She said people should be embraced for who they are authentically
The New York Times talked to Rachel Dolezal earlier this month.
In a New York Times report chronicling reactions to the discovery of Ms. Dolezal’s deception, blacks and liberals accused her of an offensive impersonation, part of a long history in which whites appropriated black heritage when it suited them.
Almost 1,500 Times readers responded in comments on that article:
So, if a white person claims to be black to get into Harvard (just like the 1980s movie Soul Man), h/she should be left alone and allowed to continue enjoying the fruits of the deception? — Lanier Y. Chapman, New York
Portraying oneself as black when they’re not is not a crime. However, if one isn’t truthful about one’s ethnicity, what other things may they not be truthful about? — Kurt Pickard, Murfreesboro, Tenn.
In an opinion column, Charles M. Blow of The Times wrote that Ms. Dolezal’s deception was “a spectacular exercise in hubris, narcissism and deflection.”
In an essay on the Op-Ed page, Tamara Winfrey Harris wrote: “Racial identity cannot be fluid as long as the definition of whiteness is fixed. And historically, the path to whiteness has been extremely narrow.”
So race-fluid isn’t and can’t be a thing, it seems.
The Seattle Times reports on a Facebook live she did yesterday:
“Nothing about whiteness describes me,” she said during the half-hour interview.
As she answered questions posed by viewers, her message remained focused and unapologetic.
Race, as understood in Western cultures, is a largely social construct, she said. Yet from the time she was a child, she felt more aligned with black people.She said people should be embraced for “who they are authentically, and ultimately the quest for self-definition and self-determination is really part of the pursuit of happiness and freedom for us all.”
Nevertheless, the reaction from readers in the newspaper’s online-comments section was fierce and unforgiving.
Because race-fluid is not a thing.
“If black men start identifying as white then they will stop getting shot by police right? No, so transracial is something only white people can do…” with 1,502 likes.
That seems like a fair point.
I see what you did there, O.
:)
In an office where I used to work (as an intern), there was one man who couldn’t quite get hired because he wasn’t quite high enough on the list (it was a state job – he had to reach a standard of merit). The office couldn’t hire him because there were several women who had tested higher than he had, and even without the one point they got for being women, he couldn’t get near their scores. So, they worked and worked until they found some trace somewhere of a Native American ancestor, way back in his background, got him the 10 affirmative action points a Native American could get, and jumped him over enough women on the list to get him the job. So this white male, who had experienced nothing in the way of the crap that Native Americans experience, and nothing in the way of the crap women experience, managed to utilize a law written to maximize the ability of white males to benefit from something intended to assist a different group, and jumped over the bodies of the fallen to seize the job. Smugly, I might add. And the office was totally proud of what they had done.
He had not lived the experience, but he reaped benefits as though he had. And could claim oppression, because now he was “Native American”, having never lived that way, having never lived anything but white male privilege.
Meanwhile, my internship was never converted to full time; in fact, the convolutions they went through to avoid hiring a woman full time (me) were even more impressive than the maneuvers they used to hire a white male and claim him as a minority hire.
She’s a confused person and she’s lied. But she doesn’t look any more white than I do, and my father is black. It’s not guaranteed that one can tell whether someone is white or black or whatever, claims to the contrary notwithstanding. If she had a black ancestor several generations back, she and her more recent ancestors might be considered “passing”. There are several books by people who discovered they are “actually” black. The crazy heritage of the One Drop Rule in this country.
This of course puts some light skinned people in the position of considering themselves white but being treated by the outside world, at least those who know something of their family background, as black. That’s another example where how people perceive you is more the issue than how you perceive yourself.
I see the parallels with gender that are being hinted at, and I think they’re valid. It’s just difficult for me to look at Dolezal as an “obviously white” person, which damages the analogy for me.
@3 I don’t think the analogy has anything to do with whether Dolezel is “obviously white” or not. It has to do with the enforcement of an extremely rigid orthodoxy regarding race on the one hand, and gender on the other, even though the reasoning employed in the two cases is diametrically opposite.
