Should this "Karen" be locked up for falsely accusing an innocent Black?

[zorq]

No. I believe she lost her phone, and phones being integral to many peoples's lives these days (and often containing sensitive info), she freaked out like many people would. What does that have to do with anything? (edit: I don't mean the initial joke. I mean why do I need to address some ulterior motive on her part? I don't assert there was one.)

Insisting that the accusation was "bullshit" implies that she was intentionally lying. In order for me to accept that I would like a plausible motivation for her to indeed commit to bullshitting a stranger in this fashion.

One party was minding their own.
One party made a false and unfounded accusation.

Done.

First of all, things don't become simpler just because you choose to ignore the details. That is a pattern all to familiar to me when dealing with conservative logic. We are capable of holding more than two thoughts at the same time in our heads when considering a problem so why would we try to limit ourselves like this?

One party was minding their own business, yes, absolutely. And he made it clear that he wanted to return to minding his own business repeatedly. But he refused to do one thing that would make that outcome almost certain.

One party made a false accusation, yes. But I still object to your insistence that it was unfounded. WE DON'T KNOW HER REASONS! Your insistence that reasons must be "damn good" to justify an accusation isn't an objective (or well defined) standard. And there are still scenarios in which she still could (wrongly) have "damn good" reason to suspect the kid has her phone. Here's one that is completely unlikely but entirely plausible: The kid is clumsy and drops his phone near or maybe even inside the woman's partially unattended and open purse/handbag. The woman turns and notices the boy retrieve the phone which has a passing resemblance to her own phone and then comes to the obvious conclusion that she just witnessed her phone being stolen before her very eyes.

Why are people here so adverse to helping out a confused stranger especially when it benefits YOU as well in an instant and tangible way?

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

No. I believe she lost her phone, and phones being integral to many peoples's lives these days (and often containing sensitive info), she freaked out like many people would. What does that have to do with anything? (edit: I don't mean the initial joke. I mean why do I need to address some ulterior motive on her part? I don't assert there was one.)

Insisting that the accusation was "bullshit" implies that she was intentionally lying. In order for me to accept that I would like a plausible motivation for her to indeed commit to bullshitting a stranger in this fashion.

No. I said it was bullshit because the accusation was unfounded. From her perspective it may or may not have seemed legit, but she's not here in this thread and I'm not talking to her. I'm not talking about what the world looked like from her eyes in that moment. I was mocking your attitude--you, a third-party observer--and your bizarre apologetics for her shit behaviour.

First of all, things don't become simpler just because you choose to ignore the details. That is a pattern all to familiar to me when dealing with conservative logic. We are capable of holding more than two thoughts at the same time in our heads when considering a problem so why would we try to limit ourselves like this?

I didn't ignore details. I stuck to what was relevant and salient in quoting and responding.

One party was minding their own business, yes, absolutely. And he made it clear that he wanted to return to minding his own business repeatedly. But he refused to do one thing that would make that outcome almost certain.

That one thing was intrusive and unreasonable and coupled with an unwarranted and vilifying accusation.

But I still object to your insistence that it was unfounded. WE DON'T KNOW HER REASONS!

I don't need to know her reasons. She needed some form of evidence to match her allegation. She had none that we are aware of. There is currently no reason to believe she had any at all. What would it have even been?

 

[zorq]

No. I said it was bullshit because the accusation was unfounded. From her perspective it may or may not have seemed legit, but she's not here in this thread and I'm not talking to her. I'm not talking about what the world looked like from her eyes in that moment. I was mocking your attitude--you, a third-party observer--and your bizarre apologetics for her shit behaviour.

I see, you were presenting your perception of the woman's thought process and in the process you used the word "bullshit." Except "bullshit" is very commmonly used to connote "deliberate lies" even though you possibly only wanted to convey "ultimately shown to be false." There was a miscommunication. You did not intend to imply deliberate deception on her part. Do you understand my reaction to this misunderstanding?

First of all, things don't become simpler just because you choose to ignore the details. That is a pattern all to familiar to me when dealing with conservative logic. We are capable of holding more than two thoughts at the same time in our heads when considering a problem so why would we try to limit ourselves like this?

I didn't ignore details. I stuck to what was relevant and salient in quoting and responding.

Now you are being disingenuous. You boiled the entire situation down to 14 words and called it "done." Don't sit there and insist that details weren't omitted.

One party was minding their own business, yes, absolutely. And he made it clear that he wanted to return to minding his own business repeatedly. But he refused to do one thing that would make that outcome almost certain.

