Too funny....'black' NAACP leader outed as white

[jon_berzerk]

more power to her

perhaps more transrace folks

will come out of the woodwork

 

[Asclepias]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

 

[Asclepias]

You must not have read my earlier posts where I said that I have no issue with someone identifying as black what-so-ever.

That aside, so you think it is mentally stable to take stories from other peoples lives and pretend that they happened to you? That would help explain your abrasive personality and bigotry though. You've taken in every horrible story and made it your own? I admit, I'd always simply put you down as a racist troll...

Who does it say the most about, her or the members/followers, that she would have more perceived insight by appearing/posing as black??

How do we know that's the reasoning in the first place?

Everything has selfish reasons.

In her case I see someone, for most of her life, was as white as white can be.
Her "identifying as black" doesn't wash with me.
She started dating, and eventually married, black men. So she may Relate to blacks.....not identify.
She sees a chance to get behind a podium and lecture on the plight of the black race.
Ain't no lilly-white girl gonna have any credibility....no authority on the subject, so she makes herself look more black.

Uuhh.... She is a professor at a university in AA studies. An expert in her field. She has all the credibility she needs. You do realize there are white people that major in such things, teach as professors and are experts like she is in AA studies right?

As if, ESPECIALLY, you would give a white professor in that field any credence

I mentioned earlier I had met another white woman that was an expert on AA studies/history at a job. She actually majored in it. We talked often at lunch and I was thoroughly impressed with the depth of her knowledge so I know some white people know the truth that is hidden or denied by the rest of whites.

 

[Steinlight]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about your race if it is a social construct? Are transwomen liars for not identifying with their birth sex?

 

[Asclepias]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

 

[Steinlight]

Who does it say the most about, her or the members/followers, that she would have more perceived insight by appearing/posing as black??

How do we know that's the reasoning in the first place?

Everything has selfish reasons.

In her case I see someone, for most of her life, was as white as white can be.
Her "identifying as black" doesn't wash with me.
She started dating, and eventually married, black men. So she may Relate to blacks.....not identify.
She sees a chance to get behind a podium and lecture on the plight of the black race.
Ain't no lilly-white girl gonna have any credibility....no authority on the subject, so she makes herself look more black.

Uuhh.... She is a professor at a university in AA studies. An expert in her field. She has all the credibility she needs. You do realize there are white people that major in such things, teach as professors and are experts like she is in AA studies right?

As if, ESPECIALLY, you would give a white professor in that field any credence

I mentioned earlier I had met another white woman that was an expert on AA studies/history at a job. She actually majored in it. We talked often at lunch and I was thoroughly impressed with the depth of her knowledge so I know some white people know the truth that is hidden or denied by the rest of whites.

What's this professor's opinion on transracialism?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I don't think the issue here is what she knows or doesn't know about being black but that she was dishonest.

In a country where our politicians are viewed as money grubbing liars I dont get why allowing people to think she is Black is really that important?

Hell I lied to get my first job in IT. Do I feel bad? Hell no.

Another thing to remember is that AA is supposed to be for minorities, not just whomever. Where does this madness of pretending to be something you are not end? Also, to even think that an allegedly intelligent and well educated woman would be "unaware" in any way is a bit ridiculous, unless she is suffering from some kind of mental illness.

In many ways, we've created the incentives for this fraud to occur, thus, we've sort of created the behavior in order to achieve it.

 

[Steinlight]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

What concept?

 

[Steinlight]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

Are transwomen "liars" for not identifying with their birth sex?

 

[Asclepias]

How do we know that's the reasoning in the first place?

Everything has selfish reasons.

In her case I see someone, for most of her life, was as white as white can be.
Her "identifying as black" doesn't wash with me.
She started dating, and eventually married, black men. So she may Relate to blacks.....not identify.
She sees a chance to get behind a podium and lecture on the plight of the black race.
Ain't no lilly-white girl gonna have any credibility....no authority on the subject, so she makes herself look more black.

Uuhh.... She is a professor at a university in AA studies. An expert in her field. She has all the credibility she needs. You do realize there are white people that major in such things, teach as professors and are experts like she is in AA studies right?

As if, ESPECIALLY, you would give a white professor in that field any credence

I mentioned earlier I had met another white woman that was an expert on AA studies/history at a job. She actually majored in it. We talked often at lunch and I was thoroughly impressed with the depth of her knowledge so I know some white people know the truth that is hidden or denied by the rest of whites.

What's this professor's opinion on transracialism?

Look it up and let me know. I'm pretty sure she is all for it.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

What concept?

You didnt answer my question. What kind of retarded question was that? Are you claiming you cant lie and say for instance you are married? Thats a social construct so your question sounds pretty illiterate.

 

[Steinlight]

I don't think the issue here is what she knows or doesn't know about being black but that she was dishonest.

