Yes; I Find Rachel Dolezal Offensive--and Here's Why

This is the second time I used this strip for a blog post, and it's still relevant.

If you don't know who Rachel Dolezal is by now, I don't even know what link to point to for your education; she's such a big news story these days that you can just look her up and get this basic bit: Rachel Dolezal is a black woman who has led the Spokane branch of the NAACP, except not exactly, because as her parents recently revealed, Rachel is actually white.  She put in a lot of effort to look black (with questionable success), but she was born white, and in her cover came to a position of authority.

Now despite our culture's longstanding obsession with making fun of "wiggers", as evidenced by such things as the comic above, that Offspring song, and my personal favorite example, Malibu's Most Wanted, I'd be willing to consign Dolezal to the "mostly harmless" pile.  It's embarrassing, but it's also, like many audacious acts, somewhat funny in its bizarreness and almost impressive when viewed solely through the lens of individualism.  As a gamer, I have stepped into the shoes of two black men, having made a 1970s-ish, Shaft-like black action characters in two different RPGs (among others, like a blonde valley girl, a Japanese schoolgirl, and a lizardman), because I find such characters cool.  That's likely a manifestation of our refusal, as a species, to accept the hand Mother Nature has dealt us; we use whatever means possible to master our own fates, and therefor someone willing to take the next step and actually turn into a (rather light) black person in reality probably has some value in our culture of self-made men and women (and some things in between), as it pushes that envelope to new lengths.  Again, I can give props to brash, upwardly mobile individualism, if nothing else.  Unfortunately, that's not the area of accomplishment Rachel Dolezal chose to stay in; she used her transformation to gain power in the collective black lobby, and that is where I draw the line.

See, with that natural human drive for the improving one's own lot comes the inevitability of those who are willing to climb over others to achieve it; leaving those others' less in control of their own upward mobility, and sometimes whole races climb over each other, as is the context that exists in recent history between whites and blacks.  No; I'm not guilting Rachel's family for what their ancestors might have inflicted on black people, but the fact is, some white people did; they brought most ancestral black Americans to the country as slaves, and blacks are still being born into the aftermath of that dark history, to black families that tend not to have as much money or political influence as white ones.  It would be lovely if that weren't the case, and dark skin vs light skin had no more implications than green shirts vs brown shirts, and I think we are moving in that direction, but the NAACP exists to confront the ills of that hopefully-departing situation wherein someone's mere bloodline can screw them over for life.

This biological inevitability was a running theme throughout almost every traditional ideal of tolerance and egalitarianism that I, and probably many others, have been taught for my whole life.  The idea is that if someone is born a certain color, or with certain eye shapes, or in some unfortunate cases, with deformities like hunchbacks, it's wrong to punish them for that which they had no control over; if their appearance bothers you, at least be kind and not voice that, and do not assume they can't do a job as well as those who look more "normal" to you, etc.  It was taught with regard to race even at my conservative redneck school district, and since then, the gay community has adopted similar arguments about biological inevitability, as in Lady Gaga's gay anthem, "Born This Way".  Of course, this idea that seems traditional to us was, at one time, a radical notion; prior to its rise in popularity decades of bigotry propped up the very situation of inequality that the NAACP has always fought against.  As its name suggests, it aims to empower those people who, because of their lineage, have been dis-empowered elsewhere.

Rachel Dolezal, in how she has approached this, flies in the face of all that.  Her racial fluidity goes against the conventional (in the modern era) "born this way" philosophy so often cited when preaching non-discrimination, but beyond that, it speaks to the same old regrettable situation of power vs weakness.  Rachel has had the opportunity to alter her appearance through various thorough methods; darkening her skin (somewhat) and frizzing her hair, a self-transforming opportunity not shared by many of the people the NAACP represents, who are struggling enough with ordinary situations.  In certain other situations, I might be willing at least to give Rachel more credit than, say, non-whites who try to make themselves look white for advancement in a white culture; as it's easier to imagine someone is unselfish when "becoming" a race they know might lessen their ease of life in some scenarios.  Unfortunately, Rachel chose to enter one of those scenarios where darker skin helps one's credibility, and because, as stated above, the NAACP exists to give blacks a sort of positive discrimination in order to compensate for the negative discrimination that has marginalized them elsewhere, and in doing so, has potentially undermined the NAACP's positive discrimination.  Now, "potentially" doesn't mean definitely, but it's not worth the risk when her position could've been put to better use empowering a poorer, naturally black person.

Now, in case you weren't sure, I'm white, so why am I here vouching for black advancement against possible white usurpers?  It certainly isn't because I'm interested in being politically-correct; I care nothing for that upward battle of checking my privilege and flagellating my peachy flesh to maybe gain a slightly greater standing in the minds of idealogues obsessed with the oppressed and hateful towards those WASPs who have only in relatively recent history stood to be the default "oppressors". 

However, I allow that part of the reason for this is that I'm not very privileged, because instead of just a white man, I'm an autistic white man.  I've known hardship resulting from discrimination and intolerance my whole life, and despite all those "resources for parents" groups all-but creating the illusion that only children are autistic, that life is now pushing three decades.  At this point in it, at least some segments of our society have become fixated upon autism, but the most disturbing trend, as noted in an article I'm citing for the second time here on The Nonpartisan, is the lack of actual autistic people getting a say in how we're approached and "helped" in society.  It's not just the outrageously misnamed "Autism Speaks"; I constantly run up against organizations that talk down to me and don't have any of my sort in their actual staff.  There is not yet anything resembling a National Association for the Advancement of Autistic People (an "N Triple-A CP" if you will); at least not in terms of broad societal clout.

So naturally, I take strong personal stance on the necessity of marginalized groups to be their own advocates; as opposed to outsiders claiming to speak for them, but even though it's partially personal, I know I'm not the only one who feels this way.  Race is not bling; it's not just something you put on like a fine suit when you want to look more legitimate for a position of power, and doing so is especially vile when you're depriving someone who needs it much more.  There may come a day (presumably a day Rachel Dolezal would like) when things are different; a day when we've all committed the idea that it doesn't matter what others look like so thoroughly to second-nature that it will stop mattering what we look like as well, and with the help of some as-yet unknown super science, we waltz from appearance to appearance in a manner today befitting of RPG characters and forum avatars.  Yet that would be the day (or even past the day) groups like the NAACP cease being necessary, and not only do I see such groups as still being very-much necessary, I assert that we could use some more like them.  That leaves open plenty of things that Rachel Dolezal can do to help--but deceiving people isn't one them.