Amy Cooper and the scourge of white whining

[Leather_Lesbian]

On Wednesday, it was reported that Cooper is suing her former employer, investment firm Franklin Templeton, for — you guessed it! — racial discrimination. Cooper had her 15 minutes of national attention last year when she called the police on Christian Cooper (no relation), a Black man and birding enthusiast who asked her to leash her dog in a leash-only area of New York City's Central Park. Mr. Cooper filmed her telling 911 that "I'm being threatened by a man," which wasn't true.

While Christian Cooper left before any police arrived, the video was chilling — especially in light of the epidemic of police violence against Black people in the U.S. Quite literally, the incident happened the very same day that Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin calmly murdered George Floyd in full view of a crowd of witnesses. Cooper herself released public statements last year insisting that she is "not a racist" and "did not mean to harm that man," but nonetheless claiming, "It was unacceptable, and I humbly and fully apologize to everyone who's seen that video."

Her firm still let her go.

Those who were understandably skeptical of Cooper's "apology" are no doubt vindicated by her lawsuit, in which she claims she "was alone in the park and frightened to death," a claim that anyone who watches the video has every right to be skeptical of. (It's worth a rewatch, to be reminded of how calm Amy Cooper is when she threatens Christian Cooper, and how she turns on the "scared" voice when the call to 911 patches through.) She also accuses the bird watcher of being "overzealous," even though she was the one who had to take a "therapeutic" class on racial bias in order to get the charge of filing a false police report dismissed.

But while Cooper's arrogance is truly next level, her playing-the-victim lawsuit is emblematic of a wave of white whininess that's crashing over the U.S. right now, as large numbers of white people — mostly, but not exclusively Donald Trump voters — convince themselves that it's not racism that is a problem in the U.S., but the bogeyman of white people being victimized by anti-racists.

Take, for instance, the surge of chatter about "critical race theory." If you have no idea what the hell your drunk uncle is talking about when he raves about this on Facebook, well, you're not alone. Critical race theory was, until this year, an obscure concept outside of the narrow confines of legal scholarship, used mainly by law professors to explain the historical reasons for ongoing racial inequalities baked into the legal system.

But "critical race theory" sure does sound scary to defensive white people who are sure the "woke" mob is going to find out about that racist joke they told at a poker game last year and "cancel" them, as Fox News keeps warning will happen. And so right-wing media has spent months making sure the term "critical race theory" is on the lips of every Donald Trump voter still mad that they "let" Philadelphia and Detroit vote in the 2020 election.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a...rge-of-white-whining/ar-AAKs6KZ?ocid=msedgdhp

 

[Stephen_Coyle]

The idea that "critical race theory" is a widespread threat to white people was invented, whole cloth, by the right-wing media and then pumped out vigorously. Mentions of "critical race theory" on cable news simply didn't exist prior to this year, but there's been an explosion of uses of that term on Fox News in recent months. A study from Media Matters shows that, by early May, the term had been used (inaccurately in most, if not all, cases ) on Fox News at least 552 times in the past year.

The right would have you believe that it's the left that made "critical race theory" a thing, and they are merely reacting. But another study of Facebook posts by Media Matters found that pretty much the only people talking about "critical race theory" online are Republicans, with nearly 90% of the posts from political pages and 97% of the interactions coming from right-wing people.

To be certain, there is nothing wrong with real-life critical race theory, which is a valuable tool for academics analyzing legal and cultural issues. But right-wing media doesn't use the term accurately. It's an alarmist term to stir up fears that "woke" culture is coming to get white people. And also, of course, as justification to silence — or, as one might say, cancel — any discussion or attempt to educate people, especially students, about the existence or history of racism in America.

 

[WillJ8787]

On Wednesday, it was reported that Cooper is suing her former employer, investment firm Franklin Templeton, for — you guessed it! — racial discrimination. Cooper had her 15 minutes of national attention last year when she called the police on Christian Cooper (no relation), a Black man and birding enthusiast who asked her to leash her dog in a leash-only area of New York City's Central Park. Mr. Cooper filmed her telling 911 that "I'm being threatened by a man," which wasn't true.