In a country where our politicians are viewed as money grubbing liars I dont get why allowing people to think she is Black is really that important?

Hell I lied to get my first job in IT. Do I feel bad? Hell no.

Another thing to remember is that AA is supposed to be for minorities, not just whomever. Where does this madness of pretending to be something you are not end? Also, to even think that an allegedly intelligent and well educated woman would be "unaware" in any way is a bit ridiculous, unless she is suffering from some kind of mental illness.

In many ways, we've created the incentives for this fraud to occur, thus, we've sort of created the behavior in order to achieve it.

There is no fraud here, race doesn't even exist as a legitimate biological construct. As Rachel said in her interview, race is cultural. Ask any credible scientist, Bill Nye, Neil Degrasse Tyson, etc.

 

[Steinlight]

Everything has selfish reasons.

In her case I see someone, for most of her life, was as white as white can be.
Her "identifying as black" doesn't wash with me.
She started dating, and eventually married, black men. So she may Relate to blacks.....not identify.
She sees a chance to get behind a podium and lecture on the plight of the black race.
Ain't no lilly-white girl gonna have any credibility....no authority on the subject, so she makes herself look more black.

Uuhh.... She is a professor at a university in AA studies. An expert in her field. She has all the credibility she needs. You do realize there are white people that major in such things, teach as professors and are experts like she is in AA studies right?

As if, ESPECIALLY, you would give a white professor in that field any credence

I mentioned earlier I had met another white woman that was an expert on AA studies/history at a job. She actually majored in it. We talked often at lunch and I was thoroughly impressed with the depth of her knowledge so I know some white people know the truth that is hidden or denied by the rest of whites.

What's this professor's opinion on transracialism?

Look it up and let me know. I'm pretty sure she is all for it.

What's her name?

 

[Asclepias]

Thats great but pointless. I never called you a bigot so I dont really care about your earlier posts.

I've seen alot of people I worked with do the same thing. They take snippets of experiences and piece them together together to form a history. Thats why lies are so common in our society. People tell them all the time. Fisherman lie about the size of the their catch for one example. The term "mentally stable" relies upon an agreed upon norm. I have found that people who think they are the norm are usually sheep and lack the ability to think for themselves. You seem to fall in that category when you stand behind the term mentally stable. You dont even know what that means.

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

Are transwomen "liars" for not identifying with their birth sex?

If they give the concept any validity.

 

[Steinlight]

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

What concept?

You didnt answer my question. What kind of retarded question was that? Are you claiming you cant lie and say for instance you are married? Thats a social construct so your question sounds pretty illiterate.

I never talked about marriage. I am trying to gather whether you are calling transracial individuals liars.

 

[Asclepias]

Uuhh.... She is a professor at a university in AA studies. An expert in her field. She has all the credibility she needs. You do realize there are white people that major in such things, teach as professors and are experts like she is in AA studies right?

As if, ESPECIALLY, you would give a white professor in that field any credence

I mentioned earlier I had met another white woman that was an expert on AA studies/history at a job. She actually majored in it. We talked often at lunch and I was thoroughly impressed with the depth of her knowledge so I know some white people know the truth that is hidden or denied by the rest of whites.

What's this professor's opinion on transracialism?

Look it up and let me know. I'm pretty sure she is all for it.

What's her name?

Did you read the OP?

 

[Steinlight]

Fascinating. I have to admit, I had never heard of anyone doing as you say here until this story came out. In my mind it indicates a form of denying reality, though I suppose I could indeed write it up as a "fish tale" with a minor expansion of the concept of why people typically tell "fish tales," as you have pointed out...

Under a "fish tale" theory as you present, and in my analysis of such, I am left with a less "pleasing" opinion of this woman's intentions however, and I much prefer to see the good in peoples actions than the bad; perhaps I too deny reality at times...

In any event, in my mind, it would boil down to her a) desiring to fit in, b) craving attention or pity, or c) merely "writing" a story to intrigue her audience. As a writer I can understand C well enough, and in the spirit of "taking others experiences as my own," an expanded form of empathy if you will, I can find understanding for A. B however troubles me to grasp, it is difficult for me to combine the dueling concepts of "not being a sheep who thinks for themselves" while simultaneously "accepting the experiences of others as my own history." Despite B, under the "fish tale" theory you present, then yes, I could accept that as a form of "normal."

Unfortunately this "fish tale" theory brings with it concern as well. Now, in any other position, this "fish tale" theory likely wouldn't be a problem, but when you have someone who is an NAACP leader who is supposed to be representing the very /real/ plights of modern blacks, making up "fish tales," there becomes a question of integrity in the position, don’t you agree?

For example, suppose I tell a "fish tale" about a guy hitting me. If I merely tell my friends, then likely no harm done I can agree. However, if I were to start telling that "fish tale" in public, to the media, or the police, are we then not in a whole other world of possible "harm done"? Is it still "acceptable" to continue to portray that "fish tale" as the truth, when that guy may face reputational or legal ramifications from that lie?

