Scrolling through conservative media, you’re bound to see her face. People have posted the meme for years as a caricature of the Left. Enraged. Unreasonable. A snowflake too sensitive to other opinions. We don’t know her name, but her continual presence made me start to wonder: Who is she? And what set her off? Who was she talking to, and what was the discussion? It turns out, she was more civil than the meme suggests, and the camera only caught an appearance of anger. And the argument, while controversial, wasn’t without sources. But a political tribe weaponized her image to breed contempt for progressives, having no regard for the person or her words.
In a discussion with a media team from Info Wars, the protestor claimed that a high percentage of women experience rape. The rally in 2016 was a protest against then primary candidate Donald Trump, and the rate she shared was one in three. The stat wasn’t even central to the point she was making, but claiming it was enough to carve her image into internet infamy. The footage of the chat largely vanished when Youtube banned Info Wars content the following year, but the internet continued to post the meme. The world offered her no chance to defend the opinion; only a silence that left us with a stereotype of people left-of-center.
She might have embellished the rate from studies, but sources show similar numbers. It’s possible, for example, that she was aware of interviews on college campuses finding one in five women experiencing sexual assault. Like all political polling, the science for accuracy was controversial. What constitutes assault? How will people answer to phrasing A versus B? Is a question loaded, prompting a specific answer? Experts will argue over the approaches, but it’s possible the number is even higher than one in five, given the pain of such experiences. So saying that it’s one in three wasn’t insane. It may well be wrong, but the jury is still out.
I can’t offer more insights on these studies, but they make me think of the biases people bring to the arguments. Fans of Info Wars might have held a heavy incentive to disbelieve a high percentage. For supporters of Donald Trump—a man already under allegations for mistreating women—such a rate might feel like validation of the accusations. On the protestors’ side though, higher numbers of victims would add weight to public support. If the number was instead more like one in twenty, there would be less incentive for leaders to act. Indeed, the Obama administration may not have investigated campus assaults if not for the one in five stat. Each side has their reasons to not listen, both then and now.
But the full context of the situation that created the meme deserves attention for the protestor’s sake. She believed that 33% of women experience rape. She joined a protest against a presidential candidate suspected of misogyny, only for a team from Info Wars to show up. They were looking for an argument, and their fans were prone to deny the acts she was fighting against. Isn’t it reasonable to understand how someone might become upset? And the camera only captured, at most, a flash of anger in the midst of her measured comments. But it was enough to seal her fate for online viewers scoffing at high rates of sexual assault.
The internet jumped on the chance to forge the meme. The Alex Jones Channel uploaded the video “Trump Supporters Shut Down Protestors”, and within a day, anonymous users on Reddit coined the name “Ficki Fiona”. “Ficki” is German slang for the f-bomb, and the cruel, catchy name labeled her with the stat she had shared. From there, platforms condemned her as TRIGGERED with mocking headlines like “Angry feminist.” And through the years, the legend grew. The image has been cycled and recycled in thumbnails for a decade now. And all of this for a stat that may or may not be accurate.
Ironically, if her image had appeared less online, I wouldn’t have thought about her. I would have passively accepted the message that the Left is crazy, dangerous, or not worth my time. Someone like Fiona brought nothing of value, or so it seemed. Just another psychopath screaming at a Trump event. I would have been one of millions holding a passive contempt for a stranger. Never seeking the source of her feelings. Never asking questions on what brought her to that charged moment. Never appreciating the context that could drive any of us into an argument. I would have just doom scrolled to the next Youtube clip without a thought or care for the person dubbed Fiona.
Conservatives will argue for the need to use such memes to persuade the public of progressive threats. Some would say the image of anger still represents people in our institutions who practice illiberalism. That cancel culture is omnipresent in universities and media, raising intolerance and silencing speech. Using this imagery is a necessary tool then to rally support against suppression. But even if all true, we shouldn’t exploit someone’s picture for political messaging. For all the disagreements we’d have, to be callous with someone’s image for the cause of culture wars is inconsiderate. It raises contempt in the world while making a lifetime of pain and embarrassment for someone else. It’s wrong, and there are other ways of persuasion for your cause.
So wherever Fiona ended up, I hope she is doing okay. I think about the struggles from being a famous, nameless internet meme. Did it interfere with her life? Does it still? Did it hurt her job prospects, or tear apart relationships? Maybe she doesn’t have a care of it at all, or maybe it was a disaster. But in any case, the world owes a recognition of her opinion. An effort to take it seriously, even in disagreement. That is the aim of this blog, with Info Wars and the internet never giving her that chance. It made for a dismissal that none of us should accept. Her face is still everywhere, but her words are almost nowhere.