While Christian Cooper left before any police arrived, the video was chilling — especially in light of the epidemic of police violence against Black people in the U.S. Quite literally, the incident happened the very same day that Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin calmly murdered George Floyd in full view of a crowd of witnesses. Cooper herself released public statements last year insisting that she is "not a racist" and "did not mean to harm that man," but nonetheless claiming, "It was unacceptable, and I humbly and fully apologize to everyone who's seen that video."

Her firm still let her go.

Those who were understandably skeptical of Cooper's "apology" are no doubt vindicated by her lawsuit, in which she claims she "was alone in the park and frightened to death," a claim that anyone who watches the video has every right to be skeptical of. (It's worth a rewatch, to be reminded of how calm Amy Cooper is when she threatens Christian Cooper, and how she turns on the "scared" voice when the call to 911 patches through.) She also accuses the bird watcher of being "overzealous," even though she was the one who had to take a "therapeutic" class on racial bias in order to get the charge of filing a false police report dismissed.

But while Cooper's arrogance is truly next level, her playing-the-victim lawsuit is emblematic of a wave of white whininess that's crashing over the U.S. right now, as large numbers of white people — mostly, but not exclusively Donald Trump voters — convince themselves that it's not racism that is a problem in the U.S., but the bogeyman of white people being victimized by anti-racists.

Take, for instance, the surge of chatter about "critical race theory." If you have no idea what the hell your drunk uncle is talking about when he raves about this on Facebook, well, you're not alone. Critical race theory was, until this year, an obscure concept outside of the narrow confines of legal scholarship, used mainly by law professors to explain the historical reasons for ongoing racial inequalities baked into the legal system.

But "critical race theory" sure does sound scary to defensive white people who are sure the "woke" mob is going to find out about that racist joke they told at a poker game last year and "cancel" them, as Fox News keeps warning will happen. And so right-wing media has spent months making sure the term "critical race theory" is on the lips of every Donald Trump voter still mad that they "let" Philadelphia and Detroit vote in the 2020 election.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a...rge-of-white-whining/ar-AAKs6KZ?ocid=msedgdhp

Lock her up.... racist belong in jail...that will cure them of it!

 

[CornusKousa]

Lock her up.... racist belong in jail...that will cure them of it!

Not accepting the racism YOU support, isn't being racist.

Critical theory is racist commie trash, just like the three lefty bigots and certainly many more who will post in this thread.

 

[Lazaran]

.
Um,.... I actually believe that Amy Cooper WAS scared out of her mind.

I don't believe she was terrified PURELY because of Christian Cooper's race. Yes, there was likely some conscious/unconscious racial bias, but her size, gender, and isolation, confronted with the size and gender of Christian Cooper(no relation)) and his aggressive tactics used to address her failure to control her dog, were likely equally significant factors in her reaction.

Christian Cooper DID threaten Amy Cooper and her dog. That basic fact cannot be disputed. Christian Cooper admitted to saying he would do something she wouldn't like if Amy Cooper didn't comply with his demands that she leash her dog. He also attempted to lure her dog to him with a dog treat he "just so happened" to have in his pocket.

Amy Cooper was undoubtably in the wrong with her failure to control her dog and follow park rules, but Christian Cooper didn't comport himself any better with his actions in response to Amy Cooper's wrongful acts.

Whether she should have been fired from her job due to her extreme reaction and actions is a reasonable question for the courts to address.

 

[Rightguide]

The idea that "critical race theory" is a widespread threat to white people was invented, whole cloth, by the right-wing media

That's a fucking lie. Actually it's Communist Party doctrine invented by subversive Marxists to divide our nation. It's simple child abuse to teach this shit in schools. Parents and students are rising up all over the nation in PTA meetings, city counsel meetings, and in government hearings. My state along with three others have already outlawed it within their borders, three more states have bills sitting on their governor's desk awaiting signatures, and as many as ten more have similar bills in various states of political process.

 

[CandK_inSE]

.
Um,.... I actually believe that Amy Cooper WAS scared out of her mind.

I don't believe she was terrified PURELY because of Christian Coopera race. Yes, there was likely some conscious/unconscious racial bias, but her size, gender, and isolation, confronted with the size and gender of Christian Cooper(no relation)) and his aggressive tactics used to address her failure to control her dog, were likely equally significant rfactors in her reaction.

