this doesn't happen often, but I could not agree more. The horror that kid endured for likely nothing (according to Donham)If Carolyn Bryant Donham is brought to justice, this will be worth it.
It's about time. I'm Christian, so I think that even if she isn't brought to justice here, she will still have to face judgement. I would not want to be in her shoes - I have much to answer for, but causing the death of an innocent (that I know of) is not on the list.terrible. I know she probably has little time left...but she should be brought to justice, whatever that may be
To which crime are you referring?And yet, as the decades have come and gone, and sensitivities change, focus might change to seeing this as a sexist rather than as a racist crime.
The worst he did was whistle at her, and even that’s not certain. She has admitted to fabricating the rest of her testimony. I’d say his murder was more than than “a bit much”.Killing might be a bit much, but before law enforcement paid attention to this issue, it was other men who protected women from harassment by men.
Might be a bit much? Yikes.And yet, as the decades have come and gone, and sensitivities change, focus might change to seeing this as a sexist rather than as a racist crime.
Killing might be a bit much, but before law enforcement paid attention to this issue, it was other men who protected women from harassment by men.
We all have our mental focuses of attention. Like looking at one of those optical illusions that can be either a hat or a rabbit, a young or old woman. Some focus instinctively on a racial attack, some see a wolf-whistling punk get his come uppance. Both are meaningful narratives. I do think there is currently a shift from the former to the latter. The first feels very race-obsessed 1950s. In the current wave of feminism, with the exception of the more intersectional variants, the focus would likely bemore drawn to the latter.To which crime are you referring?
He wasn't beaten up, he was savagely murdered. And regardless of the year, the murdered party is the victim in this scenario.'A group of young men hang out near a store. A woman walks in. One of the group starts wolf whistling her to impress his friends. Gets standoffish, or much worse (stories vary and are changed over time), when she shows obvious discomfort. Later gets beaten up.'
Who would be considered the victim in 2019? The man?
There was no standoff. At most, he whistled at her, and we don’t even know if he did that much. The woman herself later admitted to fabricating the rest.Gets standoffish, or much worse (stories vary and are changed over time), when she shows obvious discomfort.
He was killed.Later gets beaten up.'
Of course. Meaningful narratives don't necessarily exclude one another. If there is a friction between your point of focus and mine, it is not in me invalidating yours, but you excluding mine. I can see clearly the racial motivation. Just as clearly as the big city vs small town narrative, or the closed community protecting one another in court narrative. And also the punk showing off by harassing women narrative, which feels erased from your story. I blame lingering 50s focus - once a narrative becomes dominant it is nearly impossible to topple it, as all events are being understood within this story. Combined with the prevailing mechanism that anti-racism precedes anti-sexism.The following quotation is vile, but it comes from one of the men who murdered Till and will, I hope, put to rest the idea that what happened was a slight overreaction that had nothing to do with race:
Well, what else could we do? He was hopeless. I'm no bully; I never hurt a n___ in my life. I like n___s—in their place—I know how to work 'em. But I just decided it was time a few people got put on notice. As long as I live and can do anything about it, n___s are gonna stay in their place. N___s ain't gonna vote where I live. If they did, they'd control the government. They ain't gonna go to school with my kids. And when a n___ gets close to mentioning sex with a white woman, he's tired o' livin'. I'm likely to kill him. Me and my folks fought for this country, and we got some rights. I stood there in that shed and listened to that n___ throw that poison at me, and I just made up my mind. 'Chicago boy,' I said, 'I'm tired of 'em sending your kind down here to stir up trouble. Goddam you, I'm going to make an example of you—just so everybody can know how me and my folks stand.'—J. W. Milam, Look magazine, 1956
Till didn’t do anything. The old demon admitted to making the whole thing up.I no more exonerate that act than that you defend wolfwhistling women.
Not according to my source. Bryant merely stated in an interview (53 years later) that parts of the story were not true, specifically him also grabbing her waist.Because, for the last time, the woman herself admitted it never happened.
Are you justifying Till’s murder?And yet, as the decades have come and gone, and sensitivities change, focus might change to seeing this as a sexist rather than as a racist crime.
Killing might be a bit much, but before law enforcement paid attention to this issue, it was other men who protected women from harassment by men. Surely a woman ought to be able to walk the street, do some shopping, without being wolfwhistled at and subsequently be put in her place. You take an underground nowadays, and a woman just has to smile and cast her eyes down in submission at the man making inappropriate comments or else. No complaints from me if people fight back now and then.
I do tend to disagree about the first bit, see my post above.Till didn’t do anything. The old demon admitted to making the whole thing up.
Even if he did whistle at her, he didn’t deserve the torture that was placed upon him. They gauged out his eyes, lynched him, beat him, shot him, and did a number of other tortuous acts. That’s unjustified, he was only 14.