accusing-them-of-assault-leading-neighborhood-protest/

    There are multiple examples of Karens.


    Karen in Michigan

    Couple Charged After Videos Show White Woman Pulling Gun on Black Woman

    Widely circulated videos showed a white woman pointing a gun at a Black woman as she filmed with her cellphone in a parking lot in Orion Township, Mich.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/02/us/michigan-woman-pulls-gun.html

    Edit to add:

    The argument appears to be is that if there are objections to the actions of some white women, all white women are included. It is an extremely tribal argument.


    Smacking the back of someone's car who's calmly ended an argument and Is driving away Is pretty goddamn stupid, IMHO, whatever justification she thought she has. 

    Watch the video - hardly makes me sympathetic. I have an idea the charge wont hold up in court.

    https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2020/07/03/couple-charged-with-felonious-assault-after-woman-points-gun-at-family-outside-orion-township-chipotle/


    No surprise

     

    Edit to add:

    Hill said she thought the driver was going to run over her as he backed out, so she hit the rear window of the SUV. That’s when the the woman jumps out of the passenger seat with a gun.

    https://www.towleroad.com/2020/07/gun-wielding-karen-threatens-black-family-outside-michigan-chipotle-watch/

    The husband was fired

    The backlash over the incident was swift. 

    Eric Wuestenberg, who worked as a coordinator for veterans support services at Oakland University, was fired. He was also armed during the Wednesday incident, according to authorities. 

    "We have seen the video, and we deem his behavior unacceptable," a statement from OU said. "The employee has been notified that his employment has been terminated by the university."

    https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/oakland-county/2020/07/02/woman-pulls-gun-orion-township-michigan/5365854002/

     

     

     


    And you think smacking someone's car as they're leaving Is a way to calm down a fight or what? Obviously IT all comes Down to "the Black person Is right" with you, but whats your supposed logic here. Would you be happy if a White person slapoed a Black person's car trying to get away from a fight?


    The black woman feared being hit by the car.

    Edit to add:

    The husband's employer fired him after viewing the video. This is not about me. The police arrested the woman.


    Why the fuck would she "fear being hit" unless she was so childish as to stand behind their car trying to leave? Would Black people put up with her bullshit? 


    We are not a monolith 


    Thank fucking god.


    Brandishing a weapon brings one into a whole 'nother realm of liability.

     

    Even in "stand your ground" states like Michigan, threatening deadly force in the face of even actual property damage (as opposed to the horror of hearing one's sheet metal thumped) means you better have something more than (even if justified, which here I submit it was not) apprehension of property damage or prepare to face legal liability.

     

    That said, in the instant case, even if the couple in the car could make out some claim that they feared bodily harm from the offending mother and children, one is obliged to call bullshit, they needing only to drive the fuck on.

     

    Indeed, if I am not mistaken, back in the day one so signaled to the coachman that it was time to whip up the horses...


    You never consider anything but color. There's never any objective consideration of what happened. If the colors were reversed you'd claim a racist white harassed a black couple even when they tried to peacefully leave until the black women pulled a gun to defend herself.


    The woman will have her day in court. The situation is that a white woman pulled a gun on a black woman who feared getting hit by a car.


    If the car is moving it's moving so slowly I can't see it in the video. The black women walks from behind the car to the side and then strikes the car. If a car was backing into me and I was afraid of getting hit I'd hit the car immediately not casually walk to the side then hit the car. I see no evidence she was afraid of getting hit by the car.

    If the colors were reversed you'd claim a racist white got behind a black person's car to stop them from peacefully leaving racist harassment.

    PS  What I find so amusing is a couple of weeks ago you were claiming black people are so afraid of racist cops that they have to be careful about everything they do and white people never have to consider it. Then as an example you cite a black women who went up and pounded on a door because she thought the people living there scratched her car in retaliation for blocking their drive way. Some thing I'd never consider doing because I don't want to get involved with the cops. Now a black women engages in an angry tirade over what was a minor bump when exiting a diner. Again a confrontation I'd never consider getting into because I'd be afraid they'd call the cops on me.