Christian Cooper DID threaten Amy Cooper and her dog. That basic fact cannot be disputed. Christian Cooper admitted to saying he would do something she wouldn't like if Amy Cooper didn't comply with his demands that she leash her dog. He also attempted to lure her dog to him with a dog treat he "just so happened" to have in his pocket.

Amy Cooper was undoubtably in the wrong with her failure to control her dog and follow park rules, but Christian Cooper didn't comport himself any better with his actions in response to Amy Cooper's wrongful acts.

Whether she should have been fired from her job due to her extreme reaction and actions is a reasonable question for the courts to address.

We agree for once.

When I watched the video I thought they were both wrong.

No idea if it had anything to do with race or not, but I got the impression that he was threatening regardless of his race.

Like you said, she is wrong for not leashing her dog.

I do think the courts should address the reasonableness or nonreasonableness of termination of employment. To me, her being fired was less about her actual actions and more about public reaction.

 

[KeithD]

She lost me at the unleashed dog point.

 

[pointless]

.
Um,.... I actually believe that Amy Cooper WAS scared out of her mind.

I don't believe she was terrified PURELY because of Christian Coopera race. Yes, there was likely some conscious/unconscious racial bias, but her size, gender, and isolation, confronted with the size and gender of Christian Cooper(no relation)) and his aggressive tactics used to address her failure to control her dog, were likely equally significant rfactors in her reaction.

Christian Cooper DID threaten Amy Cooper and her dog. That basic fact cannot be disputed. Christian Cooper admitted to saying he would do something she wouldn't like if Amy Cooper didn't comply with his demands that she leash her dog. He also attempted to lure her dog to him with a dog treat he "just so happened" to have in his pocket.

Amy Cooper was undoubtably in the wrong with her failure to control her dog and follow park rules, but Christian Cooper didn't comport himself any better with his actions in response to Amy Cooper's wrongful acts.

Whether she should have been fired from her job due to her extreme reaction and actions is a reasonable question for the courts to address.

your pattern has been noticed.

 

[Lazaran]

your pattern has been noticed.

Could you be a little more ambiguous???

*shrugs*

 

[BoyNextDoor]

The idea that "critical race theory" is a widespread threat to white people was invented, whole cloth, by the right-wing media and then pumped out vigorously. Mentions of "critical race theory" on cable news simply didn't exist prior to this year, but there's been an explosion of uses of that term on Fox News in recent months. A study from Media Matters shows that, by early May, the term had been used (inaccurately in most, if not all, cases ) on Fox News at least 552 times in the past year.

The right would have you believe that it's the left that made "critical race theory" a thing, and they are merely reacting. But another study of Facebook posts by Media Matters found that pretty much the only people talking about "critical race theory" online are Republicans, with nearly 90% of the posts from political pages and 97% of the interactions coming from right-wing people.

To be certain, there is nothing wrong with real-life critical race theory, which is a valuable tool for academics analyzing legal and cultural issues. But right-wing media doesn't use the term accurately. It's an alarmist term to stir up fears that "woke" culture is coming to get white people. And also, of course, as justification to silence — or, as one might say, cancel — any discussion or attempt to educate people, especially students, about the existence or history of racism in America.

That's a fucking lie. Actually it's Communist Party doctrine invented by subversive Marxists to divide our nation. It's simple child abuse to teach this shit in schools. Parents and students are rising up all over the nation in PTA meetings, city counsel meetings, and in government hearings. My state along with three others have already outlawed it within their borders, three more states have bills sitting on their governor's desk awaiting signatures, and as many as ten more have similar bills in various states of political process.

Case in point: The ravings of a fanatic.

 

[Rightguide]

Case in point: The ravings of a fanatic.

Yes, the truth always hurts the dissembling propagandist.

 

[Comshaw]

.
Um,.... I actually believe that Amy Cooper WAS scared out of her mind.

I don't believe she was terrified PURELY because of Christian Cooper's race. Yes, there was likely some conscious/unconscious racial bias, but her size, gender, and isolation, confronted with the size and gender of Christian Cooper(no relation)) and his aggressive tactics used to address her failure to control her dog, were likely equally significant factors in her reaction.

