Rachel Dolezal: a name that will live in infamy. Everyone in America has now heard of this poor orange woman’s dream to live her life as a black American via a canned tan and a bad perm. I really think that a major discussion on the intersection of deception, madness, manipulation, appropriation®, and victimization are in order, don’t you?
Because that’s really the issue here, this extraordinary example of intersectionalityism, amirite?
Less than a week ago Rachel Dolezal was on a regular webcast show called Moral Mondays hosted by the Spokane Branch of the NAACP. This according to the NAACP Spokane Facebook page, which as of this printing is still up. At the mere thought that this incident could be real, the Gods of Irony (and Guido da Montefeltro) slit their own throats, because even they, with their awesome power, could not possibly top the clusterfuck that is the existence of Dear Rachel.
I’m not going to get into the details of her backstory because that’s what Buzzfeed is for. And I really think the Twitter trollfest has been entirely overblown. I mean, did @POTUS even comment? I didn’t think so. There wasn’t even a cop or a penis involved in this bullshit. Duh. But I do think the fact that every. single. diary. at Daily Kos on this topic so far has flopped is notable.
The reason is the intersection. It’s a little too close to home for them.
People who perpetrate the extraordinary level of deception that Dear Rachel has are one or both of two things: crazy and/or criminal. Regarding the issue of transgenderism, conservatives for a long time have made the argument that people wouldn’t tolerate it if someone felt black but weren’t, so why is gender any different? Vile progs would usually respond with as if. But now it has happened. And the truth is, they can’t respond coherently. Because that argument on its face is simple and it resonates. Race & gender are both social constructs and genetic constructs. You can’t actually change them, but you can play the part. To pretend otherwise is just crazy, but that’s what we’ve been asked to do with the transgender side.
My philosophy on the whole T part of LGBT has been that it’s a free country and you can do what you want with your body, just don’t expect me to accommodate your crazy with gushing or pronoun changes. And truth is, a lot of people feel that way. No amount of shaming by vile progs (and there’s been plenty of it) will change that.
In the wake of Dear Rachel’s story, there’s been a lot of discussion about whether or not what she’s done can be considered cultural appropriation. This discussion is not generally coming from white people, especially the left-leaning among that group. It’s coming from the same people who hate on Iggy Azalea because she’s more ratchet than the lowest shorty in Hotlanta.
What the juxtaposition of Caitlyn Jenner & Rachel Dolezar exposes is the hierarchy of victimization espoused by the left. There’s just some shit you can’t say or do when it comes to race, but it’s a-okay when it comes to gender, especially when it doggy-styles the feminine mystique. Any man can be any kind of chick, but screw any whitey who wants to be black, and that goes double for white women, the most hated class of whites. It’s not appropriation if you do it by portraying a mere woman.
Here’s another uncomfortable point: Caitlyn Jenner and the other superstar transgender queen, Laverne Cox, make a mockery of true femininity by embracing every stereotypical beauty standard women are impossibly held to. They don’t seek to be women in the sense that we understand them in the everyday world; they seek to be centerfolds or models. These are the kinds of women who exploit the ugly cultural impulse to objectify women’s bodies, which turns them into cash cows.
Dear Rachel has just darkened her skin and permed her hair; she didn’t change her dialect or seek glory & fame as a hip hop star and, as far as I know, she’s never been caught on film twerking. You can’t say that about Miley Cyrus, for example. Rachel’s the ultimate white social justice warrior.
And this is what throws white progressives off—they know the feeling. They’ve wanted to do something like this, but they haven’t had the balls and you know, carrying the charade this far is just too much work. Her full embrace of victimhood status is something they envy their black progressive cohorts for being able to do. That she did so through going to Howard University and working for the NAACP is just evidence of her earnestness to them, and therein lays the divide that will disrupt the relationship between black and white leftists. What one side considers appropriation the other side will consider a matter of choice.
At the end of the day, though, Dear Rachel is just your garden variety crazy. She’s high-functioning, obviously, but the depth of her deceptions and manipulations, along with the the legal issues with her parents and real appropriation of her adopted brother as her son together pretty much suggest a diagnosis of something like borderline personality disorder (note: I am not a psychologist, except in the armchair sense). It’s really kind of tragic, despite all the fun & funny that’s been made of it. It will be interesting to see what the cultural consensus turns out to be.