    The colors are not reversed. The situation is being handled by local law enforcement. The authorities felt the charges were appropriate. The organization that employed the husband fired him. Since I had nothing to do with the case, the question becomes why you think the local authorities and the company made their independent decisions.

    Edit to add:

    The woman reacted out of fear. The police were called. The police arrested the woman with the gun.

    2nd Edit to add:

    If a black woman oulled a gun a a white woman, the black woman would be arrested

    The question would if the black woman would be alive after the police arrived.


    You're constantly telling us the decisions of the local authorities are wrong and racist. When they follow the path you like only  then they are fair minded and independent. I don't make or accept appeals to authority to support my opinions. I make rational arguments. You make appeals to authority only when they support your opinions and when you're unable to make rational arguments


    As I noted in a 2nd Edit to Add above, if the roles were reversed and the black women had the gun, would she survive the police encounter?

    You argue your point of view, I argue my point of view. Do you think the authorities were correct in arresting the women who pointed the gun?


    You don't argue your point of view. Your whole purpose is to find a way to not discuss most of the encounter. You're only willing to discuss the last 10 seconds of the encounter as if that is all that happened or matters. I'm unwilling to voice my opinion on the last 10 seconds until you discuss the 15 minutes that preceded it. 


    The discussion is about the use of the term Karen. I think that it is an appropriate term. You find it objectionable. I point to an actual case of a Karen pulling a gun on a woman in Michigan. You create a hypothetical case of a role reversal. You did not address the actual case. I questioned if the hypothetical black woman who pulled a gun on a white woman would survive the hypothetical police encounter. You were the one who diverted from the real to the imaginary. If the hypothetical black woman with a gun survived the police encounter, the hypothetical black woman would have been arrested. The real black woman says that she was afraid of being struck by the car. You look at the video and opine that nothing happened. The real legal authorities arrested the real white woman and filed charges. The real company that employed the husband fired him. I agree with the real world actions taken by the police. Slapping a vehicle window can be handled by police. If there was property damage to the vehicle, that could be addressed. There was no mortal threat requiring pointing a gun.

    Two people argued. One pulled a gun and was arrested.

    Any more hypotheticals?


    People lie all the time. I happen to think you're a pathological liar. I don't accept anyone's word for what happened. I look at what ever evidence I can find to support or contradict what a person claims. In a court of law any good lawyer would ask, You claim you were afraid you would be struck by the car. Why didn't you strike the car immediately when you were behind it? In the video you walked to the side of the car and then struck it. Cars cannot move sideways. How could the car have struck you when you were on the side of the car? Did you strike the car because you were angry they were leaving without the apology you demanded?

    The answers to these questions would determine whether the jury believes she was afraid or whether she is lying. You never consider whether a person is lying if it helps you to push your agenda. You never look at any evidence if it doesn't support your point of view. You refuse to even address it.


    That's because he has over time revealed a goal of stereotyping people and believes in tribalism uber alles.

    Got me thinking how several of our group here at Dag now have mentioned our families not really being like us and having difficulties with them one way or another. We're loners or individualists and see zero safety in tribes. On the contrary, they make life more difficult.


    Did you see a situation that requires pointing a weapon?


    Once again, you only want to discuss the last 10 seconds of the encounter. You refuse to discuss the previous 15 minutes. I will not share my opinion of the last 10 seconds until you are willing to discuss the previous 15 minutes. I will not cooperate with your diversion tactics. Nor will I be your strawman.


    "Anyone is free to express opinions or advice about what is thought true; however, the fallacy occurs when the reason for assenting to a statement is based on following the recommendation or advice of an improper authority. The relevance or appropriateness of the authority's expertise to the question at issue is the essential element under consideration.... "

    RM or anyone is "free to express opinions", additionally, it is not inappropriate or a fallacy under 

    "Argumentum ad Verecundiam"

    to cite a relevant legal authority responsible for actions related to a legal matter. link

    Similarly, Dr. Fauci would be a proper authority to cite for public health concerns not, say, an authority like a mayor or county sheriff.


    Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority.

    Logical Form:

    According to person 1, who is an expert on the issue of Y, Y is true.Therefore, Y is true.

    Example #1:

    Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and perhaps the foremost expert in the field, says that evolution is true. Therefore, it's true.

    Explanation: Richard Dawkins certainly knows about evolution, and he can confidently tell us that it is true, but that doesn't make it true. What makes it true is the preponderance of evidence for the theory.

    rmrd offers no evidence that the authority's position is correct. He simply uses the appeal to authority as the evidence.

     

    Second rmrd has repeatedly claimed that the police and local authorities do not relevant expertise in these matters. If fact he more often claims they are wrong. He at the very least is guilty of extreme hypocrisy.


    It took four prosecutors to reach a level where the men accused of murdering Arbery were charged.

    I find the actions of the first three prosecutors questionable

    I agree with the charges filed by the fourth prosecutor.

    I agreed with charging Zimmerman and the six officers charged in the death of Freddie Gray

    I wanted charges filed in the case of Eric Garner.

    No hypocrisy

    Simply confusion on your part.

    Have any more hypotheticals to divert attention?


    "I find the actions of the first three prosecutors questionable"

    3 times out of 4 you claim the authorities were wrong. But when it suits you you make an appeal to similar authorities as "evidence." Frankly that's a text book example of hypocrisy.


    Yes, judging situations by typing people is just like racism. Yes, hypocrisy, totally, doh. But then he has a lot invested in racism, hasn't shown interest in much else.


    You may have missed it, but George Floyd's homicide served as a surprising trigger for re-examining race and racism. The issues being discussed include police abuse, bias in corporations, bias in the arts, diversity in industry including newsrooms, bias in housing and banking, etc. This is all happening in real time.

    On the periphery, a state flag is changing and statues to traitors are coming down.

    You are standing on your lawn yelling, "Stop"!

    People are addressing racism. The movement is multiethnic.


    "The issues being discussed"

    I would welcome that discussion But they're not being discussed by you. You're using every means at your disposal to avoid that discussion. In the larger culture people are being canceled to attempt to shut then up and shut down the discussion. 


    You are standing on your lawn yelling, "Stop"!

    SAME OLD STRAWMAN you're seeing now. Over and over and over, you do this, and it's a real waste of time by other members here.  It's very aggravating and actually disgustingly stoopid when you do that to someone who has posted here a long time with nuance. We can all see it, rmrd. We're not your strawmen. Please treat us with the complexity we come here for or stay silent on other's threads if you feel the need to fight with your strawman, start your own blog entries to fight with the strawmen.  

    It's clear you rarely try the latter because no one takes you up on it when you do. Because there are none of your strawmen here.


    I hate all these memes. It's just a way to insult someone with out having to engage or explain. Calling someone Karen is no different than calling a women a bitch or a cunt. But just like in comedy certain insults are now unacceptable you can't call someone a cunt anymore. But people love to bypass conversation or debate and name call instead. So they look for "acceptable" insults. Even if they have to invent new ones. I discount anyone who uses any of these memes as intellectually stunted just as I discount anyone who calls someone a nigger. Or someone who calls someone racist without sufficient evidence to back up the claim


    yes


    Yes, it's a stereotype, that's what they do, make a bunch of people into a group that acts similarly. Stereotyping by skin color is racism, police profile young black males, rmrd and his friends profiles a certain type of white woman as doing the same thing. And oh boy does he have the examples all ready to link to and provide the stories of this type of white woman acting terribly. Just like the cops who can argue young black males commit more crimes. Hypocrisy much? Does he really want to fix the stereotyping problem or wallow in it is the question?