Christian Cooper DID threaten Amy Cooper and her dog. That basic fact cannot be disputed. Christian Cooper admitted to saying he would do something she wouldn't like if Amy Cooper didn't comply with his demands that she leash her dog. He also attempted to lure her dog to him with a dog treat he "just so happened" to have in his pocket.

Amy Cooper was undoubtably in the wrong with her failure to control her dog and follow park rules, but Christian Cooper didn't comport himself any better with his actions in response to Amy Cooper's wrongful acts.

Whether she should have been fired from her job due to her extreme reaction and actions is a reasonable question for the courts to address.

Really? Scared out of her mind? From what?

Christian cooper did threaten her, but it wasn't a threat to her life. His words were he would "do something you won't like". That could mean any number of things. The telling thing is he never made a move toward her. He also never threatened her dog at any time. He never approached her, never said anything that could remotely be construed as a threat of any kind, other than what I quoted above so unless she was so timid anything would scare her, why was she "scared out of her mind"?

The treats: he didn't "just so happen to have" them. According to him, he carries them for a reason, because people don't like others feeding their dog treats and it's a way to encourage them to get their dog under control. And that "scared her to death"?

In actuality, his "demand" that she comply with his request to leash her dog was a request that she comply with the rules of the park. Asking someone to obey the rules is being aggressive? Me thinks you might be stretching that one a bit (or a whole fucking bunch) more than you should.

As far as "but her size, gender, and isolation, confronted with the size and gender of Christian Cooper" factoring into her reaction. He never moved from his position. She approached him. If she was so terrified of him for those reasons, why did she do that? Why not, if she felt threatened, try to put some distance between them? She could have done so and still managed to make the call to 911, UNLESS she really didn't feel threatened at all. Hmmmm....

The change in her tone from when she was speaking to him to when she was speaking to the 911 operator speaks volumes. She wasn't hysterical at all until she was on the phone with the 911 operator, and then only after the first part of the conversation. She was clearly trying to manipulate the operator into thinking there was more going on than actually was.

There are few incidents like this where both parties are totally innocent. But there is always a preponderance of guilt on one side or the other. In this case, Christian Cooper was about 10% at fault. The other 90% lays directly at her feet.

As far as her being fired by her employer for this incident. I agree, that's what the courts are for. Depending on her contract with the company, I doubt very much if she has any grounds to make her case.

Comshaw

 

[Lazaran]

Really? Scared out of her mind? From what?

Christian cooper did threaten her, but it wasn't a threat to her life. His words were he would "do something you won't like". That could mean any number of things. The telling thing is he never made a move toward her. He also never threatened her dog at any time. He never approached her, never said anything that could remotely be construed as a threat of any kind, other than what I quoted above so unless she was so timid anything would scare her, why was she "scared out of her mind"?

The treats: he didn't "just so happen to have" them. According to him, he carries them for a reason, because people don't like others feeding their dog treats and it's a way to encourage them to get their dog under control. And that "scared her to death"?

In actuality, his "demand" that she comply with his request to leash her dog was a request that she comply with the rules of the park. Asking someone to obey the rules is being aggressive? Me thinks you might be stretching that one a bit (or a whole fucking bunch) more than you should.

As far as "but her size, gender, and isolation, confronted with the size and gender of Christian Cooper" factoring into her reaction. He never moved from his position. She approached him. If she was so terrified of him for those reasons, why did she do that? Why not, if she felt threatened, try to put some distance between them? She could have done so and still managed to make the call to 911, UNLESS she really didn't feel threatened at all. Hmmmm....

The change in her tone from when she was speaking to him to when she was speaking to the 911 operator speaks volumes. She wasn't hysterical at all until she was on the phone with the 911 operator, and then only after the first part of the conversation. She was clearly trying to manipulate the operator into thinking there was more going on than actually was.

There are few incidents like this where both parties are totally innocent. But there is always a preponderance of guilt on one side or the other. In this case, Christian Cooper was about 10% at fault. The other 90% lays directly at her feet.

As far as her being fired by her employer for this incident. I agree, that's what the courts are for. Depending on her contract with the company, I doubt very much if she has any grounds to make her case.