Turning the one drop rule on its head OUGHT to defuse the whole craziness.
The head of the NAACP back in the 20s was blond, blue-eyed etc. etc. So he could travel safely in the ex-Confederate states etc. But he was ‘black’ by KKK standards and chose to identify as such.
Faux blackness doesn’t really offer much of an advantage, except in victim status, or in racist notions of ‘hipness.’ Dolezal’s gains weren’t really much to write home about. She inflated herself in a tiny, narrow cultural space.
Sackbut @ 3 –
But I agree with you about Dolezal. More than that, I think she has a point. I think it’s quite possible for people to identify more with groups (categories, identities, tribes, whatever you want to call them) they were not born into than those they were born into. On the other hand I think with groups / categories that are not purely a matter of choice (politics and the like) it’s better to identify with rather than as. Then again as you point out that gets hugely complicated with mixed-race people who look more like one than the other.
Given that Dolezal does “appear” ethnically “black” or “mixed race” and as such, society will be treating her as non-white, I think that she does have some claim to shared experience with other adults who are “really” black or mixed race.
It’s interesting and it really does highlight the way “woman” can be coopted – and the cooption considered valid – but “black” can’t. And there’s far more biological evidence for sex differences than there are for racial differences (though even in that case the evidence isn’t great for a lot of neurological or psychological claims).
It’s clear that, despite all scientific evidence showing that “race” has no scientific validity, it still exists as a political and social caste or class – just as gender critical feminists have been claiming about gender. Yet somehow, the two cases are treated very differently. Hmmm…
Funny how that works, isn’t it. It’s almost as if everyone expects women to shut up and move over.
[…] a comment by iknklast on She said people should be embraced for who they are […]
Given that Dolezal does “appear” ethnically “black” or “mixed race” and as such, society will be treating her as non-white, I think that she does have some claim to shared experience with other adults who are “really” black or mixed race.
Dolezal has cited numerous incidents of ‘racism’, but when investigated by the local authorities none panned out.
When someone lies to everyone around them, when they adopt fake identities, when they complain of fake incidents (racism)), when they invent fake backgrounds, fake families and fake fathers, they are not to be taken seriously.
I also think that racism is prevalent enough. America doesn’t need ‘Blackface’ race hustlers like Dolezal inventing more of it just to make a fast buck, and making a fast buck was what the her dishonest ruse was all about.
A thoughtful and elegant contribution, but I’m not sure it’s entirely fair.
Sackbut @3 She’s a confused person and she’s lied.
You seem to imply that the confusion and lying are her fault only. I don’t think it’s all that clear that she has always been consciously dishonest, rather she seems to have gradually coopted a narrative option that was more easily accepted by her peers than telling the truth.
In my experience, this is probably true. Or at least, I can completely relate to this situation. I often have met people completely unwilling to accept the existence of category-errors. With the years of being enforced into diverse categories unreflecting of actual origins, I eventually ended up accepting by convenience a poc label. Convenience means saying what people want to hear and are satisfied with, without further need for explanation.
What’s a bit upsetting is the fact that after having to endure ethnicised/racialised ‘microaggressions’ for decades for not being white enough, I might well currently experience the reverse and have people call me a fraud. But you know what? You can’t erase life experience and it’s not only a matter of pretend game. Changing the rules underway will not change the experience. And you can’t play a social ‘game’ where half the people want it one way and the other half is still playing the older version.
The parallel with gender stands completely. Everyone should be able to just be whatever they like whether others like it or not, as long as it’s not a bullying lever against other people. I think everyone can agree that the best situation would be indifference, in a perfect world without any prejudice, but the world is actually much messier and more complex than we can think of even when we account of that complexity and that mess.
And people have a perfect right to be confused too. Feeling sympathetical proximity to Black people doesn’t seem like something completely indecent. I can also relate to that. The issue is really that too many people can’t seem to navigate this world without the security of labels and stereotypes and are fully blind to Alterity.