Rachel Dolezal, race, and gender

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

Dolezal has written a book about her experiences in which she argues that if people can identify as a different gender, they should also legitimately be able to identify as a different race. Interesting piece in today's Grauniad

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/25/rachel-dolezal-not-going-stoop-apologise-grovel?CMP=share_btn_tw

Very thoughtful points, Geordie. I hadn't thought about the situation that way.

not I agree. However i dont believe saying 'I identify as a woman' makes someone a woman or that they understand anything about a womans experiences.

I can identify as a 6 foot 3 swedish supermodel with honey gold skin and blonde hair. But unless the life and loves of a she devil was a documentary, it ain't going to happen.

"how you are treated by the outside world affects how your identity is shaped and how you connect with your community. I was aware that I was black, and the weight that carried, from I was jusrt out of toddlerhood."

^This from fauche captures it for me.

I am not black, but mixed race. I have a sibling who "passes" as white when not standing next to the rest of us, but growing up they could never get away from being identified as mixed race, not white - there were a couple of times I thought they might have been trying to do that, when moving to a new school. I don't think "passing" occasionally makes you "not black" or "not Asian" because you have not grown up like that - it is simply a glimpse into another world. A visit that I can't make myself, but still just a visit.

' Actually I think there is a difference between race and sex in this regard. Race isn't as binary (not that sex is totally binary but is more so). It's a spectrum whose range passes through a grey area where one's race is hard to determine. '

I have to keep picking up on these points. Sex is a biological reality. There are two binary sexes in mammals and it is how we reproduce. Every biologist in every culture in the world acknowledges this. Every culture in the world knows males and females exist, even if they know nothing of the Scientific subject called Biology.

Race is not analagous to sex. There are no universally agreed set of races that one can fall into a grey area of and be hard for people to determine. What the 'races' are in one culture is not that same thing as what the 'races' are in another. And there are no human races at all in the subject we call Biology.

Sex is analagous to geographical variation in adaptive features. All biologists agree that areas near the equator have ancestrally been populated by people with higher melanin levels, for example.

Race is equivalent to gender, not sex. It takes physical features and creates a set of cultural attitudes around them. The reason we still talk about races is because it is important to acknowledge that oppression based on the idea of race and resistance to it is a massively important part of the history and culture of certain ethnic groups.

No I disagree

I do believe that many people strongly believe they have been born the wrong sex, these feeling can start from a very young age and the desire to be the sex they feel they should have been is enforced by society we are surrounded by what is male and what is female

I am not talking about men who want to wear a dress and be pretty in am taling about really loathing your body and feeling you are in the wrong body

Saying that I do not believe a man can become a women they are transwomen their needs are different and that should be accepted which of course is very hard for those that see themselves as women who are biologically men (and for transmen too). Sadly the trans movement has been taken over by men who want to define what being a women is (becuase being a man they can) and I believe many hate women

When it comes to race is the desire be black to share the pain of past generations that were slaves, is it to allow yourself into a group of people that you admire, to jump of an emotional bandwagon of pain and being a victim of racism, to feel you are connected to a culture on a deeper level than you could ever be if you are white (or not from that cultural background)

When travelling in India I met quite a few white Europeans that told me they felt asiain/Indian why becuase they felt they felt at home in India (many had been there for years) felt this is where they should be, they felt connections with the Indian culture and the people but it's nothing more than a connection and a desire and for some a hatred of their cultural past (and lots of navel gazing)

I have no issue with someone moving to Britain, being here for many years, feeling British and ticking British on an ethnicity form. You don't have to be born British or English to have it as your ethnicity.

That's not the same thing as lying about your ancestry.

RD had a strong connection to black culture because the only family members who treated her with warmth, love and compassion were black.

I don't agree with what she's done, but there are clearly some major psychological events there that are not mainly about black history.

Being British is taking on a nationality and maybe adopting culture

That isn't the same as changing the colour of your skin, changing your hair and passing yourself off and claiming to have suffered because of your ethnicity

I never said it was the same.

But you talked about people feeling a connection to India, which is a nationality and a culture, like being British. There are Indian people of African ancestry, of East Asian ancestry and so on.

And I know people from other EU countries who haven't got British as their legal nationality but now feel British or English or Scottish is their ethnicity, having spent most of their lives here.

I would love to experience being white for a day. However, That's impossible for someone of my complexion. RD can talk and make arguments because she holds the power in the gene pool of acceptable colour and look. It's easier to darken your skin than its is to lighten it up. It's easier for her to look one percent black and be considered black than me trying to lighten up and still not get to that one percent let alone 5o%. It does not matter how many wigs, weaves, hair extensions or chemicals get to burn my scalp and body to change.
If life was to get difficult for her she can easily revert back to her white self and go on with her life. But for me, the box am in, I shall for ever be, this will include my children whether they are male/female, trans/ | biracial/ bi| gay or straight or whatever label they choose to assign themselves.

I will give this a thought and come back with an argument wether I agree with her or not. Overall, she is at an advantage both from the black community and the world in general by having the complexion she has alone. It's does not matter whether she makes it darker or not. Having her darken complexion still gives her privileges that a lot of people within the race will never get due to ingrained ideology from slavery and the aftermath.