Comshaw

Yes, I believe SHE was scared out of her mind. People have a difficult time identifying with the thought processes of others who behave in a way that doesn't comport with how they would behave in a similar situation. Perception is reality, and how Amy Cooper perceived the threat facing her is absolutely relevant to the outcome of the event. Even her excitedly approaching and threatening of Mr. Cooper with calling the police can be seen as evidence of her frightened state of mind.

The claim that Amy Cooper initiated the interaction with Christian Cooper is inaccurate. Mr. Cooper confronted Miss Cooper about her dog. The claim that his statement about doing something she wouldn't like wasn't a threat is laughable. The luring of her dog with a dog treat is downright creepy.

The most confrontational part of the event could have been avoided if Mr. Cooper had simply called the park authorities on her, rather than playing vigilante park ranger. It seemed as though Mr. Cooper appointed himself guardian of the park, and took active measures(carrying dog treats, etc) to enforce the park rules.

Amy Cooper was initially in the wrong, but Christian Coopers actions were provocative, and contributed to escalating the situation.

Neither covered themselves with honor that day.

 

[YDB95]

That's a fucking lie. Actually it's Communist Party doctrine invented by subversive Marxists to divide our nation.

Well, it was first conceived by some law professors. I can see why you would mistake them for communists, but, yeah, no.

It's simple child abuse to teach this shit in schools.

Then it's a good thing the only place it's ever been taught is in law schools. That's age 22-25 at least, sometimes much older. People that age can make up their own minds whether or not they buy a theory, Rightguide.

Parents and students are rising up all over the nation in PTA meetings, city counsel meetings, and in government hearings. My state along with three others have already outlawed it within their borders, three more states have bills sitting on their governor's desk awaiting signatures, and as many as ten more have similar bills in various states of political process.

Which is an astounding waste of resources in the midst of a global pandemic and very real cases of police brutality against Black Americans, not to mention multiple shootings almost every day. Reminds me of how the Republicans spent so much time in the '90s banning gay marriage when it was already illegal.

 

[Comshaw]

Yes, I believe SHE was scared out of her mind. People have a difficult time identifying with the thought processes of others who behave in a way that doesn't comport with how they would behave in a similar situation. Perception is reality, and how Amy Cooper perceived the threat facing her is absolutely relevant to the outcome of the event. Even her excitedly approaching and threatening of Mr. Cooper with calling the police can be seen as evidence of her frightened state of mind.

The claim that Amy Cooper initiated the interaction with Christian Cooper is inaccurate. Mr. Cooper confronted Miss Cooper about her dog. The claim that his statement about doing something she wouldn't like wasn't a threat is laughable. The luring of her dog with a dog treat is downright creepy.

The most confrontational part of the event could have been avoided if Mr. Cooper had simply called the park authorities on her, rather than playing vigilante park ranger. It seemed as though Mr. Cooper appointed himself guardian of the park, and took active measures(carrying dog treats, etc) to enforce the park rules.

Amy Cooper was initially in the wrong, but Christian Coopers actions were provocative, and contributed to escalating the situation.

Neither covered themselves with honor that day.

Of course I can not get into her head and say for certain how she was responding to the encounter. The point is that neither can you. So we either go on blind belief, which you are doing, or empirical observation.

After viewing the video a few more times she doesn't appear to be frightened at all, but does appear to be agitated because Mr. Cooper called her on not obeying the rules. Fight, flight or freeze, those are universal reactions of all creatures, humans included.

Fight is usually undertaken if under threat that individual feels they can win, or they have no other choice. Because of her stature, I do not believe she thought she could win a physical confrontation. Additionally, she wasn't so frightened she froze in place. If she was as afraid as you are making her out to be, she should have taken the last option and ran. She didn't. She opted to approach him and threaten him. That isn't a sign of being afraid, but of being angry.

I never claimed that Amy Cooper initiated the confrontation. That is a false statement. I did insist that she approached him, which she did. And the reason she did I detailed above.

It definitely could have been avoided if Mr. Coooper had kept his mouth shut, but let's look at that. He was sitting in the park enjoying one of his hobbies, bird watching. Ms. Cooper came through with her dog off-leash, which was against the rules. Mr. Cooper stated that off-leash pets chase and frighten away the birds.

