If she is entitled to define what it means for her then why does she have the expectation that what she HAS been doing to “live as black” MUST be taken for “living as black”? By your theory, there could be as many definitions for “living as black” as there are people on the earth.
Whether she claims to understand what the black community of yester years went through or not, by misrepresenting herself as part of that community one may believe that she is attempting to take advantage of the “benefits” or “advantages” that are offered as “acknowledgement” for the mistreatment they endured. (Note that my initial instinct was to say “compensation” but I found it insulting to suggest that any act/privilege could be considered as such.) This is further reinforced by the inaccurate information that she provided in government forms.
And it was fried chicken and grits (i.e. sarcasm and common stereotyping) not chicken wings. It was meant to show how petty the whole fiasco is.
I can’t comment further on this because I have no idea if the choice to “out” her was made by the parents or if there was more at play and they ended up where they are…so I’ll step out on the debate of what they did being right or wrong.
In smart phone I can’t read whole post at one time. So will answer step by step.
She doesn’t have any expectation that you or anyone else agrees with her definition of being black. She just doesn’t want to be hounded.
One may believe whatever one wants. Doesn’t mean it’s true. As I stated she joined Howard BEFORE THE black life. The NAACP hires whites and blacks. As I had stated she had to lie because people don’t accept this race change things. As is evident here and elsewhere.
Ok. Fried chicken. If this “fiasco” is “petty” blame those hounding her. Including ones here.
Post 52 states the parents were asked “point bkank” by media. And that the parents had to tell the truth. A rhetorical question was posed - should they have lied?
To which I responded in post 53 they had an option to NOT speak to the media. To which you responded - isn’t avoiding speaking to the media akin to lying? (And this was liked by poster 52)
In other words, you did see the chain of posts develop and raised the point that if the parents were approached by the media, avoiding them is akin to lying.
My position is - regardless of whether the choice to out her was made by the parents or was in response to being approached by media, they were wrong in speaking out about their daughter.
I wouod hope most parents reading this wouldn’t treat their child this way - even if the child were estranged from them.
I am not suggesting that I didn’t follow the communication that happened in this thread, what I was suggesting is that I don’t know if the parents made a conscious and planned effort to approach the media of their own volition to out her. I haven’t read up on the matter. I don’t know if the media chased the parents for a comment and then they agreed to make a statement or if the parents just had it in for Dolezal and took the first step.
In both scenarios it is sad and testimony to the fact that dysfunction in this family exists.
yeah…we seem to be on parallel paths…I’m looking for info and facts at the same time that I am forming/expressing my opinion on the matter.
you know a lot more about the situation (perhaps having read up on it) and have already made up your mind.
All you have to do is read the comments in this thread - some from yourself - expressing outrage not just at her lies, but how dare she live as a black person. Now you are saying what prevented her from living as a black person without having to lie about it.
It just doesn’t compute. One doesn’t have to research this topic to come to this conclusion.