    Meanwhile, PP and I see this stereotype as like running radio stations and State Departments and young people thinking they need to step aside and go home and bake cookies so the other stereotypes can take over....I suspect the stereotype will go back to being a victim soon. If so, which presidential candidate will they chose?


    The Karen in New Jersey was protested by her own neighbors.

    The husband and wife in St Louis who came out from the protection of their home with a military rifle and a starter pistol were picked by their neighbors.

    The protests happened after the actions of the Karens were witnessed.

    White women joined the protests.

    Police stereotype predetermining guilt (apple) 

    Protesting the action taken by a Karen after the fact (orange)


    O/T, I believe that John Bolton used the sobriquet with regard to Nicki Haley, and I hold him harmless in the instance. YMMV.


    Well if true, I think that's not O/T sounds similar to the WNYC manager and Hillary Clinton. Just typing and creating fire on the type from another direction.


    To be clear, the implied usage by Bolton was to call Haley "a cunt" not "a Karen".  Carry on.


    But that is THE word I was thinking of without knowing it, that is the typology I was thinking of. And I think  the stererotype has gone beyond race and is being used as exactly that. In all of the infighting in left circles, the young are attacking current liberal white power figures, they really are.  And Wesley Yang was seeing it too in the tweet I was quoting.  And in the exchange with PP he saw the equivalence in Hillary Clinton.

    Unfortunately this thread has gotten waylaid by rmrd doing the same old thing.

    But your contribution is more like exactly what I looking for! Very helpful, thank you for piping up. 

    We really are seeing a trend of "middle aged white women don't know their place." Shuddup and sit down, cunt. That's it, that's what I am seeing and why I started the blog entry.


    " I hold him harmless in the instance. YMMV."

    You would because insulting people instead of engaging in debate is your style. And no insult is too extreme. So you calling someone a cunt wouldn't surprise me.


    Actually, to be honest and after a little research, the only confirmed usage I can identify is Tiillerson's, and purportedly Haley loved Bolton, so I may be utterly confused.  Once again, YMMV.


    ..........Trump told Bolton that Tillerson said that Hayley .............

    https://i.imgur.com/wWROdgB.jpg


    Ahh, that thickens the plot considerably, since it is totally in Trump's playbook to lie so as to ensnare Bolton in a a disloyalty viz, if he fails to rally to Haley's defense, Trump subsequently plays back the tape (which he delighted in collecting as we know) both to discomfit her and alienate her from Bolton.

     

    The man is a snake (apologies to snakes.)


     "after a little research"

    That's quite a stretch for you. I'd expect you to just continue going with what you perceive as your strength, name calling. But then I'm sure the operant word here is "little."


    Karen at a North Carolina Hampton Inn fired for harassing black guest.using the swimming pool.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/news/2020/06/29/hampton-inn-employee-fired-calling-cops-black-family-pool/3281804001/


    You're really making a list and checking it twice. What is the end purpose of creating this category of women? To aid in stereotyping when one is out and about? To get the culture to ridicule them? And then what? Somehow change the power dynamic so that another group gets "privilege" of authorities in charge (or voters) trusting that stereotype more than the ridiculed one? Or is it just to bay at the moon about the unfairness of life?


    There is a multiethnic movement for equality.

    All, I hear from you are complaints. You say that your way is better, yet you have nothing to offer. 


    Clue: on Dagblog I'm not an activist trying to change the country. You ridiculously think if you yell and preach at the other 5 people on Dagblog, you are going to accomplish something.

     multiethnic movement for equality.

    Well then, how come I haven't seen you post hardly any stories that don't have to do with Afro-Americans on this website? You haven't contributed to that multi-ethnic mindset. You've been working against it for several years on Dag. Clearly, you don't try to understand any other tribe. You have told me more than once that this is not a post-racial society as if you have a lot invested in it never becoming one.

