NAACP leader is white, faked being black
- Thread starter UCFKnight85
- Start date
apparently she was a big C Thomas Howell fan and watched Soul Man way too many times as a kid.
She claimed her white heritage when she sued Howard University but now claims to be black so she can talk about the shared experiences she has had with the community. Which is crappy because I would assume we all understand that in general in this country, there are more challenges growing up black or as any person of color (vs growing up white).
What bugs me the most is that she could have had the same job, done the same activism in the community, and continue to do good for the black community if she was just honest about being an ally to the community rather than lying to pretend to be a member of it. Now because of her insane and blatant lies, she's offending the community she wanted to help and making it almost impossible for her to be another person helping further the cause. Such a waste of future community growth and advancement over stupid lies.
What bugs me the most is that she could have had the same job, done the same activism in the community, and continue to do good for the black community if she was just honest about being an ally to the community rather than lying to pretend to be a member of it. Now because of her insane and blatant lies, she's offending the community she wanted to help and making it almost impossible for her to be another person helping further the cause. Such a waste of future community growth and advancement over stupid lies.
besides how do you know she really doesn't aspire to be a transracial? That it isn't a deep part of her psyche?
aparently the term "transracial" doesn't mean what everyone has been using it to mean- it means children who are a different race from their adopted parents.
besides how do you know she really doesn't aspire to be a transracial? That it isn't a deep part of her psyche?
Also, this is a superb article summarizing why Caitlyn Jenner and Rachel Dolezal have nothing to do with each other: http://www.upworthy.com/a-black-tra...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
(since it's been mentioned several times, so now maybe we can stop using that silly comparison)
Actually a better comparison would be, say, Dingy faking to be a gay man (yeah yeah Jets, we all know you both have a thing on the side, but I'm talking about in general) to advance his career in the Human Rights Campaign so he could claim to understand what it's like growing up closeted with the hate speech and bullying that comes along with that. Especially since straight allies are welcome in leadership roles for various LGBTQ+ organizations (heck, one of the Directors of MBA Orlando- the gay chamber of commerce- is a straight man). Not only would he be offending the community he was serving, but he would be doing an injustice to those who have actually lived through the challenges of being part of a marginalized community.
The point is, she's a crazy liar who used her actual race in a lawsuit against Howard University but also tries to play the role of a black women when it's convenient for her.
She has issues, she is ruining what good she could have done in the community in the future with her lies, and she has hurt and upset a community that previously saw her as fighting for them (and not just for herself).
Total side note: I absolutely love her hair permed instead of straight. She is rocking those curls. Needs to calm down with the self-tanner, though, because she's orange in some pictures.
LOL at that article and video. Gender does not hold the same biological basis that race does?! She cant be serious. No, there are major comparisons to be made between the 2 stories. In the end they are both lying about, just one was accepted for their lie and the other wasnt.
No, trans people aren't lying about who they are, they are transitioning to confirm who they are.
But that's a whole different thread/debate.
Since I am not part of the black community, I can't really speak on their behalf to say her lying is offensive, but I can't imagine it didn't come across as such considering you hear stories every day of black youth and individuals getting treated worse because of their skin color, and she growing up white hasn't experienced that level of discrimination.
I agree 100% with this crazy ass bitch because I'm white as fukc and I don't give a shit if you believe me or not. I'm borderline redneck, to be honest.
Simply put they are lying about who they are. You can change your appearance, but you either have 2 x chromosomes, or 1 x and 1 y. You can however change skin color (try eating a shit ton of carrots, or even some silver). So really 1 person was celebrated for changing their appearance while the other was not. Of course, Bruce was more open about it while Rachel wasn't. That's what people seem to be getting hung up on. Its simple, you can either accept them both equally, or neither.
Last edited:
So transitioning to confirm who you really are only applies to genitalia, not to skin color? You can be a a woman inside a man's body but you can't be a negro trapped inside a caucasian's body? What makes one assesment acceptable and not the other?
I'm not refering to this NAACP case specifically, just the psychology of it all.
So I'm trying to understand that you're coming from a place of not understanding the trans population as much or what it means at a medical and psychological level to be transgendered, and not jump to conclusions that you're just trying to oversimplify this so it takes as little effort as possible to wrap your head around transgenderism (just like I didn't know as much as I do now before I was involved in various advocacy groups and took and then taught cultural awareness about the LGBTQ+ population- education is a journey and I'm assuming you're coming from a place of not understanding, instead of callous dislike or disinterest). And to be fair, it is a difficult concept to look at both transgender and "transracial" topics. Gender and race are social constructs, yes, but not to an equal degree. Gender is more deeply rooted in your own mind, while race is more forcibly imposed by our society.
