Thread: Why does it seem like everyone is trashing Rachel Dolezal??

My hope for tolerance is that someday, being xxxx race, gender, etc... is not a condition for or against you getting a job anywhere.

I can't see where all of this Social Engineering has really done any good. But then again, I'm a 56 yr old white male.

Originally Posted by kelbro

My hope for tolerance is that someday, being xxxx race, gender, etc... is not a condition for or against you getting a job anywhere.

I can't see where all of this Social Engineering has really done any good. But then again, I'm a 56 yr old white male.

The issue is that a Caucasian misrepresented her ethnicity to gain a position of leadership in an organization devoted to the furtherance of that other ethnicity's well being. The whole thing would have been considered bizarre in past decades, but now in this alternative reality we seem to find ourselves in, it is par for the course.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

The issue is that a Caucasian misrepresented her ethnicity to gain a position of leadership in an organization devoted to the furtherance of that other ethnicity's well being. The whole thing would have been considered bizarre in past decades, but now in this alternative reality we seem to find ourselves in, it is par for the course.

Understood. It's the presumed NEED for any group that has a race or gender in their title that is disappointing to me.

I don't care who you think you are, who you love, where your relatives came from. Just leave things a little better than you found them and we all win.

Originally Posted by kelbro

Understood. It's the presumed NEED for any group that has a race or gender in their title that is disappointing to me.

I don't care who you think you are, who you love, where your relatives came from. Just leave things a little better than you found them and we all win.

I agree. I was listening to the late Pastor J. Vernon Mcgee on a radio broadcast of a sermon. I was in my car and didn't hear the beginning, so I don't know which book of the Bible it was. JVM was originally from Kentucky, though he pastored most of his life in Los Angeles.

The sermon was from the '60s and he said (paraphrasing) 'a lot of people are talking about integration nowadays.' I took a deep breath wondering what he would say ..... he said, 'In heaven there will be no segregation but all will be one.' That is the truth. We have to wait for it, but the day will come.

Really it's like during the draft while wars were going on and some folks filed for conscientious objector status. Anyone can claim it but if you want the classification you have to prove it by past deeds.

Similarly, anyone can claim to be anything they want. You can claim to be the King of England or Napoleon's great grandson or the surviving Romanov but in the end it's all meaningless you have to prove it and show what gives you that status.

I'm not sure what the OP is trying to do here. I suspect his real motive is to imply all this transgender stuff is nonsense by comparing this woman to them. The comparison is a false equivalent.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

I'm not sure what the OP is trying to do here. I suspect his real motive is to imply all this transgender stuff is nonsense by comparing this woman to them. The comparison is a false equivalent.

No. My bad in using Dolezal as an example since deception is a key factor in her particular case.

I don't have a motive and my opinion in regard to transgender is not relevant. Society has simply shifted recognizing gender based on biology to gender based on the subjective perception of the individual. Generations from now people would give a blank stare to someone who says gender is based on biology because in the future gender will be based on perception and won't be based on biology. It is what it is.

Gender is evolving to be based on an individual's perception of who they think they are irrespective of their biology, period. It is what it is. My only point is that a person can also perceive themselves to be a different race irrespective of their biology and I don't think it's any different than gender perceptions.

Trying to differentiate between gender and race in this regard in relation to the way someone may perceive themselves opposite from their biology will get us into stereotypes....

"He dressed up in girl's clothes even as a child and has always been effeminate. He's always thought of himself as a woman. As such, society should recognize him as a woman based on his perception of himself...."

"The white girl grew up in a largely black neighborhood. Her step-siblings are black. She has only always listed to rap music and has always had the same mannerisms and talks in the same vernacular as her black friends and peers. She has always thought of herself as black."

Yes, not all women are effeminate, not all black people listen to rap music or talk in a certain categorical vernacular........

My point is that I don't think it's right to recognize gender perceptions but refuse as a society to accept race perceptions. "We accept [ ], but [ ] is just plain crazy" when both perceptions are based on something different than the person's biology.

Seems to me that for baby boomers and those born in preceding generations this is all cut from the same cloth. Insanity. There was a lot wrong with the 1950s, such as the essentially separate and unequal society of that, and previous times, but there was a lot right with those times too. On many things "we"in the USA were all on the same page. Most of us anyway.

The generations since have been brainwashed with liberal propaganda and since the late '60s 'counter culture' and the sexual revolution anything goes, as long as it isn't the Judeo-Christian ethic we once shared in this country. Think like that and the totalitarian lefties will seek your head on a plate.

My thoughts are this. Never use the term "transgender". It gives legitimacy to the insane notion that gender is debatable.