But of course, Rachel D wasn't really the first to do this...
Posted on 06/17/2015 11:46:13 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
The Rachel Dolezal story has put the Left in an awkward spot. An obviously white woman who has long presented herself to the world as black, Dolezal is testing the Left’s commitment to its own radical subjectivism.
Frustrated by comparisons of Dolezal to the transgenderism they embrace, many liberals have declared the two cases completely different. But they have failed to show one, at least not a substantial philosophical difference. In both cases, a human being seeks to erase an immutable trait in order to assert a “self-definition” that exists in the mind, not the body.
If humans have a right to define the “authentic self” without regard to their given human nature, why should that right be restricted to one fixed trait but not all of them? The Left has no answer to this question. All it can do is flail and argue that being transgender is somehow morally better than being transracial because the former is more trendy and societally approved.
It is odd to hear the same people who a few weeks ago were arguing that the right to self-definition trumps all considerations now laying down conditions for it. Apparently Dolezal can’t claim “transracial” status because not enough people have “experienced” the condition and not enough doctors have recognized it as real. Dolezal could point out that these were some of the same objections raised at the beginning of the transgender movement.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Ergo, if one wants to enjoy White privilege, simply self-identify as White.
And equally importantly, if as we’ve been told, this is such a terrible country in which to be Black, why then would a white woman want to call herself Black?
Assuming (without any proof) that she’s not crazy as a loon, that is...
Rachel is a post modernist, eh? There is no reality to the adherents of that crap. However, as Ayn Rand stated there is objective reality and one can ignore it, but it will not ignore you.
p.s. I hope Evan Sayet runs with this.
Not to mention the sex tape...
But of course, Rachel D wasn't really the first to do this...
Did you see her “before” picture? She was a ginger. Anything is better than being a ginger...
I like your take on this. For blacks to get all the benefits of “white privilege,” all they have to do is proclaim themselves to be white!
Can someone transform this into a racial scandal about a white imposter taking away needed opportunities from deserving African-Americans?
-PJ
Drive alone in the HOV lane.
When pulled over, tell the officer that you
“identify as multiple people”
and he should kindly drop his polyhomosapienphobia
before you sue him for a civil rights violation.
How could we say she stole those jobs from AAs if they weren’t defined as a perk set aside for AAs?
Got it!
polyanthrophobe!
The Left celebrates anything that degrades traditional culture. When you understand that concept, their response to virtually anything is predictable.
There are no limits to the pits of Hell...
Awesome post!
I should have said she stole three jobs by faking her race: the chair of Spokane's police ombudsman commission.
Three authentic African-Americans could have had opportunities that she took from them, but liberals don't want to go there. That should be the meme, imposter stealing opportunities from African-Americans by pretending to be African-American.
-PJ
When a Black man or woman self-identifies as a dignified, civilized, well-spoken Black person, they not only get White privilege, they also get Affirmative Action.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.