So being trans is something you know from a very young age and usually you come out when you're mature enough to understand why you've felt different your whole life and have the terms for what you're feeling, so it's not something you eventually decide upon and leverage to your advantage. And that's assuming the best timeline as many trans individuals for various reasons feel they can't come out for a lot longer into their lives. Even the transition surgeries are now called Gender Confirmation Surgery. Because trans individuals feel that the lie is the biological sex they were born into, that they have never identified with. This whole process (and it's a hell of a process because it's not as simple as scheduling a surgery- there are several psychological evaluations that have to happen, hormone therapy for a set amount of time before you are able to sign up for surgery and then the legal process of changing your gender on documents, etc.) is traumatic, intense, scary (discrimination and violence against trans individuals happens at alarming rates), and many trans teens and adults never make it through because while the gay youth population is 4 times as likely to attempt suicide, trans teens are twice that- so 8 times as likely to attempt (and often succeed) at taking their own lives (with similar rates in trans adults). This isn't about lying because a trans person isn't trying to get anything out of other people by transitioning, they are merely trying to live their truth and embody the gender they have always identified with. This is a trans individual, and cis-gendered individuals (like me, for example) can't claim to be trans even if we feel a strong kinship with the trans community but can only be allies.
Now onto Rachel. The reason there is such outrage is because she's playing both sides- she is benefitting from acknowledging her actual whiteness (sueing Howard University for discrimination for example) as well as allowing herself to indulge in blackness as a commodity, without having to actually engage with every facet of what being black and growing up black entails, namely discrimination, marginalization, oppression, etc. And while that's one part of the lie that has people outraged, she has also used her deception to leverage personal benefit like applying for a strictly black-only scholarship, to network as a black lady to advance her career, she had claimed to be a victim of hate speech towards black individuals, etc. And she HAS to at some level conscious of the statements and actions she is engaged in and that she had a white experience and has not suffered what those in the community around her have. To know that and still give speeches where she claimes to have gone through the same experiences as a proud black woman to a community she is supposedly advocating for is what is really upsetting a lot of black individuals. She is lying to the community she is claiming to want to help and advance forward. You can't have true advancement with that level of dishonesty. And also, she's adding another level to the alienation between the black and white community by doing this, which undermines her goals even further.
In the end it's about honestly (Caitlyn came out about who she honestly is) and the harm that Rachel's lies have brough towards the black community, both as a community leader and her commoditization of struggles she hasn't had to deal with growing up.
Update:
This chick is no longer employed as a Prof of Africana Studies at Eastern Washington Univ. (Univ also states that she never reached Professor status but that's the label the white chick had used for years).
SPOKESPERSON: ‘RACHEL DOLEZAL NO LONGER WORKS FOR EASTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY’
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ls-name-removed-from-university-faculty-page/
PS. I give her a few months...and then she will be a regular on MSNBC to discuss race topics when they pop up.
This chick is no longer employed as a Prof of Africana Studies at Eastern Washington Univ. (Univ also states that she never reached Professor status but that's the label the white chick had used for years).
SPOKESPERSON: ‘RACHEL DOLEZAL NO LONGER WORKS FOR EASTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY’
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ls-name-removed-from-university-faculty-page/
PS. I give her a few months...and then she will be a regular on MSNBC to discuss race topics when they pop up.
This entire argument could be made about the issue of "trans-race", if that's the propper name. It's all about which issue you decide to side with. If you throw away the individuals in both cases (Bruce and Robyn) and just focus on the cases themselves, the argument is the same: a person that discovers that they're born in the erroneous body for who they really are.
I don't care enough to pass judgement on either case, I just wonder why one case would be considered acceptable and the other wouldn't. If I decide that I have been a caucasian person born inside a hispanic body and decide to change my appearance, my name, my identity to comform to who I really am inside, how is that any different than if if I decided I was a woman born into a man's body and changed my appearance, my name, my identity to comfom who I really am inside? Neither is a choice, it's who I really, truly, know I am. Where is the difference?
Race is a social construct. Gender roles are a social construct. Gender by itself is not.
You should probably re-read what you just wrote about trans, and then what you just wrote about Rachel. Rachel has come out and said that she has identified as being black from a very young again. You dont get to pick and choose which one you support. Either they both can choose their identity, or neither can. Which is it?
And I will leave you with this:
Psychosis - A mental disorder characterized by a disconnection from reality.
Last edited:
I'll take this a step further agisnt LMK's points, and this isn't me attacking your ideals or anything more than trying to understand them, and propose this: concordingly, none of them chose anything. Bruce is a woman. He was always a woman. Rachel is black. She was always black.
Why can't both these realities coexist? What makes one argument valid and one invalid? And, once again, forget about the individuals involved and focus just on the issue being presented.
If gender orientation isn't a choice, which it isn't, then why is racial orientation a choice?
