Discover more from Wonkette
Megyn Kelly Disappointed Activist Movements Me Too And Black Lives Matter Co-Opted By Activists
Does Megyn Kelly know what activists are?
Megyn Kelly, continuing on her "Megyn Kelly Says A Lot Of Dumb Shit" world tour, stopped by the The Carlos Watson Show this week to share her opinions on Black Lives Matter and #MeToo. They were, as you might expect, quite terrible.
In a clip obtained by The Hill which has not yet been published by the show, she was totally fine with both of these movements until they were "co-opted" by "activists." This is certainly an odd take given that both of them were started by activists in the first place.
Megyn Kelly: Black Lives Matter and MeToo Co-Opted | The Carlos Watson Show youtu.be
Kelly explained that, at first, she felt real bad about George Floyd being brutally murdered by a police officer who was literally kneeling on his neck so he couldn't breathe, and sort of understood why people might be mad about that. But then people like, kept protesting and being angry about it instead of just letting it be a 24-hour news cycle that we all forget about in a week. And then they wanted serious change to happen in order to prevent something like that from ever happening again (although it subsequently happened several more times this summer), and that was just rude .
Via The Hill:
"When George Floyd was killed I think a lot of Black people and white people were deeply affected by that tape," she told Watson, the co-founder and CEO of OZY."
And when I saw the riots unfold, my first instinct was how can we ask people to respect law and order and sort of the balance of decency when we don't live that," she said in a clip of the interview released exclusively to The Hill Thursday ahead of the full interview.
But Kelly said she "began to feel very differently" as the summer went on and demonstrations evolved and some activists promoted the slogan "defund the police."
"I began to feel very differently, as it morphed into more of a political movement, where to me it seemed co-opted by activists, as opposed to just people who wanted change," Kelly said. "And some reform in law enforcement turned into 'defund the police.' "
It must be said that at no point has Black Lives Matter ever not been an activist movement. It's not like, you know, "Live, Laugh, Love" or some other slogan you'd see embroidered on a pillow in Marshall's. It was started by activists Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi in response to George Zimmerman killing Trayvon Martin because he was real scared of the Skittles he was about to pull from his pocket.
That was eight years ago, by the way. In 2012. Eric Garner? That was six years ago in 2014. The police have had ample time for "reform." Had they started this "reform" after Rodney King, it is unlikely that a lot of these people would be dead now. Had they started it after Amadou Diallo, same deal. Hell, if they had started it after Eric Garner, they'd be in a real good place right now. But instead of doing this "reform," they blamed bad apples who pretty much never actually faced any consequences for their actions, they waved their little thin blue line flags and responded to Black Lives Matter not with any amount of seriousness, but with their own Blue Lives Matter nonsense.
That's how you get to "defund the police." Which by the way just means taking some of the funding the police get and giving that to social services that are better able to deal with a lot of situations the police have proven themselves incapable of handling. It's an idea that has actually worked really well in areas that have tried it. Of course, conservatives like Kelly have picked up on how wound up some Democrats are about how bad and scary they think the term is, and they're doubling down on that. They're seeing an opening and they're going for it, hoping they can get enough people to oppose just doing the thing that actually works in favor of simply calling for vague, feel-good "reforms" that will never actually happen or do anything if they do.
It is a tale as old as time.
Kelly's take on this is not particularly unique. Conservatives voiced their frustration for months that they wanted us all to be sad for George Floyd as a nation, just not in a way that suggested it had anything to do with his race or the police officer being bad at his job. And certainly not in a way that people were really, really mad about and and in fact so incredibly tired of this kind of thing happening that they stopped giving any fucks and started demanding change or else .
Now, one might think she'd feel differently about #MeToo given that she was, quite notably, a victim of sexual harassment at her old job at Fox. But no. No she does not. She didn't like that activist movement being taken over by activists either, because now they're making all of the men scared that they're going to lose their jobs over nothing.
"It morphed into something that wasn't gonna be all that helpful," she said of the #MeToo movement. "It wound up alienating the very group we most need to have buy-in on our progress: men."
"And I think the reality of our racial struggle right now, in part, is for Black people to ascend in a meaningful way, the truth is you need white buy-in too," she said.
Yeah, so here's the thing about that — there is actually no super gentle way to nudge people who are perfectly content with their position as oppressors to start playing nice. There's no "right way" to "progress" without offending the comfortable in some way. There is no coddling, no use of "When you do this, I feel this way" statements that they are going to find particularly convincing.
Very few people change without actual consequences, and those that can be convinced through gentle discourse to change their behavior are rarely the biggest problems to begin with. The ones you have to watch out for are the ones who will happily do whatever they think they can get away with. It was not as if men like Harvey Weinstein and Roger Ailes simply had no idea that women don't like getting sexually harassed or assaulted and would have adjusted their behavior accordingly were they only aware of this fact. They knew, and they didn't care, because there were no actual consequences. But now, now men who would very much like to sexually harass or assault a woman might think twice, because they have far less reason to believe it will end well for them.
Saying we need men to "buy-in" to not sexually harassing and assaulting us and we need white people to "buy-in" to not being super racist and cool with cops murdering unarmed black people is like saying we need serial killers to "buy-in" to not murdering people, or that we need embezzlers to "buy-in" to understanding that embezzling is wrong. The thing they're doing is wrong already, and they're not allowed to do it, and if they do do it, there are consequences. It's not their choice, it's not about their feelings, it's not about should and shouldn't it's about can and can't. I don't give a flying crap how a man feels internally about whether or not he would like to sexually assault me, all I care about is that he doesn't do it in the first place.
Me Too, in fact, was pretty helpful for a lot of women, including Megyn Kelly. And if consequences are established — including defunding — for police departments that seem to have a problem with their officers killing unarmed black people, that will be helpful for a lot of black people. Once we get that shit taken care of, then we can talk about everyone's feelings.
[ The Hill ]