    Not only are your interests limited by race, one which is very much a small minority of the county and getting smaller all the time via intermarriage, you don't even post about black people with opinions that differ from yours. You immediately like to cancel them, I notice. People like this

    So you are dealing with even a smaller minority than the one on the census.

    For these reasons I have ZERO trust in your interpretation of the most reason phenomenon of popularity of BLM memes. You read in a bubble, you post and preach bubble, for YEARS, day in, day out, leaving anything outside your bubble unread undiscussed and uncovered, and you expect anyone on this site to take you seriously now that you have even a figment of understanding of majority opinion?!!! No way, you're like the last person on earth to be able to understand what's going on now, coming from a self-made bubble, refusing all other input.

    Last chance to open your mind and start learning about other sub-cultures lest you be stuck in an ever receding and tinier ghetto forever.


    Trump is a racist imbecile, posting stories about what he has mishandled seem repetitive. 
    I repeatedly mention the multiethnic nature of the movement. The BLM movement does seem to be one thing showing progress.

    Reilly participated in Robert Woodson's 1776 Project. Woodson's idea was to counter distortions in the 1619 Project. The 1776 Project included people like Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, and Coleman Hughes. The reason that the 1776 Project is not well known is not because of a Liberal conspiracy, but because the essays were so bad. I read those on the Right with different opinions, but a don't find that they truly offer anything of value. You once posted links to the Skidmore College panel that included Mc Whorter and others. The participants realized that their views were not widely accepted. 

    When you listen to Glenn Loury and John McWhorter on their Blogginheads podcast, you realize that they know their ideas are outliers. On a recent podcast, Loury cited the work of Heather MacDonald on police abuse. He did so without acknowledging that her work has been criticized by multiple experts. He accepts MacDonald as truth. On another recent podcast, Loury had Coleman Hughes as a guest co-host. The subject of maternal mortality came up. Black women have a mortality 2-3 X that of white women. Loury noted that this was not a problem because maternal mortality had dropped so dramatically since 100 years ago. From Loury's standpoint there is no problem with black maternal deaths. About 700 women die during pregnancy every year. Forgive me if I go with the research based obstetricians who have a goal of no woman should die during pregnancy rather than the view point of a bean counter like Loury.

    After reading BLM, Kendi,  Coates, Gay, and Hannah-Jones,etc.  and comparing it with Loury, et. al., I reject the Loury position.

    BTW. I will point out once again the homicide rate in Chicago in the 1990s in comparison to today. If Loury is going to argue that the black maternal mortality rate is no problem, he should shut up about Chicago crime today.


    also for the record, this is projection in the extreme

    All, I hear from you are complaints

    I've gone out of my way for years on this website to post stories about the positive change in the culture for Afro-Americans, to note how many little changes were happening in the culture that were making the situation more POSITIVE. The glass half full stuff.

    And mostly what you have done over years--I am not blind nor stupid, I can see it and so can the others--is cherry pick for stories that counter those to complain complain complain that nothing has changed for Afro-Americans at all that everything is still the same as it was 50 or 100 years ago, that if MLK came back he would think zero has changed, oh woe is the story of the Afro-American, wallow in the woe, here's another story about how there is no rising that Maya Angelou is delusional....

    Come up with a link to prove me wrong--where you posted news something anything has gotten better for blacks. The essence of complaining, the complete black victimhood story day after day, that's you--GLASS NOT JUST HALF EMPTY BUT TOTALLY EMPTY. Fulfilling Spiro Agnew's description of "nattering nabob of negativism," that's been you on this website...to the point of never posting news on any other discriminated against group worldwide--yes you fear reading about other tribes in worse shape because then you might not win the Victim Olympics. Where are all the rmrd stories about solidarity with the Syrian and African immigrant in Europe, the Uighurs in China, the Palestinians in Israel.... NOT THERE because of bubble, American Afro-Americans must win the victimhood race on Dagblog.


    MLK III on your dismissive attitude. We are not where we should be but there is hope.

