Rachel, we Hardly Knew Ye

        We are hearing a lot of media chatter regarding the ethnicity of one Rachel Dolezal, head of the Spokane Washington, branch of the NAACP.  Hers is an interesting family story, as she, blonde, blue eyed, with four black adopted sibs, has apparently recast herself as African American. 

        First of all - who cares?  Whatever her motivation may be, it hardly affects any part of her job performance, and certainly is consistent with the first line in the NAACP charter which reads, "To promote equality of rights and to eradicate caste or race prejudice among the citizens of the United States....."

       The founders of the NAACP were three individuals, one African American, W.E.B. DuBois, and two Caucasians,  Mary White  Ovington and Moorfield Storey. The group of six Americans who were the first national officers  of the newly born NAACP was comprised of five Caucasians and Dubois. Obviously, the founders of the organization made no consideration of ethnicity as a qualification (or disqualification) of any kind .

        What troubles me about this far greater than any personal issues related to Ms. Dolezal, is the minor media feeding frenzy occasioned by the recent revelation regarding her racial self identification.  In truth, both liberals and conservatives have shown their collective posteriors here.

        Some liberals are seemingly angered because they view Ms. Dolezal as a poseur,  and would seem to imply that this voids all the acknowledged good work she has done in revitalizing the organization's Spokane branch.  There also seems to be some thought (in the liberal community) that, while Caitlyn Jenner is accepted, and applauded  for finally and legitimately accepting her true nature, there is some magical (psychological?/social?/emotional?)  difference between racial self identification and gender identification, which denigrates Ms Dolezal. It would take a score of psychologists to drill down to any sort of semi-valid answer to that issue. I won't try.  I would point out that Caitlyn Jenner will profit mightily from her journey, while Rachel Dolezal surely won't.   

        Of course, it's more clear cut on the conservative side of the issue. Liberals who are critical of MS. Dolezal are hypocrites for accepting Bruce Jenner's transition to Caitlyn.  On the surface it's hard to argue their point. A closer look at real motives reveals the  typical Far Rightist schadenfreude which emerges  whenever a progressive's  non compliance with standards established  by doctrine  driven intolerance becomes newsworthy.  It is exacerbated by liberals' willingness to "pile on" in this admittedly unique instance.

        Finally, regarding Rachel Dolezal, ethnic insecurities and all - if she's a happy, functional person, doing what she loves and doing it well, than I guess Nathaniel Hawthorne's description fits, " “It was as if she had been made afresh out of new elements, and must perforce be permitted to live her own life and be a law unto herself without her eccentricities being reckoned to her for a crime.”