- Joined
- Jan 24, 2013
- Messages
- 20,738
- Reaction score
- 6,290
- Location
- Sunnyvale California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Let's establish the innaccuracies/stupidities of that article:
1. The boundary Martin crossed that got him into trouble wasn't geographic, it was legal. The minute you cross from legal action to illegal action, there will be trouble. The second he went from pedestrian to assaulter he was in trouble.
2. The implicit comparison of the dead bodies of Emmett Till and Trayvon Martin are astounding in their contrast. Emmett Till was beaten and tortured before he was killed and his corpse probably looked like holy hell. Trayvon Martin, outside of the single small bullet wound, had nary a scratch on his body.
3. The problem with saying that neither Emmett nor Trayvon accepted their "assigned social place" is that there is really no definition to what "assigned social place" Trayvon failed to accept. Did he not accept his assigned social place as a law-abiding citizen or his assigned role as a responsible student (getting him suspended and sent to Florida in the first place). In any case, there is little comparison to be made regarding the general acceptance of the roles assigned to Emmett Till and Trayvon Martin. Most notably, the assigned place for Emmett was irrational and unreasonably forced upon only a subset of the population. The social assignment Trayvon Martin failed (to be a good student/law abiding citizen) are socially rational and reasonably applied to pretty much everyone at that age.
here is a question i have about this debate. Why are we only focusing on such a narrow period of time, the point of time of the actual fight, and the last minutes of trayvon martins life. what about the events leading up to the fight, when Trayvon first enters the neighborhood and when he is first spotted by Zimmerman? does including what happened before the confrontation add context to the debate?
Last edited: