Cher

This was not the result of one tweet, and the photo was unrelated to the action taken. This was the result of several tweets and OVER AN HOUR of video footage Chuck self-recorded. In the videos AND in his tweets, he has singled out Kim by name and other black women.

His entire first video is essentially a tone policing. 14 minutes into the first video he sets up a common racist trope framing that "protestors go out and get in the way", and then brings up Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr's role in the Civil Rights Movement to push this idea that -

1) the request for accountability from Aimee on the initial tweet, and 2) the demand for consequences for John's harassment tirade were violent, and of course, that riots detract from the message the activists are fighting for, when the reason the riots happen in the first place-

is precisely because those activists are NOT being heard. This is something Dr. King, Jr talked about AT LENGTH once he understood how different the fight for civil rights was in the North than in the South. I personally very graciously and kindly explained all of the ways -

Chuck's video was tone policing and problematic on a comment with time stamps. The first woman John verbally abused on his tirade offered to speak with Chuck on the DevRel podcast after he posted this video. After he clarified he wanted the conversation to be centered around -

Aimee and John's experience, and not understanding the black women he singled out, she retracted her offer (which Chuck had ignored anyway) and stated it was clear to her that his only purpose was to tone police black women and help his friends be heard. She's not wrong.

Chuck made FOUR videos regarding this subject, and not a single one took any of the feedback he got into account. He continued to single out Kim as "not being civil" and "attacking". His registration was revoked because of a collection of things he said, all of which amount to-

tone policing. He starts with being upset that his friend who behaved abhorrently was held publicly accountable and lost business relationships over it, and yes, saying "what he said was wrong and not cool, but" is a defense of him. He felt the need to talk for 30 minutes with-

the but of that behavior disavowal, and worse, he claimed days later that nothing John said was racist or sexist, and blocked me when I quoted out a list of racist or sexist things John said to people in response to that. Stop making this about one sentence and a hat.