That was when "Karen" really entered the mainstream, and it entered AS a pointed critique of white femininity's interactions w Blackness.
Whatever earlier "Karen" stuff existed, that was the moment that made the Karen meme.
Did the Karen/manager stuff from Reddit influence that?
Probably.
But "Karen" became a meme about racism, first and foremost.
Niche white usage prior to popularization doesn't get grandfathered in.
White people don't get to be like "oh a few white people used this earlier so we have homestead rights."
It's a disingenuous way of masking their misogyny.
Twitter is a medium that demands an economy of language.
In other words, there's a need to communicate as much as possible in as few words as possible.
The specificity of language is critical.
"Karen" used to pack a very specific punch that named the ways that entitled white women use white lady victimhood tropes to get racist authority figures to perform racial violence.
They snatched a surgical tool out of Black people's hands & hammered it into a blunt weapon.
Tweets do.
When you have a message to get out, you need precise language to communicate the nuances of the message.
You can't explicitly map out the nuances of racially-weaponized white femininity in 240 characters or less.
In its original popularized form, it was a rich depository of meaning, a Black community-constructed bit of language that named a particularly complex, ugly, and under-recognized racist strategy in a highly specific way.
It's thieving a rare manuscript from a closed collection, crossing out the parts you don't like with a Sharpie, then distributing xeroxed copies without attribution or acknowledgment of alteration.
It's a powerful reminder of what the term was really intended to mean, and of white dilution of that meaning.
This is a critique of a white lady lawbreaker calling a structurally racist, racially violent legal authority on a Black man because he asked her to stop breaking the law.
That is EXACTLY the behavior "Karen" was specifically meant to name.
White folks have a responsibility to read up and understand this sort of shit.
And what they mostly hear is:
1) a lot of race-blindered white ladies think "Karen is a slur" and
2) a lot of white dude mosogynists using "Karen" to mean "bitch"
Without white bro appropriation of "Karen," there would be no pretending that "Karen" is just some petty paraphrase of "bitch."
There would be no disingenuous pretense that "Karen" is couched in anything but a very specific critique of white racist entitlement.
That's why privileged re-weaponization of this stolen language to further other oppressions is doubly galling.
They need to underme nuanced critique of racism, bevause they need the issue muddled in order to evade accountability.
Even more importantly, though, it's about countering their efforts to use cultural theft to cement their own privilege twice over.
We let them reconstruct language that isn't theirs in a way that protects oppressive violence-- in this case, racist violence.
That is how they maintain their supremacy.
It's our job to identify the intersections, join in solidarity, & resist.
At the same time, it's an incredibly rich object lesson in how supremacy disingenuously and constantly operates on multiple axes at once.
A lot of white people have responded in ways that demonstrate a total lack of understanding of that dynamic.
The master Audre Lorde names will always try to complicate things by declaring oppressed people's tools to be his own.
Don't choose to take them at their word.
Choose to fight them.
Any other choice is a choice to enable.