    For all he’s seen in his life, Martin Luther King III has never witnessed something quite like the last few weeks. The photos of protests from around the world, the torn-down statues of slave traders, the number of people standing alongside and in solidarity with Black Americans—it has all made him start to wonder if something different actually could happen this time.

    https://www.newsbreak.com/news/0PLHEk4W/martin-luther-king-iii-has-never-seen-something-quite-like-this

    MLK's daughter gave the eulogy at Rayshard Brook's funeral.

    On Tuesday, June 23, the daughter of the late Martin Luther King Jr., Dr. Bernice King, gave a powerful speech during Rayshard Brooks' funeral. "To the family of Rayshard Brooks, especially his wife Tomika Miller and their three daughters and son, and to all of you, my brothers and sisters—we really should not be here today," King said. "This did not have to happen to Rayshard. There's so many ways that Friday, June 12 could have ended and a police killing did not have to be one of them. And yet, here we are again."

    https://www.newsbreak.com/news/0PQA2Ssf/martin-luther-king-jrs-daughter-bernice-delivers-powerful-eulogy-at-rayshard-brooks-funeral


    Rayshard was a drunken idiot who attacked a cop. Why Is he even part of this story? May had 3 awful killings - Aubrey, Breonna, Floyd - that kicked off protests about Injustice. Why dilute it with unrrlated acts of stupidity? The cops spent 30 minutes trying to calmly put the guy away, not abuse him. 


    Is like Booker T. Washington knew rmrd personally

    Excepting the absurdity that this is not a job and that the majority of the public does not pay attention to Dagblog, of course. And then there's that we don't really know if rmrd is Afro-American or even has black skin. All we have is a pseudonym and blacksplain' words, that's all we have


    This frigging hilarious. I noted that Reilly wrote an essay for the disastrous 1776 Project. Now Reilly is quoting Booker T. Washington. The Washington quote was a jab at the younger W.E.B. DuBois. You connect me to DuBois, Thanks.

    “There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. ... Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs ... There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well.”

    This 100-year-old, cobbled-together quote from the “the Great Accommodator” Booker T. Washington has gotten quite a bit of circulation in the right-wing blogosphere since the Tea Party came under attack over racial issues.

    The quote helps support a broader sentiment that the current racial discontent is being fueled by a black liberal grievance industry that refuses to acknowledge racial progress, accept personal responsibility, or acknowledge its own racial transgressions. And that the charge of racism has become a bludgeon against anyone white and not in love with President Obama, thereby making those whites the most aggrieved — victims of the elusive reverse-racism Bigfoot. It’s perfect really: the historic words of a revered black figure being used to punch a hole in a present-day black mythology and to turn the world of racism upside down.

    (The fact that those on the right would glom onto this quote is fascinating from a cultural/historical perspective. The quote is a not-so-subtle swipe by an aging Washington at his young nemesis, W.E.B. Du Bois, an Obama-like figure who advocated a more broad-based, activist movement for racial equality to be led by an erudite black intelligentsia. This is so riddled with ironies that I couldn’t possibly tackle them all in this column. Maybe another time. Rain check, please!)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/20/opinion/20blow.html

    Reilly (and you) latched onto a quote favored by wingnuts.

    You have made my Frederick Douglass Day the best one ever. Thanks.

     

     


    hmmm, it's really so so so hard to decide which should I spend my time reading and taking seriously: pseudonymous rmrd on Dagblog who shares nothing of himself and purports to be able to blacksplain or Prof. Wilfred Reilly?

    How do I say it except bluntly: I truly regret not discovering the ability to follow intelligent educated people on Twitter sooner and regret spending so much time interacting with rmrd on Dagblog who does the same thing over and over and over using the same tactics over and over and over and hijacks nearly every single intelligent discussion on Dag that could possibly be related to his personal jihad. It's a holiday so I  doing this one last time...hopefully...pray for me, everyone else, that I can break the habit and ignore.