Why can't both these realities coexist? What makes one argument valid and one invalid? And, once again, forget about the individuals involved and focus just on the issue being presented.
If gender orientation isn't a choice, which it isn't, then why is racial orientation a choice?
I said she felt a kinship with the black community like an ally tends to do, but considering race is more of an outward societal construct, she can't just say she understands what black youth have gone through because she hasn't had to experience that because of her privilege of being white.
Gender is different from sex. Sex is biological and genetic (male chromosomes, female chromosomes, and in the case of intersex individuals, they can be XXY and physically have both or parts of both genitalia expressed at birth). Gender is how you identify as a women or a man or it can even be fluid where you don't feel comfortable identifying with either (gender-queer is an overarching term for that). Even if you don't get it, because you are lucky enough to have your gender identity align with your biological sex, not everyone has that luck. This is what makes it hard for those that do fall outside this neat little box of self identity- that it's a small minority who actually know firsthand what it's like to know you're a woman, while biologically being born a man (or vice versa, or gender-queer).
You don't have to agree or even believe this, because gender not always aligning with biological sex happens regardless of your belief or understanding of the concept.
And since they are not the same thing, I can choose which I support because one is someone living her truth and true identity, and the other one (however much she identifies with that culture and community) is outright lying to those she's supposedly working to help. What Rachel is doing by lying is detrimental to the cause of the NAACP, which is sad because of what I've read she's been a great advocate for the advancement of the black community aside from this issue.
And what you left me with at the end there only goes to show what an absolutely ass you are.
She literally wasn't always black (she even sued a university on the basis of her being white, where she acknowledges she's white) and still isn't black. She identifies with the black culture and community but she isn't black. It's an extreme case of white guilt, which she could have used to be a great ally and do good for the community- which she actually has done (this lie notwithstanding).
Just like I can't chose to be black, because I'm not. I also can't choose to be trans, because I'm not.
(and gender identity has nothing to do with sexual orientation- one is how you see yourself, the other is who or what you want to have sex and relationships with)
Meant to add a second part to my original post: Race is a social construct. Gender roles are a social construct. Gender by itself is not.
I completely agree with you that a white person can never fully understand what its like to be black. Same with black understanding to be white. So how could a man understand what it's like to be a woman, or a woman understand what it is to be a man? By your own admission, they cant.
Again, how are these 2 instances any different from one another? You cant answer that. So either they are both are right to choose their identity, or neither can. Which one is it?
If you think one is crazy and needs help, then they both do. That I can agree with you on ;-)
You should really re-read your own exact quotes LMK. By your own admission, someone who has come out and said they identify as being another race, cant be considered that new race because they were not that way since birth. How is that in any way different from a man who now identifies as being a woman, but wasnt born as one, be considered a woman now?
http://nypost.com/2015/06/16/i-identify-as-black-rachel-dolezal-breaks-her-silence/
Sweetie, you're not understanding me. Disassociate the people involved in both these examples (Bruce and Robyn) and focus just on the points at hand. I don't want to make a case for any of these two individuals, but for an individual who presents me with this situation.
Exhibit A is born a man, but identifies their gender as a woman. Exhibit B is born caucasian, but identifies their race as negro. Why does exhibit A has validity but exhibit B doesn't?
A trans person isn't a person born as, say, a man saying they already know the female experience- they don't, they just know they feel like a woman inside, but they haven't dealt with what it's like to be one until they transition- which is also why you see a lot of trans support groups that assist with understanding the nuances we grow up learning that they have to catch up on (how to dress fashionably as the other gender without going overboard and becoming a caricature of their goal, voice lessons, walking, etc.). A trans woman isn't claiming to know what it's like for a cis woman growing up. My trans friends know they didn't grow up experiencing how the other gender lives until they eventually transitioned themselves. (and even then, it's a different experience because they didn't grow up with society seeing them as that gender so they haven't dealt with years of, say, being nervous walking alone or getting a period, or whatever- assuming we are still using a trans woman as an example). Caitlyn, for example, isn't claiming to know what it's like to be a woman in america- she just knew that in her mind and soul she's always been a woman, but has experienced what it's like being a man in america (until recently).
Plus, the reason why people are so upset is because trans people don't come out as trans to deceive anyone else, it's not about other people- it's about being true to themselves. In Rachel's case, her lies were specifically to deceive others when it was convenient for her.
The issue is very complicated and there are subtle but clear differences that I have talked about.
Because you can mentally identify as a man or woman (or neither or both, but that's a separate thing), but you don't mentally identify as a different race because race is a social construct.
If a baby is raised on an island and never taught what gender is, you'll still generally see them presenting behaviors as more masculine (male) or feminine (female).