That one thing was intrusive and unreasonable and coupled with an unwarranted and vilifying accusation.

This may be where we ultimately find no common ground. Flashing your phone aroud in public is practically an international passtime. It costs so very little time and effort to unlock your phone or briefly remove the case that I don't see what the big deal is. It is intrusive, but not unreasonable given the stakes of the situation and the lack of other hurdles in performing the task.

But I still object to your insistence that it was unfounded. WE DON'T KNOW HER REASONS!

I don't need to know her reasons. She needed some form of evidence to match her allegation. She had none that we are aware of. There is currently no reason to believe she had any at all. What would it have even been?

There IS reason to believe she had reasons or evidence. If we suppose she has no reasons or evidence for making the accusation, her observed behavior becomes incomprehensible.

It is total irony that you would ask, "What would it have even been?" Immediately after clipping out from my quote a plausible example of what it could be.

 

[Toni]

I do believe that the term 'Karen' should be retired.

Mumbles is right: she had other options to find her phone--although she may not have known that she had those or those features may have been turned off. My purse WAS indeed stolen, with my phone in it. I actually had those features off somehow. In the end, I got my purse, complete with credit cards (already replaced) and ID and even cash--but not my phone. Which was weird because we also immediately had my phone deactivated once we realized that the find my phone function was not working and Verizon assured me that it was useless to the thief. I store zero financial information on my phone and make zero purchases using it.

One of my kids had a bike stolen and for weeks and weeks after, I was certain I saw 'that' bike. Nope, I did not jump out and accuse whatever person was riding that bike every time I saw someone riding a similar bike--but I did feel the impulse.

I'm not saying that racism wasn't involved in the incident in the OP. It probably was. I am saying that the term Karen really needs to be retired and that I understand being hypervigilant and mistaking every similar phone for YOUR phone.

 

[TomC]

There IS reason to believe she had reasons or evidence. If we suppose she has no reasons or evidence for making the accusation, her observed behavior becomes incomprehensible.

Unfortunately, people are commonly stupid and behave in incomprehensible ways.

It's all too possible she found her phone missing, panicked, and inflicted herself on the first person she saw with a phone like hers. Race, age, and gender may not even have mattered.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

First, no one in the USA has to prove their innocence. That woman needed more than “That phone looks like mine and a couple of million others”

Second, there were a number of polite, non-accusatory approaches she could have used.

Third, the fact she tackled the kid in ftont if his parent suggests she was out if control.

Fourth, the hotel employee also has better approaches/ options than he choose.

I would hope this woman would make a sincere apology for her behavior snd accusations.

 

[Toni]

First, no one in the USA has to prove their innocence. That woman needed more than “That phone looks like mine and a couple of million others”

Second, there were a number of polite, non-accusatory approaches she could have used.

Third, the fact she tackled the kid in ftont if his parent suggests she was out if control.

Fourth, the hotel employee also has better approaches/ options than he choose.

I would hope this woman would make a sincere apology for her behavior snd accusations.

Oh, yeah: not using polite approaches or tackling a kid (or anyone) not actively in commission of a crime (I'd be ok with tackling someone who had just grabbed someone's backpack and made a run for it, for example)--that's really bad. My post was just about understanding how, if something has been stolen, one can be certain one 'sees' the stolen item however improbable that is. Also, we need to quit using the word Karen as proxy for racist white woman. And btw, how is it that racist white men slide right on by without their own meme/name?

 

[TSwizzle]

These contrived incidents are just tedious now. It's the same format every time.

 

[Toni]

These contrived incidents are just tedious now. It's the same format every time.

Yeah. Imagine being on the receiving end of such an accusation.

I'm sure there are at least 42 million people in the US alone who would be delighted if they could regard such incidents as 'tedious.'

 

[zorq]

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to prove their innocence. But I do think that in this situation choosing to do so would have been simultaneously fast, easy, safe, charitable to a stranger in distress, and a self beneficial alternative to enduring the continued rude pestering of that same stranger. You lose so little, and gain so much. People have been shot dead in the streets of the US for much less.

 

[TomC]

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to prove their innocence. But I do think that in this situation choosing to do so would have been simultaneously fast, easy, safe, charitable to a stranger in distress, and a self beneficial alternative to enduring the continued rude pestering of that same stranger. You lose so little, and gain so much. People have been shot dead in the streets of the US for much less.

Pretty much this.

