That does not make Parks refusal story telling at all? That is just somebody else also defiantly refusing to stand up?
No part of Claudette story contradits anything I wrote. No part of detailed Parks story co tradicta none of that either.
Neither of the two were the first black arrested on the bus. Arrests, beatings, occasional murders or rape happened before the two. The segregation was not keeping itself magically before. But yes, Parks and also women political council and also NAACP were all influenced by Colvin (who became member of Parks youth group). And Colvin was influenced by priors too.
You seem to ce conflating "story telling" with "fabricated incident with no basis in reality". That is not what it means, at least not in all cases.
Rather, story telling includes relating true actual events in a form that creates sympathy and interest from the audience and public. Disintermediating elements of luck, randomness, or familiarity by repetition can be hard. The point remains that Parks was seen by Black civil rights activists and the NAACP, and at least arguably demonstrated by the 1950s US press and public to be a compelling narrative.
There's no claim that Parks was the first refuser or arresstee (she clearly was not), or that her story is false. Those are all red herrings. The point is that the story was sympathetic and compelling.
I'd think this might be more clearly apparent in fewer than four explanations. I won't attempt a fifth.
Except that I did not said any compelling story at all.
OP: Behaviors and outcomes rarely change, but history is driven by surprising events...?
Me: Civil rights movement was started by Rosa Park sitting on the bus. It was surprising big event. Most characters in that story kept going by same scripts as before, with only slight variations and only little bit
of learning from previous experiences.
(The civil rights movement as a thing lead by King which was different operation then NAACP was something no one expected to happen. No one was expecting year long heavily written about boycotts with few bombings mixed in either.)
You: This better fits the "compelling narrative" rather than "surprising events" mode. Perhaps combining them.
Me: In fact, Rosa Parks being arrested was surprising to everyone who knew her. The first protests organized by WPC were surprising to Rosa Parks and whole bunch of other people who considered Mongotmery blacks rather passive and disunited. Rosa Parks standing up for herself refusing humiliation was completely in character for her. Bus driver demanding her arrest was normal behavior for him. No one did sudden 180, they all went by the same scripts. The general track record of activism in Mongotmery was to not achieve anything and being only few in numbers.
So again, how exactly does this not fit simultaneously "surprising events" and "behaviors and outcomes rarely change". You can make story out of it, but I did not.
---------------------
Colvin case not being publicized by leaders does not make reaction to Parks case less surprising. It also does not show abrupt change in anyone's behavior. That case does not disprove neither "surprising events" nor "behaviors and outcomes rarely change".
No part of Claudette story contradits anything I wrote. No part of detailed Parks story co tradicta none of that either.
Neither of the two were the first black arrested on the bus. Arrests, beatings, occasional murders or rape happened before the two. The segregation was not keeping itself magically before. But yes, Parks and also women political council and also NAACP were all influenced by Colvin (who became member of Parks youth group). And Colvin was influenced by priors too.