If you raise a baby away from society, regardless of racial background, you won't see them having actions that are more "black" or "white" because those behaviors and such arise from cultural backgrounds and history, which are based in society- that's why a black american experiences being black in a very different way than a black person born and raised in, say, Nigeria. (this is, obviously, not accounting for the internet and globalization)
You really arent stating your case well. Rachel was transitioning as well, you just refuse to accept it. You just dont like her because she lied to get a job. But your cool with Bruce who is lying to get a TV show. Rachel was trying to help a cause, while Bruce is trying to make a profit and stay relevant in pop culture.
No, that baby would display characteristics that would be either dominant or submisive. That baby would also display characteristics of whatever living being faction on that island it identifies itself with. It doesn't know gender, it doesn't know race, it just knows.
Just think I'm UCFBS for a second here and that I'm looking at both Exhibits A and B from an existensial perspective.
Last edited:
Oh my god, I even pointed out how Rachel has gone back and forth with her racial identities in different situations to benefit herself. Inconsistencies notwithstanding (although that alone should show how committed she is to identifying at one race or the other).
Also, since racial identity is based in race and cultural background, which are contingent on society and history- you can't say you ARE a different race and that be a fact. You can absolutely identify with and be an ally for a racial group or cultural group other than your own (people do that all the time). And especially because she's taking advantage of the privilege of being white (she uses that identity when it suits her and she tans and curl her hair to be racially ambiguous when it suits her), is the most insulting part of it for the black community. I mean, she's literally using her white privilege to get her way while also playing victim and telling the black community she faces the same oppression as them because she's also black. Not only is that offensive as heck, but it's a big, blatant lie- and considering her position as a leader in the community, that's a big deal.
If she was just some receptionist or postal worker or whatever (not in a position of leadership), it probably wouldn't have been made into this big a deal. It's because she was playing both sides and deceiving the community she was also trying to help that this has blown up this much.
Anyway, I'm tired (no coffee today) and we aren't getting anywhere because I can tell you're never going to really believe the points I'm making, if you don't outright ignore them altogether, so since this is not going in any productive direction- just assume you won so we can be done with this whole debate. Because in the end- no one will even care about this story in 2 weeks.
Wow. way to not listen to a thing I said about the trans community. Yeah, I'm sure Bruce changed everything, irreversibly, to become Caitlyn just for ratings. Maybe she isn't the best role model by far for the trans community, but this type of thinking where you refuse to even listen or learn about what it's like to be a trans person is why that group is still so marginalized in 2015.
Way to go.
What? Dominant or submissive?? My theoretical situation had no other people on the island (thus, no society to speak of to influence)
I'm not talking people, I'm talking living beings. Animals. I mean, who raised this baby? What raised this baby? How did it manage to grow up in order to develop into our test subject?
Btw, I'm calling child services as soon as I find out who dropped this baby in the island.
You are completely in capable to taking these 2 people (Bruce and Rachel) out of this and looking at it objectionably. You havent made a single convincing point.
There is no difference from a white man deciding he wants to be a white woman from a white man deciding he wants to be an asian man. Either they both can choose, or neither can. You are saying one can choose but the other can't, thus neither can choose.
LMK is saying that the brain of a woman and the brain of a man behave differently. Old guard feminists would disagree, but let's assume they're wrong. The male brain and female brain in society have different experiences based on the their constructed gender roles. So we have identification and experience. Bruce Jenner identified as a woman but had a (troubled) male experience.
Now we look at black people as our race example. If you try to argue that black brains and white brains behave differently, you will be crucified. It has been thoroughly explored and we can say with fairly high degree of certainty that they are not different. The black and white experience, however, is absolutely different. A black man experiences the world differently than a white man, differently than a black woman, differently than a white woman.
Given these points, it would be impossible to identify as black, but only possible to take part in the black experience. This woman took part in the white experience for her whole life, then decided to take part in the black experience. Bruce Jenner is doing the same thing from the perspective of experience, but he identified as a woman the whole time. There are similar elements between the cases, but one is legitimate while the other is pretty fukking crazy.
This all hinges on whether you believe that 1) Men and women's brains inherently behave differently, and 2) The brains of different races don't inherently behave differently. There is strong evidence to support these two statements but it probably still debatable.
Little miss you could be Trans if you tried a bit harder.
How many times has Bruce been married and how many kids does he have again? Or those times he identified as a male in a sports. But I guess he was really just a woman inside back then too.
It seems very easy to write off the one woman who went back and forth on being white/black a few times, but its totally cool for a 65+ year old guy to have lived his whole life as a male and only recently decided to identify as a woman.
It seems very easy to write off the one woman who went back and forth on being white/black a few times, but its totally cool for a 65+ year old guy to have lived his whole life as a male and only recently decided to identify as a woman.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
