After a toddler was killed in a gator attack at a Disney World resort, people were quick to compare the incident to the shooting death of Harambe the gorilla at the Cincinnati Zoo in May.
In the same breath (or tweet), they evoked issues of parental responsibility, of intent, of race and of the very value of human life.
The incidents certainly share superficial similarities: Both times, children were in close encounters with dangerous animals while under the supervision of their parents.
But is it productive to search any deeper for some kind of connection?
Let's compare:
Different animals, different outcomes
The Disney incident:
The most obvious difference between the two is that a child died. An alligator snatched 2-year-old Lane Graves and he drowned in the waters of a lagoon at the Grand Floridian Resort. An animal killed him -- and in the course of the investigation, several alligators were euthanized. There was grief for both the boy and the animals.
The zoo incident:
In Cincinnati, the encounter was far more nuanced, far more fraught with hypotheticals. In video of the incident, Harambe, a male silverback gorilla, is seen interacting with a 3-year-old boy who had fallen into his enclosure. Whether his actions were predatory or benign is subject to interpretation. Even noted primatologist Jane Goodall expressed uncertainty, writing to the zoo that "it looked as though the gorilla was putting an arm round the child." The gorilla was killed. There wasn't any grief for the child; he survived. It poured for the gorilla. Harambe's defenders claimed it wouldn't have hurt the child and the decision to kill it was unjustified. Other animal experts, including keepers at the Cincinnati Zoo, claimed the gorilla's death, though unfortunate, was necessary.
[excerpted]http://www.ksbw.com/health/harambe-gator-attack-and-online-outrage/40087028