Instead of a ridiculous altercation, she could have asked the clerk to call her phone number. If the kid's phone rang, she'd have reason to go ballistic. If not, maybe she'd have actually found her phone.
The whole thing is stupid.
Tom

 

[TSwizzle]

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to prove their innocence. But I do think that in this situation choosing to do so would have been simultaneously fast, easy, safe, charitable to a stranger in distress, and a self beneficial alternative to enduring the continued rude pestering of that same stranger. You lose so little, and gain so much. People have been shot dead in the streets of the US for much less.

But that doesn't get clicks and retweets, get the Karen meme going and the MSM to wring their hands while interviewing the outraged "victim". It's just boring now.

 

[southernhybrid]

The woman's behavior was wrong. The teenager owed her nothing when she made her accusation. The fact that she tried to physically assault the teen was a crime. I don't think she needs to be locked up, but community service would be a way of helping her understand that you don't go around making false accusations and physically attacking a person who you believe took your phone.

She also owes that kid an apology. How would she have felt if a young black teenager accused her of stealing his phone and then acted as nutty as she did? I'm surprised at the reaction from so many people here. I'd be mad as hell if someone accused me of stealing their phone, but then again, I've never heard of a case where a person unfairly accused and then physically attacked a little old white woman for stealing their phone. Just sayin'.

I agree with Toni that we need to stop using the term Karen to describe women who do these things. I've known some women who are named Karen and I feel sorry for them. We don't need to use a common female name as a slur. That seems juvenile to me.

 

[Mumbles]

No. I believe she lost her phone, and phones being integral to many peoples's lives these days (and often containing sensitive info), she freaked out like many people would. What does that have to do with anything? (edit: I don't mean the initial joke. I mean why do I need to address some ulterior motive on her part? I don't assert there was one.)

Insisting that the accusation was "bullshit" implies that she was intentionally lying. In order for me to accept that I would like a plausible motivation for her to indeed commit to bullshitting a stranger in this fashion.

One party was minding their own.
One party made a false and unfounded accusation.

Done.

First of all, things don't become simpler just because you choose to ignore the details. That is a pattern all to familiar to me when dealing with conservative logic. We are capable of holding more than two thoughts at the same time in our heads when considering a problem so why would we try to limit ourselves like this?

Here's the alternative: She left her phone somewhere, likely because she was fumbling around and set it aside, saw a black kid, and immediately accused the black kid of somehow "stealing" her phone, demanded he provide proof that it's not her phone, and assaulted him when he walked away.

That's makes her look every bit as bad as if she were planning on grabbing his phone and walking off with it.

One party was minding their own business, yes, absolutely. And he made it clear that he wanted to return to minding his own business repeatedly. But he refused to do one thing that would make that outcome almost certain.

No, he didn't. As has been pointed out, she'd likely accuse him of hiding "her" phone, or grabbed the phone from him, leading to many of the same people denouncing him here whining about how awful it is that she was "attacked" for trying to steal his phone - along with a possible arrest, beating, getting kicked out of the hotel, and so on, as we've seen many, many times before

In reality, the kid's father was right - she could easily call her own phone, or use a website or app to find it for her. *That* would positively identify her phone, and likely provide an audio tone to track (which many finder apps do even when the phone is set to vibrate or to silent)

One party made a false accusation, yes. But I still object to your insistence that it was unfounded. WE DON'T KNOW HER REASONS! Your insistence that reasons must be "damn good" to justify an accusation isn't an objective (or well defined) standard. And there are still scenarios in which she still could (wrongly) have "damn good" reason to suspect the kid has her phone. Here's one that is completely unlikely but entirely plausible: The kid is clumsy and drops his phone near or maybe even inside the woman's partially unattended and open purse/handbag. The woman turns and notices the boy retrieve the phone which has a passing resemblance to her own phone and then comes to the obvious conclusion that she just witnessed her phone being stolen before her very eyes.

Why are people here so adverse to helping out a confused stranger especially when it benefits YOU as well in an instant and tangible way?

Why bother "helping out" someone who, in any reasonable view, is a violently belligerent racist?

 

[ruby sparks]

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to prove their innocence. But I do think that in this situation choosing to do so would have been simultaneously fast, easy, safe, charitable to a stranger in distress, and a self beneficial alternative to enduring the continued rude pestering of that same stranger. You lose so little, and gain so much. People have been shot dead in the streets of the US for much less.

I agree.

