This is an entertaining twitter thread about Rachel. If just a fraction of those stories are true, then I retract what I said about hoping she finds a job. She has far more pressing concerns–like uncrazifying herself.
The thing is the person in your example is, presumably, not an activist trying impart social change.
Holy crap that woman is nuts if even half of that is true, and I’m inclined to believe all of it.
White woman pretending to be black telling black people they’re not black enough and latino people they’re not latino enough. Telling a black woman she’s betraying black people by being married to a white man. :smack:
Folks from the beginning of time have imparted social charge without lying about who they are or making up stories about their victimization. At any rate, a person can do good in one area and still be deserving of the “wackjob” label based on their behavior in another area.
In the link I just posted, a Native American activist who lives in Spokane writes about how Dolezal’s lies undermined his group’s efforts to combat the Ayran Nation. Someone who fabricates hate crimes makes it easier for real hate crimes to be dismissed. So I would argue that while her intentions might have been good, she was actually doing more harm than good.
I’m kind of tired of people thinking that blacks folks are being mean for not embracing this crazy woman with open arms. Black people, as a whole, are not unaccepting of white people with a little flava. You know, someone who is “down” with black culture but doesn’t deny who they are and where they come from. Rachel isn’t in this category. If that twitter feed is to be believed (and I believe it), she has called people out for not being black enough. If I don’t tolerate that mess from bonafide black people, why would I find it tolerable in a delusional white woman?
Omg, I’ve barely gotten into the Rachel stories yet, but that thread needs to win an academy award for its gif action. I’m dying!
That’s what I meant, the nutter in your example harms noone, in the case of this other nutter she damages people by discrediting the causes she claims to fight for or creating conflict where there was none before.
For me its appalling to see how often people overlook the lack of credibility, morals or even sanity of people that elbow themselves to the front of a cause, something that is facilitated by the use of Social Media, today it’s easier than ever to do so, you just have to be really motivated about an issue (nutters are very good at that).
I’ve seen a few cases through their whole evolution, from unknown person of dubious character to paragon of a “noble cause”, the fact of the matter is Obsessed Nutter + Internet = Propaganda Machine, the results are usually to the detriment of whatever cause they latch on to.
:checks forum:
Are you* high?*
Golly, better tell anyone who names their daughter Jeanne that it’s totally fake because that baby girl has* not *been burned at the stake.
She’s a race-mixer; her son is dark-skinned, and her adoptive brother even more so. She has spent her life an advocate for an oppressed minority. You are talking out your ass on this one, projecting an image of a privileged white lady playing black on alternate Tuesdays, which she is not.
Really? You think she just happened to pick the name Diallo by coincidence?
It’s great to oppose racism. But you don’t have to be black to do it.
Read monstro’s link. Dolezal’s plan for opposing racism is to personalize it and put herself in the middle of things. She wants the struggle against racism to be about her.
That’s exactly what she is. She is literally a white lady playing black on alternate Tuesdays and every other day.
Little Nimo hasn’t reported today in the tread about posting drunk. There is still times. 
My bolding.
Actually it appears that she’s spend her life as ad advocate for herself. When she sued Howard University, it was because of she claimed discrimination because she was white.
The fake crimes? For just a few:
Her son isn’t her son. He’s one of her adopted brothers. The list of lies goes on and on and on.
One can be an advocate for another group without making up a new life filled with hate crimes.
you seem to have absolutely no sense or clue about names or logics, taking from your string of idiotic examples from the german to the idiotic reference to the trump name justifying this mentally ill woman.
of course the common name has no obvious reference.
Pulling the Senegalese name as a family name out of nowhere into the pastiche African name… that is something not any way comparable.
the idea you have that this is some kind of ‘justification’ for this woman’s documented bad behavior in lies… it says something not very positive. About you.
It is sad she is clearly very mentally ill in any case.
I wonder if she’s ever tried to claim a split personality: one white and one black.
I think you don’t understand how names work in the Western world. Of course it’s not coincidence. If I ever name my son John Brown, that’s not coincidence either.
That is literally what she is not. She lives this identity, that’s my point. And no, she doesn’t appear to be rich enough, nor to have been raised rich enough, to be what I meant by a “privileged white lady.” She did go to college, I guess that sounds “privileged” to some. Probably did it on Pell Grants, though.
Did you read the Guardian article? She has a mixed-race son (or two now, per Wikipedia). One of her younger brothers posed as her son at one point as well.
I’m sorry :rolleyes: that you have to live in a world with kooky people. At least this one seems harmless enough.
She jeopardizes the efforts of legitimate minorities by faking her own tragedies. Whites who say blacks fake their dire circumstances for handouts will use her as an example. She preys on the sympathy and gullibility of others to further her own gain. She’s far from kooky and harmless.
I understand your point. Your point is wrong.
If I got a number tattooed on my arm and went around telling people I was a survivor of Auschwitz, my behavior would be disrespectful to genuine Auschwitz survivors. If went around telling people I got PTSD while serving in Vietnam, my behavior would be disrespectful to genuine Vietnam veterans. If I went around telling people my wife was killed in the World Trade Center, my behavior would be disrespectful to the people who genuinely lost a family member on 9/11.
You can sympathize with people who have suffered. You can support people who have suffered. But when you pretend to be a person who has suffered because you want to receive that sympathy and support, that’s wrong.
As for privilege, check yours. The whole point of racism is that being white in America is a privilege non-white people don’t have.
That’s a dangerously narrow definition of racism, implying a dangerously narrow definition of privilege.
I take it you think some white shit-kicker from rural Indiana is* more* privileged than Michelle Obama, if you think about it at all?
Arg. “White people aren’t privileged…I know lots of poor white people!”
Yeah, poor white people. Are you saying that they’d be better off if they weren’t white?
Thing is, those poor white people would be even worse off if they weren’t white. As the man said, it’s not that white people are better, but being white is clearly better.
What I think is that a white shit-kicker from rural Indiana is more privileged than a black shit-kicker from rural Indiana. And I think a white First Lady is more privileged than a black First Lady.
Right. So, one, you both completely avoided the question.
Two, when I say “privileged white lady,” do you really think that “privileged” is redundant in that sentence? This is the point. You see Rachel Dolezal as an educated white woman, so of course she’s rich and privileged and must just be playing.
Good grief. Yeah, maybe she’ll go home part of the week to her palace where she’s waited on by a butler or something. :rolleyes:
Also, comparing being black to being a death camp survivor, that’s a bit much, isn’t it?
Here’s the thing: I agree that pretending to be a “full-blood Indian” is wrong, and that is in fact legally actionable. But you didn’t make* that* argument. Because to you, just being black is a total tragedy, like Auschwitz or the Vietnam War. That’s creepy, man.
They avoided nothing, you are hand waiving about Richness.
The mentally ill woman fabricated the false complaints of the hate crimes and much other damaging false claims.
The ‘commitment’ she shows is a mental illness where she is on the record of denigrating the persons of the actual biological heritage for her own victimhood seeking frauds.
What is creepy is your strange accusations and in earlier the advancing of the idea of “race mixer” as a defense.