What's up Emanuella?

Man, what country our we living in?

The trial of two teenagers who participated in a beating that led to a man's death is over. The kids in question will most likely serve only a handful of months for their barbaric, racist actions. And the deceased, an illegal immigrant from Mexico, died a brutal death.

CNN's reporting of this incident is shocking. The headline, "2 teens get jail time in Mexican's beating death", is, to put it mildly, strangely worded. At first I thought it was a spring break trip to Cancun gone wrong. But no, this happened in Pennsylvania. There is something off with the title that implies that these kids getting jail time is news-worthy. Should they not be getting jail time because the victim was Mexican? Why does the victim's nationality matter while the perpetrators' does not? Is it because Mexican, for many Americans, is a race rather than a nationality? Why did Emanuella Grinberg lead with the teens? Why are they the subjects of the headline rather than the victim? In our youth-obsessed culture could it be that there is nothing more tragic than attractive young middle-class white boys going to jail?

Unfortunately, the article becomes more cringe-worthy once you get past the headline. How can these two teens receive as little as six months in jail? I am not sure how involved Grinberg was in the layout of this article but it is pretty reprehensible to have such a smug photo of Brandon Piekarsky and Derrick Donchak next to the paragraphs that detail their sentence lengths, the terribly unnecessary anecdote of them having played high school football, and their unfortunate acquittal of felony counts.

Judge William Baldwin seems like a good guy and I would hate to have been in his position, knowing that I am sending two deplorable so-called men back into society. I wonder what kind of "potential" these children will realize as adults. I hope I do not see them trolling Calle Ocho in Miami next March.

Grinberg's major error with this piece was of course her gross oversight of the victim, Luis Ramirez. I understand that in the journalistic sphere it is necessary to have variety in one's writing. You cannot constantly repeat, Piekarsky or Ramirez. But why is it that Piekarsky is referred to as a "teen" and "football player" and never as a "perpetrator" while Ramirez is referred to as "undocumented" and "illegal" rather than "the deceased victim?" Why does Ramirez's photograph come after the pseudo-Abercrombie & Fitch ad? Is it too graphic to see what a man, whose "brain tissue oozed out of his skull during surgery", looks like unconscious?

I am obviously partial. I spent a significant part of my life as an illegal immigrant. Even as a child I lived in fear, often never admitting that I had not been born in this country. I was not present at the night of the brawl and I do not know who was the true instigator. However I do know this. However "fair" the fight was Piekarsky and Donchak walked away alive. And now they have gotten a slap on the wrists. As most illegal immigrants know, the law is not on their side. And even in death, justice on this side of the border eludes them.

my soapbox

Summer has been on for about three weeks now and suddenly all my back-burner tasks are surfacing. Namely an impending wedding. I was conducting a google search for a potential venue in Chile when I randomly found a Mormon missionary's blog. Apparently this kid is in central Chile trying to convert my relatives.

In addition to the severe spelling and grammatical errors, this blog really annoys me. Obviously I am no Chicago Manual of Style master given my penchant for using lower-case letters with wild abandon. However this kid cannot even spell Chilean. To be fair he is not teaching English to his acquaintances and, ten years after my high school graduation, I am still toting around a backpack. I admit that I am a nerd. However, I find these mistakes unforgivable since for starters blogger.com has spell check. And secondly, these errors form the foundation of a superficial cultural critique of my birth country. I am not aware of what historical, social, and/or cultural preparation missionaries are exposed to but it seems to me that this blogger did not bring much knowledge, let alone cultural sensitivity, to Chile.

He complains that Chileans are unreceptive to his teachings. Let us go back five hundred years and trace the history of mission work and colonization in Latin America. I am sure we would not begrudge a bit of wariness on the part of Latin Americans when it comes to outsiders. Especially white men. God help you if you come in sporting a red beard as you sit on a horse.

The blogger goes on to summarize the reason why Chile is an undeveloped country: Chileans are lazy. Which is, as he readily admits, in stark contrast to his active, idealist ambition to go into the world, meet people, and share his religion. I am sure anyone who spent most of their time in rural Chile, overwhelmed by the poverty and lack of education of the people they met, would try to find the origins of this miserable situation. However, this does not define the entire nation. Chile has a strong middle class and an elite that would rival the wealthy of any Western, first-world country. Even during this worldwide recession, Chile's economy continues to grow and serve as a model for the rest of Latin America. (Thank you, Chicago Boys). The laziness this blogger perceives is a complex front that, despite translation, cannot be grasped so easily. Especially if your ambition blinds you to understanding the true secular social forces at play.

I was tempted to write this response on the Mormon blogger's blog, but felt that as sparring partners we were not a fair fit. We have experienced Chile in such distinct ways and have such diverging agendas, that our communication would be like trying to discuss race in America on the Tyra show. A hot mess that in the end achieved nothing. Moreover, the passive aggressive narcissist in me enjoys the idea of having the last (and only) word on this matter.