    Keep reading Reilly, I need more humor.

     


    I saw what you did there. Reilly gave us a Booker T Washington quote. I linked to a column by Blow that put the quote in context. You have no response.



    I read this article a few days ago and it sums up my views incredibly well. I really should make more of an effort to link up articles I like rather than leaving you and PP to spend your time and energy to keep the site moving. Sorry about that


    It's organic - do what you want, what you're enthused about and have (or dont really have) time for, but effort's appreciated, even if we disagree. (though part of me Is quite sick of arguing - like to just see things i wouldn't have thought of or wouldnt have run across myself - food & culture fór thought)


    you just put it quite well what I have ALWAYS wanted out of participating here. I HATE debating, it's stupid, I even dislike formal debate. I'm excited by learning new things and different perspectives and input on what I am reading and looking at.. Debating is a fucking game like playing cards, with no purpose. Yeah, it's a skill, so what. So is tennis. I don't begrudge anyone liking to do it, but it's just not my thing, makes me feel lousy and depressed. While learning and sharing other's brainpower to interpret what's going on keeps me going through pain and leaves me feeling like I have a bit of control over life choices, knowledge is power.


    There's a style of debate that's non-combative, where grownups know they dont have answers so are mutually turning over possibilities. The 3 Blind men analyzing the elephant - i dont remember any of them calling the other a Schmuck.


    The arc of the universe.

    Dillard was doxxed 

    He says that he is is a black, Gay, comedian who voted for Trump.

    He claimed that an Asian woman racially profiled him.

    He tried to sell t-shirts based on the interaction with the white woman

    Questions about his allegations came swiftly

     

    In the wake of his encounter going viral, Dillard has begun selling T-shirts that reference the incident. One T-shirt reads, “Karen… Are You Okay?” Another says, “Keep That Same Energy Karen.” When asked by a follower why he was selling T-shirts, Dillard said:

    I sure am because I was delivery Postmates while she tried to kill me with her car. White people have profited off black oppression and hurt generations so shall we. I’m also a comedian with a T-shirt company. The only thing weird about this is how she reacted.

    https://heavy.com/news/2020/06/karlos-dillard/

    I would suspect Karlos Dillard put an end to his career and possibly his delivery job

    Edit to add:

    Twitter account suspended 

    His employer is investigating the incident

    https://www.rt.com/usa/492800-karlos-dillard-suspended-twitter-karen-video/

     




    Looks like they actually filed charges against Central Park Karen

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/amy-cooper-prosecuted_n_5f036fcbc5b6acab28543780


    there is a small glitch with the case against Central Park Karen:


    Good for him. The planet's not going to heal tself by out-assholing each other, And making police enforcement our social enforcers Is a step back, whatever the infringements. Not sure what happens to NY's in-your-face two though. Just "Fuhgiddaboudit"? Seriously? Mets/Yankees kumbaya?


    Just FYI social-media pop culture update on "Karen" as slur--"Debra" is trending on Twitter because they don't like Debra Messing's latest  messaging, which is seen as condescending towards blacks. So "Debra" may become the new "Karen." Or a variant. Examples:


    I'd go with Hillary. There's so much Hillary hate from the far left to the far right and every demographic in between that almost no one would complain about using that name.Or we could call them Cerseis like from Game of Thrones. Every one hates Cersei Lannister.


    Using "Hillary" would certainly stop beating around the bush, get right to the heart of the stereotype, mho. wink


    I am reminded of the old 2008 TPM Cafe days when every day there was a post or two from more than a few people about what a horrible bitch Hilllary was--didn't know how to use the coffee machine or was mean to an underling or whatever. This was somehow supposed to make you want to vote for Obama--I didn't really get how that was supposed to work but they thought they were helping him win by doing that.


