Physicians Assistant yelling “HELP ME” while stealing a CitiBike ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually do believe the "personal truth" thing is happening here. There's this strain in current thinking that holds that people can view events through ideological lenses and that these perspectives are automatically as true. It is a logic gap so wide you could drive a bus through it. But I hear this from DEI professionals all the time.

I think the problem is that there is a place for "personal truth." But there is also a place for objectivity. And they are not the same. Some people seem to think the more strongly you feel about something, the more objective it is, but usually it's the opposite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually do believe the "personal truth" thing is happening here. There's this strain in current thinking that holds that people can view events through ideological lenses and that these perspectives are automatically as true. It is a logic gap so wide you could drive a bus through it. But I hear this from DEI professionals all the time.

You’re assuming pp is sincere. I don’t doubt that we all of us view events through an ideological lens and we’re not always aware of how we’re biased. But I also think there’s another strand of petty hate/misogyny that has little to do with sincere efforts to understand what’s happening around us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually do believe the "personal truth" thing is happening here. There's this strain in current thinking that holds that people can view events through ideological lenses and that these perspectives are automatically as true. It is a logic gap so wide you could drive a bus through it. But I hear this from DEI professionals all the time.

You’re assuming pp is sincere. I don’t doubt that we all of us view events through an ideological lens and we’re not always aware of how we’re biased. But I also think there’s another strand of petty hate/misogyny that has little to do with sincere efforts to understand what’s happening around us.

I think the hate and misogyny are happening, but they're a feature of this scapegoating and dehumanizing campaign, which requires suspension of critical thinking to buy into it.

[Anonymous]

It’s interesting the guys tried deliberately to force the woman into a Karen stereotype, with the edited video and repeatedly telling her that her tears were fake.

Why? For fun? Because that was the last bike in the rack and they wanted it?

That’s how insidious the Karen meme is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting the guys tried deliberately to force the woman into a Karen stereotype, with the edited video and repeatedly telling her that her tears were fake.

Why? For fun? Because that was the last bike in the rack and they wanted it?

That’s how insidious the Karen meme is.

Because it plays right into the hands of those that are lusting for a sacrifice. And they rose to the challenge without hesitation, just as a bunch of teen aged boys predicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy says the bike is under his account. Does renting it not specify a specific bike? It seems some on here are saying it just means he rented a bike - but not that one specifically. It seems Citibike would want to know who has what specific bike and not just that someone rented a bike. Seems like it should be relatively easy to verify if and when he rented this specific bike or not.

He says the near the END of the video, when talking to the guy from the hospital who intervenes.

At the beginning of the video, the woman is on the bike (cross bar is between her legs) and the bike is still docked. She doesn’t have her phone out yet because she has items in her hands she needs to put away.

The man is leaning against her trying to force her off the bike and holding is hand over the QR code on the handlebars (scanning this code is how you rent the bike). His ONLY contact with the bike is the hand on the QR code, whereas she is actuall on the bike.

Then, around the :20 second mark, while the woman’s hands are occupied putting things away in her purse, he rents the bike (you see his hand move in the corner of the screen, then you hear the chunk and chime of the bike unlocking, plus this is when she grabs his phone, which is now close to the bike so he can use it to unlock).

He does rent the bike before she can, but only after she has climbed onto the bike and he has attempted to push her off with his body while blocking the QR code.

It is frustrating that people are taking his statement at the end of the video that he paid for the bike and applying it to the beginning of the video, where no one has paid and she appears to have a better claim to the bike.

She didn’t try to steal his bike. They had an altercation over who would be allowed to rent the bike, in which he was physically aggressive and inappropriate, IMO. I also think she behaves poorly by grabbing his phone, and failing to advocate more clearly for herself. But she ultimately gets off the bike and gives up.

But people are eager to see this as an example of a racist white lady, so instead of seeing what is actually happening. People are seeing what they want to see, and for some reason a lot if people want to see a racist white woman trying to endanger the lives of black men. That has happened, it’s not what happens here.

Am I wrong to assume that before she sat down, he was standing at the bike, in the process of renting it?

Renting these bikes should have some level of decorum accepted among people. If someone (the guy) is there and is in the process of renting the bike, that bike should be his. Similar to hailing a cab. The person who jumps in to the cab you flagged down is violating the typical procedure. And is a jerk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy says the bike is under his account. Does renting it not specify a specific bike? It seems some on here are saying it just means he rented a bike - but not that one specifically. It seems Citibike would want to know who has what specific bike and not just that someone rented a bike. Seems like it should be relatively easy to verify if and when he rented this specific bike or not.

He says the near the END of the video, when talking to the guy from the hospital who intervenes.

At the beginning of the video, the woman is on the bike (cross bar is between her legs) and the bike is still docked. She doesn’t have her phone out yet because she has items in her hands she needs to put away.

The man is leaning against her trying to force her off the bike and holding is hand over the QR code on the handlebars (scanning this code is how you rent the bike). His ONLY contact with the bike is the hand on the QR code, whereas she is actuall on the bike.

