Here’s the full July 17 inmail exchange.
Tyler: “Hello Theresa, I have a question that I was hoping you could answer. Are racial stereotypes considered anti-diversity and racist?” (his initial DM is the screenshot accompanying the article’s title)
Me: “This feels like a gaslighting question to me, Tyler. I’ll post your inmail question in the newsfeed this week. And in the meantime, please have the courage to say what you really intend to say to me instead of positioning it as an *innocent* question on which you spend an inmail credit. This tactic is not my first rodeo with your type. \o/ tmr”
“Oh, and don’t worry. I’ll get Vanguard engaged in the conversation as well. If one of their employees is using inmails to ask *such a basic* question that you’ve asked, that means they are not supplying employees with the training/education they need. Happy to help you out by tagging them in my post. \o/ tmr”
A little over an hour later, Tyler sends this and confirms his desire to be made “famous”—
Tyler: “Racial stereotypes are obviously wrong and my question in no way implies otherwise. Neither does it imply I or my employer are uneducated.”
“My question was intended to open up the door to a professional conversation about the term ‘caucacity,’ a term in which you have used on this platform, which is categorized as a deragatory [sic] racial stereotype.”
“I sought to understand why you use this term, and prefaced by asking a question that is directly related. Needless to say, I am no longer interested in having a conversation.”
“Threatening defamation is an unexpected, shocking, and disappointing response for someone of your stature.”
“I would advise against it, as it is against LinkedIn’s terms, is misconstruing material facts collected in our conversation, and the legal ramifications can be quite severe.”
“Goodbye”
******************************
I keep my promises.
And so….
Dear Vanguard,
I’m not sure what training or education you’re offering your employees but if Tyler Kiser is resorting to inmails to get a “basic question” like this answered from a stranger, can you please double-check that the DEI or anti-racism education you offer your employees is meeting his needs.
That one of your employees would resort to this behavior when things don’t go his way in an exchange that HE himself initiated with highly suspect motives, makes him a huge liability risk. What else might he be capable of?
Please reach out if I can help with any interventions for employees who may be at risk of “becoming Tylers” in your workplace.
🎯🎯🎯 In this Thursday’s newsletter, I’ll be providing a “translation” and analysis of Tyler’s DM messages in their entirety in order to unpack his particular “brand of racism” and how it’s used to censure Black and Brown voices and threaten harm.
Until then, I’ll include this initial “fun fact”….
The last time I used the term “caucacity” in a post, according to a LinkedIn search, was 5 months ago. I manually checked my comments on my posts for all of last week and could not find my use of “caucacity” in any of my responses to comments. I went back a week thinking Tyler was triggered by a recent use of “caucacity.” Nope. Didn’t find anything.
It’s “amazing” though that Tyler wasn’t triggered by “melanin-deficient” because clearly actual racism or racial discrimination is not triggering for him. And I’m willing to bet that he missed my June 30 in-depth newsletter piece on SWIAC or else he might have concluded that he probably shouldn’t be DM’ing me with “white dominance” nonsense.
*(Note to folks: Let me know though if I used “caucacity” on your posts in the last week or so. Only because I’m curious, not because I plan to discontinue using it.)
If Tyler is so concerned about what he characterizes as “anti-diversity” and “racist,” he had ample opportunity to send me a connection request so as to engage in conversation with me on any one of my posts from last week but did not.
Ah let’s see…
Monday, July 11, I posted about the alleged gains in DEI claimed by companies. [no use of the term “caucacity” in the post or in my comments]
Tuesday, July 12, I posted about my chosen focus on Black people when it comes to DEI and anti-racism. [no use of the term “caucacity” in the post or in my comments]
Wednesday, July 13, I posted about the lynching display at a Las Vegas mall. [no use of the term “caucacity” in the post or in my comments]
Thursday, July 14, I posted my newsletter about the racial discrimination of four organizations, two of which currently have pending class-action lawsuits filed against them. [no use of the term “caucacity” in the post or in my comments]
Friday, July 15, I posted about the beauty that comes in “small packages” and signed off for the week with a prayer. [no use of the term “caucacity” in the post or in my comments]
As a matter of fact–because I have my posts set for connection-only commenters–I’m 99.9% sure Tyler has never shown an interest in engaging with my content by “liking” it or supporting it in any way. He’s likely reported to LinkedIn a fair amount of it though based on how versed he is in spouting off “LinkedIn’s terms” in his threats. Perhaps, his attempts to get me “disciplined” over “caucacity” failed in the past, and that’s why he specifically referenced “caucacity,” even though I haven’t used it for at least a week. Hmm.
Anyhoo……the timing of Tyler’s inmail is very suspicious. Methinks he’s grasping.
Here is my closing note to Tyler and all other “Tyler-esque Esau’s” (IYKYK) thinking about coming for me—
The block button is free and won’t cost you a single inmail credit. My content is unequivocally centered on anti-racism and anti-system-of-whiteness, and I prioritize the lived experiences of Black people.
What you most need to know is that not only am I “covered” by The Most High, I also have “legal covering” courtesy of “Fucharouwnd & Feindout.”
Your threats will return to you ten-fold…..boomerang style.
Bottom line: You made a choice to write a policing inmail check to a stranger that “your a** couldn’t cash”……because as an entitled white man, you felt like you could.
For. No. Other. Reason.
You shouldn’t act so surprised when you subsequently don’t get the acquiescing subservient response you think you’re entitled to get from a Black woman. Black women don’t owe you a thing just because you fake ask….especially because you fake ask.
You obviously haven’t studied “us” the way we’ve been studying “you” all our life. You are what our ancestors warned us about regarding “good racist white people.”
If you’re not onboard with DEI or anti-racism, fine.
But instead of trolling a Black woman under the fake ruse of “wanting to have a conversation” and then threatening me when I see right through you and call you out on it, please find yourself another hobby and stay out of my DMs.
I’d appreciate that.
Buh-bye now.
Recent Comments