Plus, now the boy (because of the Dad, as far as I can see) may have to go through a messy litigation process and possibly even appear in court. It all seems a bit unnecessary.

That said, obviously, an African American may have cause to at least suspect and object to certain things that I, a non-African American, do not have to suspect or object to. For that reason, I can't harshly judge the Dad either, from the comfort of my living room. And he was within his rights. And the woman should definitely and publicly apologise.

But, imo, show the woman the phone, then ask for (or insist on) an apology. Possibly then, if you're feeling generous, even see if you can help her find her phone. Or if you're not feeling generous, just insist on the apology and if you like, give her a little piece of your mind about accusing people of stuff they didn't do.

 

[thebeave]

I saw this last night on The CBS Evening News. Given what's going on in the world these days, why does a minor, everyday incident like this get such attention? There is no evidence that I've seen that this has anything to do with racism, yet a big deal is made of the fact that its a white person being aggressive to a black person. Sometimes people are just assholes....to anyone and everyone. Plus, there's no shortage of similar incidents where a black person unreasonably gives a white person a hard time over something relatively minor. Yet when was the last time you saw that on the national news? Its pretty obvious the media has a narrative to sell, but what's to be gained by that? It seems their goal is to sow discord between the races, specifically making white people out to be nothing but a bunch of bullies to blacks, and blacks always the innocent victims of white hatred. How does this help race relations? Blacks are made to feel threatened by whites and whites feel they're being unfairly demonized. I'm so fucking disgusted by the lack of objectivity and balance in the media these days.

 

[ruby sparks]

I saw this last night on The CBS Evening News. Given what's going on in the world these days, why does a minor, everyday incident like this get such attention? There is no evidence that I've seen that this has anything to do with racism, yet a big deal is made of the fact that its a white person being aggressive to a black person. Sometimes people are just assholes....to anyone and everyone. Plus, there's no shortage of similar incidents where a black person unreasonably gives a white person a hard time over something relatively minor. Yet when was the last time you saw that on the national news? Its pretty obvious the media has a narrative to sell, but what's to be gained by that? It seems their goal is to sow discord between the races, specifically making white people out to be nothing but a bunch of bullies to blacks, and blacks always the innocent victims of white hatred. How does this help race relations? Blacks are made to feel threatened by whites and whites feel they're being unfairly demonized. I'm so fucking disgusted by the lack of objectivity and balance in the media these days.

I agree the media has a (race) narrative. The Dad also has a (race) narrative. Now his lawyer has a (race) narrative.

In the current hyper-sensitive climate, stuff like this gets attention. I'm not even saying it's a bad thing. One could make a case that this sort of thing needs to be both called out and reacted to in exactly the way the Dad reacted to it.

However, it may or may not have involved racism. One could suspect it might have.

 

[laughing dog]

I saw this last night on The CBS Evening News. Given what's going on in the world these days, why does a minor, everyday incident like this get such attention? There is no evidence that I've seen that this has anything to do with racism, yet a big deal is made of the fact that its a white person being aggressive to a black person. Sometimes people are just assholes....to anyone and everyone. Plus, there's no shortage of similar incidents where a black person unreasonably gives a white person a hard time over something relatively minor. Yet when was the last time you saw that on the national news? Its pretty obvious the media has a narrative to sell, but what's to be gained by that?

It was probably a slow news day.

It seems their goal is to sow discord between the races, specifically making white people out to be nothing but a bunch of bullies to blacks, and blacks always the innocent victims of white hatred. How does this help race relations? Blacks are made to feel threatened by whites and whites feel they're being unfairly demonized.

How would any rational person feel demonized by this incident? Really, get a grip

I'm so fucking disgusted by the lack of objectivity and balance in the media these days.

I am not surprised at all.

 

[TSwizzle]

These contrived incidents are just tedious now. It's the same format every time.

Yeah. Imagine being on the receiving end of such an accusation.

I'm sure there are at least 42 million people in the US alone who would be delighted if they could regard such incidents as 'tedious.'

Karen stories are not national news.

 

[Derec]

#BelieveWomen is about fucked up shit that happens to women when they report rape/ sexual assaults or speak up about it. What exactly are you agreeing with?

Bullshit! #BelieveWomen is about demanding that women be automatically believed no matter the evidence.
Prime example being Crystal Magnum's false accusations. Not only the media and this forum, but the victims' own university (Duke) took the false accuser's side. Of course, Magnum had the fortune of having both race and gender on her side. This Karen only had one advantage in the progressive stack.