Then, around the :20 second mark, while the woman’s hands are occupied putting things away in her purse, he rents the bike (you see his hand move in the corner of the screen, then you hear the chunk and chime of the bike unlocking, plus this is when she grabs his phone, which is now close to the bike so he can use it to unlock).

He does rent the bike before she can, but only after she has climbed onto the bike and he has attempted to push her off with his body while blocking the QR code.

It is frustrating that people are taking his statement at the end of the video that he paid for the bike and applying it to the beginning of the video, where no one has paid and she appears to have a better claim to the bike.

She didn’t try to steal his bike. They had an altercation over who would be allowed to rent the bike, in which he was physically aggressive and inappropriate, IMO. I also think she behaves poorly by grabbing his phone, and failing to advocate more clearly for herself. But she ultimately gets off the bike and gives up.

But people are eager to see this as an example of a racist white lady, so instead of seeing what is actually happening. People are seeing what they want to see, and for some reason a lot if people want to see a racist white woman trying to endanger the lives of black men. That has happened, it’s not what happens here.

Am I wrong to assume that before she sat down, he was standing at the bike, in the process of renting it?

Renting these bikes should have some level of decorum accepted among people. If someone (the guy) is there and is in the process of renting the bike, that bike should be his. Similar to hailing a cab. The person who jumps in to the cab you flagged down is violating the typical procedure. And is a jerk.

You are wrong, apparently. No one wa there, she rented it and was backing out and they pushed her on the bike back, redocking it which is where she is at the start of the video. She’s a pregnant woman coming off a 12 hr shift being physically (though not violently) interfered with by a bunch of teens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy says the bike is under his account. Does renting it not specify a specific bike? It seems some on here are saying it just means he rented a bike - but not that one specifically. It seems Citibike would want to know who has what specific bike and not just that someone rented a bike. Seems like it should be relatively easy to verify if and when he rented this specific bike or not.

He says the near the END of the video, when talking to the guy from the hospital who intervenes.

At the beginning of the video, the woman is on the bike (cross bar is between her legs) and the bike is still docked. She doesn’t have her phone out yet because she has items in her hands she needs to put away.

The man is leaning against her trying to force her off the bike and holding is hand over the QR code on the handlebars (scanning this code is how you rent the bike). His ONLY contact with the bike is the hand on the QR code, whereas she is actuall on the bike.

Then, around the :20 second mark, while the woman’s hands are occupied putting things away in her purse, he rents the bike (you see his hand move in the corner of the screen, then you hear the chunk and chime of the bike unlocking, plus this is when she grabs his phone, which is now close to the bike so he can use it to unlock).

He does rent the bike before she can, but only after she has climbed onto the bike and he has attempted to push her off with his body while blocking the QR code.

It is frustrating that people are taking his statement at the end of the video that he paid for the bike and applying it to the beginning of the video, where no one has paid and she appears to have a better claim to the bike.

She didn’t try to steal his bike. They had an altercation over who would be allowed to rent the bike, in which he was physically aggressive and inappropriate, IMO. I also think she behaves poorly by grabbing his phone, and failing to advocate more clearly for herself. But she ultimately gets off the bike and gives up.

But people are eager to see this as an example of a racist white lady, so instead of seeing what is actually happening. People are seeing what they want to see, and for some reason a lot if people want to see a racist white woman trying to endanger the lives of black men. That has happened, it’s not what happens here.

Am I wrong to assume that before she sat down, he was standing at the bike, in the process of renting it?

Renting these bikes should have some level of decorum accepted among people. If someone (the guy) is there and is in the process of renting the bike, that bike should be his. Similar to hailing a cab. The person who jumps in to the cab you flagged down is violating the typical procedure. And is a jerk.

According to her lawyers statement, she arrived at the rack, sat on the vacant bike, and rented it. She pushed back but then one of the kids grabbed the bike and pushed it back into the dock (with her on it). Then the video started. She was yelling for help because they were trying to get her off the bike (that she had rightfully just rented).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy says the bike is under his account. Does renting it not specify a specific bike? It seems some on here are saying it just means he rented a bike - but not that one specifically. It seems Citibike would want to know who has what specific bike and not just that someone rented a bike. Seems like it should be relatively easy to verify if and when he rented this specific bike or not.

He says the near the END of the video, when talking to the guy from the hospital who intervenes.

At the beginning of the video, the woman is on the bike (cross bar is between her legs) and the bike is still docked. She doesn’t have her phone out yet because she has items in her hands she needs to put away.

The man is leaning against her trying to force her off the bike and holding is hand over the QR code on the handlebars (scanning this code is how you rent the bike). His ONLY contact with the bike is the hand on the QR code, whereas she is actuall on the bike.

Then, around the :20 second mark, while the woman’s hands are occupied putting things away in her purse, he rents the bike (you see his hand move in the corner of the screen, then you hear the chunk and chime of the bike unlocking, plus this is when she grabs his phone, which is now close to the bike so he can use it to unlock).

He does rent the bike before she can, but only after she has climbed onto the bike and he has attempted to push her off with his body while blocking the QR code.