In the real story of the OP, she has claimed that her “father,” who is actually her ex-husband as I understand it, beat her with a baboon whip. I suppose given that she had claimed he was abusive to her during their marriage, perhaps her internal justification regarding “lying” about it, is in some ways lessened, beat with hands vs beat with a baboon whip is perhaps a minor embellishment. What if he didn’t actually abuse her at all, what if it was actually one of her friend’s experiences that she “borrowed” and pinned on him to make it more believable? Especially given that she is in a position that is supposed to be the voice for the wrongness of exactly the kind of shit she is doing?

And honestly, either way you look at this situation, you literally have a case of a white chick making up a “fish tale” about a black man abusing her. Yet you are defending her and her telling of that lie. I find this a bit baffling…

If we accept your “fish tale” theory as real and normal within the black community then it only highlights the need for absolute integrity among your community leaders /if/ the ultimate goal is to end racism.


The theory actually does help me comprehend a number of aspects of modern racism and helps explains many of the situations I personally found impossible to understand in recent events. Think about it, if we accept that the community takes a tale told to them, and incorporates such as their own living memory, then we /can/ actually find “reason” behind many of the seemingly bizarre actions and reactions. It is little wonder that they cannot “get over” slavery, not when they are in a sense actually “re-living” slave stories as their own personal experiences every time the word is mentioned. Racism cannot really end under this theory, because any tale or being mistreated told, real or fake, becomes a “shared memory” if you will within the community, with minor embellishments added to make it “personal” perhaps. Deeper consideration theorizes that unable to incorporate any “new” facts that may come out in a case into the self-imprinted memory of the “initial telling of the tale,” and harboring decades worth of stories of slavery as their own memories as well, they violently explode when officers go free for the injustice that exists in the “memory” they have imprinted from that initial tale – to example, the Brown had his hands up in surrender and got shot in the back “fish tale” completely ignoring the evidence that he was attacking officer Wilson. Applying the theoretical precursor of self-imprinted memory, the “bizarre” actually begins to make sense. Even discounting that they recognize they are not actually Mike Brown, with the incorporated living memories of decades old police racism and brutality in a sense “fresh” in their minds, then it becomes almost logical to for them to assume that the police are lying about the evidence that Brown attacked the officer. Perhaps through study of this extreme emotional contagion phenomena we could make lasting progress in "recovering" from slavery...

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

Are transwomen "liars" for not identifying with their birth sex?

If they give the concept any validity.

What concept? What isn't valid about transpeople's gender identification?

 

[Asclepias]

I never said it was the Black community. I worked with primarily white guys. They lied all the time about where they graduated from, and their experience,. They had a penchant for claiming responsibility for some good idea or task they actually didn't do, etc. I see lying as a large problem in the white community way more than the Black one. My point is that her letting people believe she was Black and not correcting them is minor. You can only assume she lied on the Black husband. People that lie dont always lie about everything. That has nothing to do with race so dont be baffled. You dont necessarily have to accept my "fish tale" theory. What you accept wont make a difference one way or the other. The fact is that it exists in our society regardless of if you want to believe it or not. We all know it came from white society because they used dishonesty to get next to the NA's and fool the poor among their own. Racism can only be eradicated by whites being honest. I dont see that happening any time soon. They cant even wrap their minds around reparations.

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

What concept?

You didnt answer my question. What kind of retarded question was that? Are you claiming you cant lie and say for instance you are married? Thats a social construct so your question sounds pretty illiterate.

I never talked about marriage. I am trying to gather whether you are calling transracial individuals liars.

You avoided my question again. When you answer it then I will answer yours.

 

[Steinlight]

As if, ESPECIALLY, you would give a white professor in that field any credence

I mentioned earlier I had met another white woman that was an expert on AA studies/history at a job. She actually majored in it. We talked often at lunch and I was thoroughly impressed with the depth of her knowledge so I know some white people know the truth that is hidden or denied by the rest of whites.

What's this professor's opinion on transracialism?

Look it up and let me know. I'm pretty sure she is all for it.

What's her name?

Did you read the OP?

I am not talking about Rachel, I am talking about the woman you know who majored in it. I didn't mean to call her a professor my mistake. What was your work colleague's view on transracialism?

 

[Steinlight]

How can you lie about race if it is a social construct?

By lying about the concept. What kind of retarded question was that?

What concept?

You didnt answer my question. What kind of retarded question was that? Are you claiming you cant lie and say for instance you are married? Thats a social construct so your question sounds pretty illiterate.

I never talked about marriage. I am trying to gather whether you are calling transracial individuals liars.

You avoided my question again. When you answer it then I will answer yours.

What's your question?