She was breaking the rules and in so doing was disturbing what he was doing legally and by the rules. Why shouldn't he call her on it? I would. Anyone with a bit of self-confidence would. He wasn't in the wrong for doing so. She could have told him to bite her ass and go on her way. She didn't. She could have, after he pulled out the treats grabbed her dog's collar and gone on her way with a few expletives, she didn't. She was very upset he was videoing, I'm sure because he could use that as evidence she was breaking the rules. NOTHING he did was outside of the law. Granted it was creepy BUT WAS NOT OUTSIDE THE RULES OF THE PARK OR LAWS OF THE CITY. What she did was.

To highlight my point she was the only one of the two who was charged. Granted it was dismissed, AFTER she completed education and therapy classes on racial equity.

As I said before, 10% vers 90%.

Comshaw

 

[Lazaran]

Of course I can not get into her head and say for certain how she was responding to the encounter. The point is that neither can you. So we either go on blind belief, which you are doing, or empirical observation.

After viewing the video a few more times she doesn't appear to be frightened at all, but does appear to be agitated because Mr. Cooper called her on not obeying the rules. Fight, flight or freeze, those are universal reactions of all creatures, humans included.

Fight is usually undertaken if under threat that individual feels they can win, or they have no other choice. Because of her stature, I do not believe she thought she could win a physical confrontation. Additionally, she wasn't so frightened she froze in place. If she was as afraid as you are making her out to be, she should have taken the last option and ran. She didn't. She opted to approach him and threaten him. That isn't a sign of being afraid, but of being angry.

I never claimed that Amy Cooper initiated the confrontation. That is a false statement. I did insist that she approached him, which she did. And the reason she did I detailed above.

It definitely could have been avoided if Mr. Coooper had kept his mouth shut, but let's look at that. He was sitting in the park enjoying one of his hobbies, bird watching. Ms. Cooper came through with her dog off-leash, which was against the rules. Mr. Cooper stated that off-leash pets chase and frighten away the birds.

She was breaking the rules and in so doing was disturbing what he was doing legally and by the rules. Why shouldn't he call her on it? I would. Anyone with a bit of self-confidence would. He wasn't in the wrong for doing so. She could have told him to bite her ass and go on her way. She didn't. She could have, after he pulled out the treats grabbed her dog's collar and gone on her way with a few expletives, she didn't. She was very upset he was videoing, I'm sure because he could use that as evidence she was breaking the rules. NOTHING he did was outside of the law. Granted it was creepy BUT WAS NOT OUTSIDE THE RULES OF THE PARK OR LAWS OF THE CITY. What she did was.

To highlight my point she was the only one of the two who was charged. Granted it was dismissed, AFTER she completed education and therapy classes on racial equity.

As I said before, 10% vers 90%.

Comshaw

We will have to agree to disagree.

Amy Cooper was 100% in the wrong about having her dog off its leash in that area of the park, but the real event was the confrontation between the two. Responsibility for the escalation and extremely negative outcome of that confrontation was shared fairly evenly in my honest opinion.

As far as assessing Amy Coopers mental state at the time, I'm not claiming to know exactly what it was. I am simply suggesting that Miss Cooper being frightened is very likely considering the documented chain of events that led to her agitated state and subsequent negative behavior. The only reason I opined on her potentially frightened mental state is because the OP attempted to discount the possibility. Fight, flight, or freeze are somewhat limiting when describing how people respond to a perceived threat. Smaller animals often puff themselves up and become extremely aggressive when they feel cornered or threatened. It's actually a very effective tactic, though ultimately it's just a major bluff.

Considering the chain of events and her subsequently taking ownership of her role in the negative interaction, Amy Cooper challenging her termination seems reasonable.

 

[WillJ8787]

Yes, I believe SHE was scared out of her mind. People have a difficult time identifying with the thought processes of others who behave in a way that doesn't comport with how they would behave in a similar situation. Perception is reality, and how Amy Cooper perceived the threat facing her is absolutely relevant to the outcome of the event. Even her excitedly approaching and threatening of Mr. Cooper with calling the police can be seen as evidence of her frightened state of mind.

