Cooper's 'damsel in distress' act has sorry history

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

By Mia Brett / The Washington Post

Amy Cooper went viral this week; and not for a good reason. In a widely shared video, she alters the pitch of her voice to sound in distress and fabricates danger, while calling the police claiming an “African American man” was threatening her life. In reality, the man in question, birdwatcher Christian Cooper, had simply requested she put her dog on a leash as required by Central Park regulations and can be seen backing away to keep his distance from her.

The incident fits into a common theme of online shaming videos catching racist white women calling the police on black people for minor reasons. The shaming has forced Amy Cooper to return her dog to the agency she adopted him from, and she has been fired by her employer.

But while the video’s unique facts have inflamed social media, Cooper’s behavior has a long historical legacy. The video doesn’t just show an entitled white woman invoking threat and involving the police in an incident that could very well have escalated and resulted in violence, perhaps deadly, against Christian Cooper. It also depicts Amy Cooper wrapping herself in the persona of the “damsel in distress,” a figure that offers protection only to white women. It is also a guise that for centuries has been used as an excuse to enact racist violence on black people in the name of white women’s safety.

Though built on white privilege, the protection offered to white women against other groups actually serves anti-feminist goals of infantilizing women and using their safety as justification to enact bigoted violence. In cases where women’s safety cannot be easily weaponized against a black, immigrant or trans person, the figure of the damsel in distress has evoked little societal response, even if a woman is in genuine danger.

-more-

https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/comment-coopers-damsel-in-distress-act-has-sorry-history/?utm_source=DAILY+HERALD&utm_campaign=9847d22981-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d81d073bb4-9847d22981-228635337

[CaptYossarian]

1. Up until a few years ago, I believed racism was an overwhelmingly male trait.

Sure, I'd heard inklings at random times over the years from women, but there have been more Bigfoot sightings than those extremely rare instances. Typically, white males were the ones complaining about brown people taking jobs away or black men wanting white women--just as their ancestors did since the early 19th century (forgetting that black people were the only folks "invited" to be here by lazy whites). The slurs and stereotypes were peppered in so as to not become monotonous either. A racist voice is usually a deeper voice, so I thought.

My last boss would often refer to my employees as "them", and my three non-racist white peers understood what she meant. "Them" would always give me chills, but my chills turned to pure horror the day after my boss was ecstatic over Senator McCain's choice for running mate in 2008. I didn't really know her until that day. It slapped me in the face and partially woke me.

But she was a rarity (I still naively believed) until Anonymous published a list of KKK members not long after the Obama victory. I looked with anticipation for several police officers and politicians that members of our party suspected would be on that list. No Duke, no Lindsay, not even a McConnell.

Those names weren't there, but many, many "female-sounding" names took their place. It seemed the once "fairer sex" could also be unfair. Now, several "picnicking while black" phone calls later, we have the term "Karens".

I thought the origin was for Karen Pence, whose husband is a shade of white that only dogs should detect, but apparently this isn't so.

The human race never fails to disappoint me.

[dalton99a]

3. +1

[NNadir]

2. Thanks. An excellent article. n/t.