It is frustrating that people are taking his statement at the end of the video that he paid for the bike and applying it to the beginning of the video, where no one has paid and she appears to have a better claim to the bike.

She didn’t try to steal his bike. They had an altercation over who would be allowed to rent the bike, in which he was physically aggressive and inappropriate, IMO. I also think she behaves poorly by grabbing his phone, and failing to advocate more clearly for herself. But she ultimately gets off the bike and gives up.

But people are eager to see this as an example of a racist white lady, so instead of seeing what is actually happening. People are seeing what they want to see, and for some reason a lot if people want to see a racist white woman trying to endanger the lives of black men. That has happened, it’s not what happens here.

Am I wrong to assume that before she sat down, he was standing at the bike, in the process of renting it?

Renting these bikes should have some level of decorum accepted among people. If someone (the guy) is there and is in the process of renting the bike, that bike should be his. Similar to hailing a cab. The person who jumps in to the cab you flagged down is violating the typical procedure. And is a jerk.

If those receipts really show she unlocked the bike and he pushed the bike back into the dock a minute later so he could rent it, then yes. Objective facts will have contradicted your assumptions.

But why would you assume that, anyway? Are pregnant women known for moving quickly and risking their babies by positioning themselves in the way of moving people and things on purpose?

You've been manipulated, both by those charming videographers and by everyone who primed you for manipulation by getting you to believe their witch-hunty propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy says the bike is under his account. Does renting it not specify a specific bike? It seems some on here are saying it just means he rented a bike - but not that one specifically. It seems Citibike would want to know who has what specific bike and not just that someone rented a bike. Seems like it should be relatively easy to verify if and when he rented this specific bike or not.

He says the near the END of the video, when talking to the guy from the hospital who intervenes.

At the beginning of the video, the woman is on the bike (cross bar is between her legs) and the bike is still docked. She doesn’t have her phone out yet because she has items in her hands she needs to put away.

The man is leaning against her trying to force her off the bike and holding is hand over the QR code on the handlebars (scanning this code is how you rent the bike). His ONLY contact with the bike is the hand on the QR code, whereas she is actuall on the bike.

Then, around the :20 second mark, while the woman’s hands are occupied putting things away in her purse, he rents the bike (you see his hand move in the corner of the screen, then you hear the chunk and chime of the bike unlocking, plus this is when she grabs his phone, which is now close to the bike so he can use it to unlock).

He does rent the bike before she can, but only after she has climbed onto the bike and he has attempted to push her off with his body while blocking the QR code.

It is frustrating that people are taking his statement at the end of the video that he paid for the bike and applying it to the beginning of the video, where no one has paid and she appears to have a better claim to the bike.

She didn’t try to steal his bike. They had an altercation over who would be allowed to rent the bike, in which he was physically aggressive and inappropriate, IMO. I also think she behaves poorly by grabbing his phone, and failing to advocate more clearly for herself. But she ultimately gets off the bike and gives up.

But people are eager to see this as an example of a racist white lady, so instead of seeing what is actually happening. People are seeing what they want to see, and for some reason a lot if people want to see a racist white woman trying to endanger the lives of black men. That has happened, it’s not what happens here.

Am I wrong to assume that before she sat down, he was standing at the bike, in the process of renting it?

Renting these bikes should have some level of decorum accepted among people. If someone (the guy) is there and is in the process of renting the bike, that bike should be his. Similar to hailing a cab. The person who jumps in to the cab you flagged down is violating the typical procedure. And is a jerk.

Not if the bikes have numbers that coincide with the rental, which I assume they do. If she’s supposed to get bike “20” but he takes it and crashes it or doesn’t return it, that’s on her account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting the guys tried deliberately to force the woman into a Karen stereotype, with the edited video and repeatedly telling her that her tears were fake.

Why? For fun? Because that was the last bike in the rack and they wanted it?

That’s how insidious the Karen meme is.

Because it plays right into the hands of those that are lusting for a sacrifice. And they rose to the challenge without hesitation, just as a bunch of teen aged boys predicted.

I'm saying Karenning the PA was a game for them. They were laughing with each other and at her. It wasn't even about the bike, because there were probably other bikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting the guys tried deliberately to force the woman into a Karen stereotype, with the edited video and repeatedly telling her that her tears were fake.

Why? For fun? Because that was the last bike in the rack and they wanted it?

That’s how insidious the Karen meme is.

Because it plays right into the hands of those that are lusting for a sacrifice. And they rose to the challenge without hesitation, just as a bunch of teen aged boys predicted.

I'm saying Karenning the PA was a game for them. They were laughing with each other and at her. It wasn't even about the bike, because there were probably other bikes.

Of course it wasn't about the bike. It was about creating a viral moment. Look how easy it is.

[Anonymous]

The teens targeted someone due to her race.

Hate crime?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The teens targeted someone due to her race.

Hate crime?

And possibly her gender, although no one seems to care about either of those things nowadays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The teens targeted someone due to her race.

Hate crime?

And possibly her gender, although no one seems to care about either of those things nowadays.

Isn’t there a thing that white people can’t be the victims of racism or hate crimes or something like that?