The claim that Amy Cooper initiated the interaction with Christian Cooper is inaccurate. Mr. Cooper confronted Miss Cooper about her dog. The claim that his statement about doing something she wouldn't like wasn't a threat is laughable. The luring of her dog with a dog treat is downright creepy.

The most confrontational part of the event could have been avoided if Mr. Cooper had simply called the park authorities on her, rather than playing vigilante park ranger. It seemed as though Mr. Cooper appointed himself guardian of the park, and took active measures(carrying dog treats, etc) to enforce the park rules.

Amy Cooper was initially in the wrong, but Christian Coopers actions were provocative, and contributed to escalating the situation.

Neither covered themselves with honor that day.

Yes, there sure are a lot of white folks scared shitless of blacks out in a park, walking on the sidewalk, shopping, driving a car and just about anything normal folks do.

It's time to either fine them for their ignorance and racism or put them in a cell overnight until it cures them.

 

[KeithD]

We will have to agree to disagree.

Amy Cooper was 100% in the wrong about having her dog off its leash in that area of the park, but the real event was the confrontation between the two.

No arrogant entitlement from her on what she could and could not do in the park and no confrontation. So, I don't need to go beyond that.

 

[Lazaran]

Yes, there sure are a lot of white folks scared shitless of blacks out in a park, walking on the sidewalk, shopping, driving a car and just about anything normal folks do.

It's time to either fine them for their ignorance and racism or put them in a cell overnight until it cures them.

There's definitely some of that. After all the terrible shit white people have done to black people over the centuries in America, white people would be foolish not to be somewhat fearful. If black people had done all that shit to me and my ancestors for the last four hundred years, they would be wise to be somewhat fearful of me. Kinda like black people are somewhat fearful of police.

Beyond the historical reasons for the potential racial element in the altercation between Christian Cooper and Amy Cooper, the genders of the two participants , and the isolated location, also cannot be ignored when considering Miss Coopers state of mind. It also didn't help that Mr. Cooper threatened to do something Miss Cooper wouldn't like, and then attempted to lure her dog to him with a dog treat he admitted he carried in his pocket for just such types of events.

This is definitely a case where more than just race has to be taken into consideration when assessing Miss Cooper's state of mind at the time of her call to the police.

 

[Lazaran]

No arrogant entitlement from her on what she could and could not do in the park and no confrontation. So, I don't need to go beyond that.

Except it did go beyond that. And in fairness to Miss Cooper, she did attempt to explain to Mr. Cooper that she was only there because the authorized park dog run nearby was closed. Assuming arrogance and entitlement from a person trying to get their dog some exercise is somewhat presumptuous. The fact that Covid had already hit New York can not go unrecognized either. People were on edge to begin with, and being confronted by a stranger about anything would likely trigger an exaggerated reaction.

The OP dismissed the assertion that Miss Cooper was frightened, and that her statement to police that she was being threatened by a man was false. No one can prove Miss Cooper wasn't frightened, and Mr. Cooper did in fact threaten Miss Cooper by saying he would do something she wouldn't like, then proceeded to lure her dog to him with a dog treat. At that point Mr. Cooper lost all credibility as a reasonable individual, because he contributed to the escalation of the confrontation. Miss Cooper was certainly in violation of park rules, but the escalation of the confrontation, which ultimately led to Miss Cooper being fired from her job, was precipitated by Mr. Coopers provocative actions.

JMTCW

 

[KeithD]

Assuming arrogance and entitlement from a person trying to get their dog some exercise is somewhat presumptuous.

Nope, it's not. It was her choice (and responsibility) to have a dog in the city. She knew the rules. She just didn't think they were for her, because . . . reasons. Arrogant and entitled.

 

[Lazaran]

Nope, it's not. It was her choice (and responsibility) to have a dog in the city. She knew the rules. She just didn't think they were for her, because . . . reasons. Arrogant and entitled.

Well I guess that settles it.

 

[Comshaw]

We will have to agree to disagree.

Amy Cooper was 100% in the wrong about having her dog off its leash in that area of the park, but the real event was the confrontation between the two. Responsibility for the escalation and extremely negative outcome of that confrontation was shared fairly evenly in my honest opinion.

