HB2, Rachel Dolezal, and identifyin’

It’s been interesting listening to lefties attack HB2 with analogies to and quotes from MLK Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. It’s a great way to shut down someone’s argument: Martin Luther King would disagree with you. 

*Who wants to be on the opposite side of MLK?  Anyone?*

We’re told that it’s very rational and normal to “identify” as a man if you are a woman, and as a woman if you are a man.

But, let’s harken back to 215 and the national furor over Rachel Dolezal.  Ms. Dolezal was a NAACP leader in Washington state.  The drivebys found out that she was claiming to be black, but was actually born white. The drivebys and their lefty buddies were outraged:  *”Identifying” as a woman  a man black?   That’s OUTRAGEOUS.*

Some of the same people who now argue the plausibility of “identifying” as a man when you are a woman, and vice-versa, were ripping Ms. Dolezal a new one over her claims of “identifying as black.”:

[…] Dolezal stated that her issues with self-identification started when she was a child and drawing pictures of herself with darker skin.

Lauer then asked when did she start deceiving people about her race, but of course, Dolezal didn’t exactly answer the question. Instead she placed blame on publications that identified her as everything from transracial to biracial. But she never corrected them.

“You didn’t correct those reports because they worked for you. They helped you meet your goals,” Lauer told Dolezal.

And she didn’t deny it.

The interview then ventured into whether or not Dolezal was putting on darker makeup or tanning her skin to look darker. Lauer referred to it as her putting on blackface.

“I have a huge issue with blackface. This is not some freak Birth of a Nation mockery blackface performance,” said the woman in darker makeup on live TV.

Lauer didn’t hold back any punches when it came to calling Dolezal out on contradictions, including the fact that she sued Howard University, charging that it discriminated against her because she was a white woman. Lauer didn’t understand how she could sue the university as a white woman when she previously said that she self-identified as black. Dolezal stated that the removal of her scholarship was an injustice, but one that she also lost because she had to pay Howard money.

“Would you make the same choices, given all that’s happened?” Lauer asked.

“As much as this discussion has somewhat been at my expense recently, and in a very sort of viciously inhumane way, come out of the woodwork, the discussion is really about what it is to be human,” she said. “I hope that that can drive at the core of definitions of race, ethnicity, culture, self-determination, personal agency and, ultimately, empowerment.”

“But when you say you would make the same choices, wouldn’t you go back and be a little more transparent about certain things in your life, or correct certain things you knew were incorrect?” Lauer asked.

“There are probably a couple of interviews I would do different in retrospect. But overall my life has been one of survival, and the decisions I’ve made along the way, including my identification, have been to survive and to, you know, carry forward in my journey,” Dolezel stated.

As the interview ended, Lauer asked Dolezal if she could have been as successful with the NAACP as a white woman.

“I don’t know. I guess I haven’t had the opportunity to experience that in those shoes. I’m not sure,” Dolezal replied.

As of today, when I’m declined for a new home loan, I’m going to let the bank know I identify as a white woman.

The next time I’m pulled over because of racial profiling, I’m letting the police officer know I identify as a white woman.

When I’m being followed in a store, and profiled, yup. I’m going to turn around and say to the guard, “Hey, why are you following me? I self-identify as a white woman.”

Because clearly this is how that sort of thing works.

Hey, that’s not me talking.  That’s a good liberal talking. 

Apparently, Rachel Dolezal is CRAZY, but a man in woman’s clothing thinking he’s Liza or Marilyn is NOT. 

“Identifying” works when it fits your agenda — when it stirs up those *uptight, church-going people.* When it helps you gain an upper hand over those same people.  *But HOLD EVERYTHING when it starts infringing on your turf.*

You ARE what you are born as:  white, black, Asian, Hispanic, male, female.

I think some of these folks with the selective championing of “identifiers” need to recall the laws of nature as well as Martin Luther King’s famous words about judging people by the content of their character.  Not skin pigmentation, anatomy, or some bureaucratic, Orwellian, dreamed-up classification.