Actually, if she wants to be black she can, however, if she things she has had the same experience as your average black person, she must be mistaken. Colourism is the biggest dived among black people. And overall, it favours her darken complexion.

Mmmmh! With people arguing that RD would not be accepted as black, I actually disagree. Most people where not happy with what she did. It was more about the lies and jobs she took by pretending to be black.

Paris Jackson (Michale Jackson daughter) has been calling herself black lately. She did her recent interview where she said she is black and feels like she is black because of her dad. People are not that bothered. Yes! there are some who tried to point it but most people who read her interview with the rolling stones just didn't care. I read it and thought how interesting but it did make sense to me that she would feel that way.

What really stood out for me was that her adoption of another race was the result of psychological disturbance. It was a result of the particular upbringing she had, the white, Fundamentalist Christian upbringing in which she was not supported to be herself and arguable was abused.

It led her to feel that she did not identify with that, and so she rejected it.

Ifet sympathy for that. But it's a psychological disorder.

... I see almondpudding said similar

Bev I agree with this:

"I think the transactivists cant accept the argument because they are aware they cant take on the "black" community (for want of a better phrase) as easily as they can take on women.

So when a woman says, actually thats cultural appropriation and misogynistic, men can roll their eyes and suggest shes due on.

When a black man says, actually, thats cultural appropriation and racist, its taken seriously"

Fauchelevent

You know what, actually on second thoughts I have to agree. At least on MN at the moment, there's all sorts of eye-rolling and accusations of political correctness gorn mad when people dare to suggest something's racist

I've read that Guardian article and other articles by RD and it's fairly clear she the reason she 'identifies' as black is to do with her childhood - strict punitive Christian parents, being made to feel guilty and ashamed of herself, creative expression being seen as sexual therefore sinful; and then her black adoptive siblings arrive with whom she has a closer emotional bond than her biological family. She felt isolated at school. So to deal with the trauma of her childhood, instead of blaming her parents and dealing with it, she internalises it, invents a new black persona to separate herself from her childhood self, and buries her white persona. I don't think she did any of this maliciously but was extremely misguided. She's not gender-fluid - she's psychologically scarred from her childhood and this is her way of dealing with it.
She may have had good intentions with regards to black rights, but she could have supported and championed those rights without pretending to be black.

NotYoda - sorry cross-posted!

No it isn't the same

People feeling Indian is becuase they are experiencing life that a very privileged person can make (and should have made that clear) a choice that the vast majority of Indians couldn't possibly dream of doing they may feel India is their spiritual home and like living there but there are not Indian and will never be seen as Indian. So what they are experiencing is a privileged life a European person can have in India how is that feeling Indian (or Asian)

People who have lived here now feel they are British have taken on a different culture (that has often been influenced by British culture) and taken on a different nationality (doubt many will be applying for Indian passports) we are a multicultural country India isnt and living life integrated with
people who live here. I know people will claim to be British as they were born in British colonies and there is influence still there but they recognise that they are from an X culture. Being British still brings you advantages in life (as does living in Britain) unfortunately for many being Indian or from many Asian cities countries does not afford you the same advantages

RD (like some I have met in india) want to totally ignore their cultural background and the privileges that come with it by claiming they are now a different cultural background becuase they feel it

notyoda and bev i don't agree at all.

Trans activists won't accept any similarity between the two not because they cannot "take on" the all powerful black community. That's absurd, as is the idea that race is prioritised or listened to always over sex - as someone who is both I can confirm it is not.

The reason the trans activist community will not embrace Rachel Dolezal is because the trans activist community is made up of many many politically minded young black and brown women and anti racists.

Kimberlé Crenshaw's idea of intersectionality has widened to include the intersection of being, say black, female and gay etc... and of course female and trans. The idea isn't useless per se - feminism has conventionally excluded a lot of women but now intersectional feminism's loudest voice is the trans woman. And intersectional feminists'll tell you that proudly. "My feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit" is a direct @ mention to feminists who question transgender theory or dare to question the safety of sex work, with an addendum to feminists who ignore brown women.

So intersectional feminism, those loudly advocating alongside the most extreme TAs being made up of brown women will have a lot to say about Dolezal, of course. Naturally. And the trans community themselves will see the difference between themselves because race is still "a fact". No one but RD has yet decided that race is a feeling in a white person's head. I mean, it's not very "done" to deny someone's claims to call themselves a certain race - but that doesn't yet extend to people with no heritage whatsoever. The meaning of woman has, for now at least, changed to be based on ideas and thoughts, sexual biology has been cancelled for the moment and is a meaningless aberration, having as much significance as whether you have a chin dimple or not.

So imho the cancelling of sexual biology against the current reality that race means something, coupled with the intertwining of feminists of colour showing solidarity with another activist community is why transactivism wil not welcome trans black.

Yes, the Paris Jackson question is an interesting one. Even if she has no black blood I would respect her claim that she is black and agree. I'm white myself though, an African American might well disagree and say that she's white. I bet her family would also describe her as black, she says her dad always did.

The reason we still talk about races is because it is important to acknowledge that oppression based on the idea of race and resistance to it is a massively important part of the history and culture of certain ethnic groups. Really? Did you type this with a straight face?

quencher so glad you're here. I missed that particular... gem

Fauchelevent

Lots to think about there. I am reading carefully. This whole discussion is very new to me.