As far as assessing Amy Coopers mental state at the time, I'm not claiming to know exactly what it was. I am simply suggesting that Miss Cooper being frightened is very likely considering the documented chain of events that led to her agitated state and subsequent negative behavior. The only reason I opined on her potentially frightened mental state is because the OP attempted to discount the possibility. Fight, flight, or freeze are somewhat limiting when describing how people respond to a perceived threat. Smaller animals often puff themselves up and become extremely aggressive when they feel cornered or threatened. It's actually a very effective tactic, though ultimately it's just a major bluff.

Considering the chain of events and her subsequently taking ownership of her role in the negative interaction, Amy Cooper challenging her termination seems reasonable.

The escalation WAS NOT shared 50/50 at all. As I pointed out before, she had numerous ways to avoid it. Mr. Cooper never moved, never approached her. The ONLY threat from him was the, "something you won't like" comment, which could mean anything and isn't even close to the action she took, claiming he was threatening her life.

She was the one who closed the gap between them. As she approached him she kept asking him to stop recording her. Making a recording like that in a public place isn't illegal or even disrespectful. Keep in mind this was a black man alone in the woods with a white woman. Had I been him, I'd record everything so as to protect my ass.

When she approached him his response was, "Please don't come close to me." Yet she stepped closer anyway. Have you ever seen an antelope walk up to a Lion when they are afraid? You won't because that doesn't happen. And just because she is a human doesn't mean she won't respond just like an antelope will with a lion. IF she were as frightened as you insist, she wouldn't have done what she did.
But let's go through it:

As she walked closer to him she was the one who issued the threat, "I'll call the cops!"

Do you remember Mr. Cooper's response? "Please call the cops. Please call the cops."

What was her next statement? "I'm going to tell them there is an African American man threatening my life."

When did he threaten her life? That never happened.

His response was, "Please tell them whatever you like."

All of the above is directly from the video. He asked her not to approach him, she did anyway threatening him as she did. That's fear? Not even. It's plain old anger. She was the one who instigated the majority of the confrontation. It wasn't even close to 50/50.

Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

Except it did go beyond that. And in fairness to Miss Cooper, she did attempt to explain to Mr. Cooper that she was only there because the authorized park dog run nearby was closed. Assuming arrogance and entitlement from a person trying to get their dog some exercise is somewhat presumptuous. The fact that Covid had already hit New York can not go unrecognized either. People were on edge to begin with, and being confronted by a stranger about anything would likely trigger an exaggerated reaction.

The OP dismissed the assertion that Miss Cooper was frightened, and that her statement to police that she was being threatened by a man was false. No one can prove Miss Cooper wasn't frightened, and Mr. Cooper did in fact threaten Miss Cooper by saying he would do something she wouldn't like, then proceeded to lure her dog to him with a dog treat. At that point Mr. Cooper lost all credibility as a reasonable individual, because he contributed to the escalation of the confrontation. Miss Cooper was certainly in violation of park rules, but the escalation of the confrontation, which ultimately led to Miss Cooper being fired from her job, was precipitated by Mr. Coopers provocative actions.

JMTCW

You seem to be going through numerous gyrations to excuse her actions. She did use the excuse of the closed dog park and her trying to get her dog some exercise. I probably would have done the same in her place. However, any reasonable person caught and called on doing something in violation of the posted rules would have apologized and leashed their dog. She DID NOT have the right to do what she was doing. Mr. Cooper was totally in the right to ask her to leash her dog. The escalation of the incident started there and grew worse by her subsequent actions.

He did threaten her, but HE DID NOT threaten her life. That was a totally false statement from her. Nor did he approach her as I've pointed out numerous times. She was the one who approached him. She MIGHT HAVE BEEN frightened but there is no way that she can be defended for her actions frightened or not. And as I've pointed out, she was the one who was cited. In a "he said she said" incident most of the time it's dismissed on both sides because of the lack of evidence. I'm sure during the investigation the cops watched the video taken by Mr. Cooper and that's what convinced them she was the offending party.

You can believe anything you want. But if you look at that video, read what was said by each party and do so with an unjaundiced eye it's apparent who was the aggressor and it wasn't Mr. Cooper.

Comshaw