    No, that's like calling them the devil incarnate - Karens are *in League* with the devil, wannabe Hillary's or Hillarys-in-training. To call them Hillary's would bring sympathy as being too over-the-top. Karens or Debras Are Hillary's many minions who carry out her evil work around earth every day, So She can stay in Chataqua And go on dog walks and scheme about her return to power/God's right hand. See "Fallen Angel/Fallen Devil"

    Hillary's six

    https://youtu.be/EHC9HE7vazI


    Some humor from warriors of yesteryear to the trailblazers of today - a lot to learn about cancel culture.



    Sequel time for De Niro and Ben Stiller: "Meet the Karens"


    A reminder that McWhorter is a prof. of linguistics. Note there is both transcript and audio.

     


    Gladys Kravitz - you already got it. (Is that a Jewish name?)

    Of course everyone should be happy an 8-year-old Is screaming and selling snacks in your yard - America Is commerce and opportunity. Why y'all Karens wanna break the kid's hopes and dreams?


    interesting question about the use of Kravitz. Right off the bat I think of how many writers for the sitcoms in that era were NY Jews, to them it's a good name to use to indicate someone who irritates people.

    In this case, there wasn't a scintilla of a hint of cultural Jewishness though; Gladys was just another white bread white housewife in anonymous middle america suburbia, no NY accent, just very very nosy and tending to hyperness. Part of the whole shtick of the show was: how could a witch trying to be a "regular woman" and not use her powers, not be noticed in such an environment? Gladys was always watching every single thing everyone in her neighborhood did, so she naturally caught the instances of witchcraft that happened when Samantha got in trouble with the relation and stuff. BUT nobody would believe Gladys when she tried to tell someone else about any instance of witchcraft she saw, they just thought she was nuts. And Samantha never got caught because nobody believed crazy Gladys. Gladys looked hysterical all the time and Samantha was a cool cucumber.


    So was Sam the real Karen who finally got called on it, a few decades late?

    ETA: kinda interesting, Dick York who played the high strung husband in real life did the whole series with a debilitating back injury from a Gary Cooper film, had to lean up against walls or on the bed between takes, later became addicted to opioids, finally quit, founded an acting group fór the homeless...

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_York


    It was one of my favorite shows as a kid so I watched most ot fhe episodes. MHO, I don't see the Samantha character fitting the Karen stereotype then or now, what she was a good-hearted and nice lady who wanted to leave her tribe of witches and warlocks and become a member of the simply human tribe. But her witch and warlock relatives just wouldn't let her go. It's a story of living in inter-tribal miscegenation basically, as the baby Tabitha is born with witch skills and that just continues the daily drama.

    I recall there were several Darren's throughout the series, not just Dick York. But he was always a guy manipulated and frustrated by his much better half.


    I believe the series was inspired by "Bell Book and Candle" which was a hit play and then the movie with Kim Novak and Jimmy Stewart. I really enjoyed that movie when I saw it when I got a little older, Kim Novak and her cat familiar are just fabulous, genuinely "bewitching", and it's set in NYC. And there are great kooky characters in it, makes NYC of the 1950's seem so appealing. Jimmy in there is basically much more of a male human victim. I've seen it several times as a grownup, it's a very fun diversion.


    They got the guy they originally wanted when Dick York had to finally bow out, after He collapsed/passed out on stage, decided enough was enough. Seemed like a pretty understanding crew and producer around him.

    Will look for Jimmy & Kim - sounds intriguing.


    Strikes me that those who show a video of a white woman having a temper tantrum over having to wear a mask in a store and labeling that a "Karen" is confusing the stereotype a whole lot. 

    I just looked at these (godawful videos) which reminds me how that temper tantrum thing while accessing services in public, that's a classic about class, not skin color. It's happens when a working class person is accessing some kind of middle class and they filled dissed by others and act out in anger. Not a "Karen". Karen as a stereotype is about entitlement issues. This other thing, the mask fits and such, that's uppityness fighting for scraps of privilege

    Avoid the first tweeter's spin on it, just watch the two videos of the free for all

     


    Latest Comments