Is it a hate crime? Are you sure?

[Andara Bledin]

Never mind the amount of damage she's now caused to the culture she appropriated...

I'm just going to focus on this part right here.

Why the fuck does anyone care if someone adopts a culture into which they were not raised?

This idea of "culture appropriation" is part of the problem and only further serves to "us vs them" society into little boxes that can be played one against the other and to help keep minorities in "their place."

Nobody calls it "culture appropriation" when a person moves to another country and adopts their ways. Nobody calls it "culture appropriation" when a person converts their religion and adopts their practices. Nobody calls it "culture appropriation" when a person changes social status and adjusts their social presentation to adapt to their new status.

As a society, as a race, humanity needs to get the idea that culture is some zero-sum game out of their heads and accept that people will shift their culture, their ethnicity, various presentations as befits their personal interests and that the rest of us should keep the fuck out of their business and expect them to keep to keep the fuck out of ours.

Did Dolezal game the system? Maybe. I'm not a psychiatrist and have way too shallow a glimpse at her life, so can't speak to her motivation. That the system likely afforded her things that it wouldn't have if she were still presenting as a white woman is a problem with the system, not her choice of presentation.

Did she do it for personal benefit? Yes. Everything we do is for personal benefit and anyone who claims otherwise is lying to themselves. What matters is if her personal benefit came at the expense of another and if the lies she told had any affect on that.

Did she lie about her family? Absolutely. Guess what; most of us have done the same. Mostly to avoid stupid questions because most of our family business is just that. For example, when people ask me about siblings, I tell them I have a brother. I don't mention my dad's two kids from a previous marriage. I don't mention the kid my mom had before they got together. I don't mention the two other kids my dad had while cheating on my mom. I know they're out there, so saying that I only have a brother is a blatant lie, but it's also meaningless to the interaction.

[s_stabeler]

it's not specifically adopting a culture you are not raised in- as I believe I mentioned earlier, I don't care if you adopt whatever culture you like if you genuinely mean it- it's when someone adopts a culture when it suits them.

[TheHuckster]

I don't necessarily agree with the notion that you can't adopt multiple cultures at once. And certainly you can be persecuted as two different cultures or races at different times.

In a hypothetical situation, let's suppose I have a skin complexion that hints that I'm part black, part white. It doesn't matter what culture I've adopted, yet I could go into a black business and be ridiculed for being "too white" for their establishment. The same day I could go into a white business and be ridiculed for being "too black." I could accuse both of being discriminatory, and I'd be right in either case. If I do, I'm not choosing my race or ethnicity when it suits me but rather I'm calling out two cases of discrimination that are equally racist.

In the case of people who grew up in a multicultural family certainly one could have a mix of traditions and customs that don't identify with one single ethnicity or culture.

In the case of this woman, from what has been stated about her so far, she certainly seems to be a piece of work, though, especially on the hypocritical "white people can't speak on race issues" front, but I disagree with the blanket idea that one can't adopt two cultures at the same time.

[Gravekeeper]

Why the fuck does anyone care if someone adopts a culture into which they were not raised?

You're really off base here. This isn't about "culture appropriation". She co-opted someone else's struggle against oppression. One with a long, ugly and sad history that's still a festering sore on America. Then she straight up made shit up pretending said oppression and racism was happening to her. While lying her way into two positions of power ( not to mention lying to the cops, courts, etc ) and claiming to speak with an authority on the matter she does not have.

She did not adopt another culture. She put on a disguise, snuck in the back door when no one was looking and started yelling "Fire!". Then spent the next couple years telling people about how horrible that fire was and how much she suffered during it so she totally knows all about fire. But you're not allowed to talk about fire because you've never experienced it.

No one would give a rat's ass if she had honestly wanted to work with and in the black community and became a part of it. But she didn't. She stole someone else's heritage so she could feel special and bask in the attention of victim hood.

At the same time, she's given right wing racists some bullshit ammunition and an example they can point too. Being black can't be that bad if white people are pretending to be black, right? Look at all the fake hate crimes she made up! I bet most of them are fake! Etc, etc, that website, etc.

[protege]

She did not adopt another culture. She put on a disguise, snuck in the back door when no one was looking and started yelling "Fire!". Then spent the next couple years telling people about how horrible that fire was and how much she suffered during it so she totally knows all about fire. But you're not allowed to talk about fire because you've never experienced it.

This. There's a big difference in being proud of one's heritage...and making shit up. She's claiming a heritage and racism that is NOT her own, undermining legit racism cases in the process. She didn't do it "for the struggle." No, she did it for a job, and some prestige--never mind the attention. Now she's upset that someone called her out on it.

[Andara Bledin]

Wow, there's a couple of mind-readers in this thread.

I'm not even going to bother attempting to debate fantasies only vaguely supported by the facts in evidence.

[Gravekeeper]

I'm not even going to bother attempting to debate fantasies only vaguely supported by the facts in evidence.

Really? You're going to flounce with a backhanded remark like that?

The facts say she knowingly used deception to get where she is, is quite willing to lie not just to others but also to authorities and under oath and she abused her position to affect and harass others. In ways so hypocritical they sound like comedy skit from In Living Colour.

Regardless of how fucked or not fucked her personal life or family life is/was it does not excuse what she has done. She's, obviously, not the only one on the planet with problems. She is, however, one of the few that decided to weave a grand web of bullshit to the harm and detriment of others. Without a shred of shame or remorse. Even now that she's been caught.

Even now its been found that some of her art work is stolen/copied from other people. Artwork which, yes, she sells.

And no, she did not reference or credit these other works. She claims hers are completely original.

[Andara Bledin]

When people are presenting what they imagine to be the case as undisputed facts, what point is there to engaging?

As for the art, the mixed media stuff is harder to class as mixed media uses other people's works and is supposed to remix then into alternate forms. Where the dividing line between a remix and copy are I cannot say - visual arts is a lot more permissive a world than, say, the music industry as regards such things. The paintings she claims as original and hers, though; that's just wrong.

[Gravekeeper]

When people are presenting what they imagine to be the case as undisputed facts, what point is there to engaging?

You're still not saying which "facts" you're referring too.

As for the art, the mixed media stuff is harder to class as mixed media uses other people's works and is supposed to remix then into alternate forms. Where the dividing line between a remix and copy are I cannot say.

I can, she claims copyright and does not credit or even admit to the source material. And she is selling it. US copyright law is pretty clear on this one. At best you could classify her crap as a derivative work. By law, only the original copyright owner can authorize someone else to create and sell a derivative work. The law is very explicit on this point. There is no special protection or exception for mixed media, collages, etc.

Even if she did credit her source, Fair Use does not permit commercial usage of copyrighted material. Only scholarly usage such as for the purposes of review, news reporting, etc. She would still need the permission of the original copyright holders. Which she obviously does not have.

So yes, she is violating copyright law. I mean, she doesn't honestly abide by anything else. Why would she start with copyright law?