Books on Trans-Raciality

[Anonymous No.6697225]

What are the essential books on trans-raciality? I've been reading Butler, Derrida and Cornel West lately but they seem to overlook this issue.

[Anonymous No.6697242]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragic_mulatto

[Anonymous No.6697243]

>>6697225
Summa Theologica

[Anonymous No.6697270]

>>6697242
So, A Light in August and To Kill A Mockinbird deal with transraciality and transracialphobia? I'm not sure I understand, but it's been a while since I've read Harper Lee or Faulkner.

[Anonymous No.6697301]

>>6697270
Race is, as the proverb tells us, a social construct. Through social conditioning people adopt the 'correct' race: brown people become black, pink people become white, people with epicanthic fold become yellow and jews vacillate. Some brave souls feel they don't fit into the great colour chart and they struggle with their trans-gressive natures. Most books that deal with race involve people transracially challenging their allotted position.

[Anonymous No.6697329]

Perhaps Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man spoke to Ms. Dolezal on lower frequencies?

[Anonymous No.6697337]

I don't know of any theorists who attempt to explain such a thing.

What would you say "race" is grounded on if its fluid?

You might be able to twist Derrida enough if you consider "race" an "act" qua Butler.

If you could show race is a performative, or at least you could perform through language enough so that you construct a racial identity outside your original one.
Then we take the tension of the racial meaning you have settled yourself on qua Derrida, and show how that tension is at odds with the race of origination you could show how you have transitioned out of one performative race into another. etc etc.

[Anonymous No.6697383]

>>6697243

Summa Theologica is shit

[Anonymous No.6697385]

>>6697337
>What would you say "race" is grounded on if its fluid?

What is "gender" grounded on if its fluid?

[Anonymous No.6697421]

>>6697337
People misunderstand performativity and more over, the post-structuralist critique of identity.

These things are constructs that are in some way contingent upon discourse, repetitive practices, and shared intelligibility but they are also worked into the body and expressed by bodies. You can't equate gender to race, regardless of one's belief that they are social constructs.

Biology is to a certain extant destiny, or rather bodies have a certain destiny imprinted upon them (one that is flexible and open to change for certain groups more than others). Blackness in particular is something that is firmly entrenched on the body. Barack Obama is just as much a black man as Malcolm X and no amount of performing as post-racial will remove the fact that certain practices founded on the body have very real bodily consequences.

[Anonymous No.6697435]

Not a book, but the most thoughtful discussion I have seen of this whole Dolezal thing.
http://dailynous.com/2015/06/15/philosophers-on-rachel-dolezal/

[Anonymous No.6697447]

>>6697385
Two sexes, which actually exist and form certain paradigms. Ethnicity is as various as the environment itself.

[Anonymous No.6697464]

>>6697447
>Two sexes, which actually exist and form certain paradigms.

Judith Butler would like to have a word with you.

[Anonymous No.6697471]

This whole episode just goes to show why theory is actually necessary. People have gotten their Sartrean freedom mixed up with their post-structuralist critique of identity.

As to why blackness is different (on an ontological level) from queerness or womanliness:

http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/wanderings-slave-black-life-and-social-death

[Anonymous No.6697475]

>>6697435
> most thoughtful discussion

Looks like they're all afraid to take a clear stand.

[Anonymous No.6697480]

>>6697421
>Barack Obama is just as much a black man as Malcolm X

He's half white...

[Anonymous No.6697488]

>>6697421
>Barack Obama is just as much a black man as Malcolm X

You're basing Obama's "blackness" on racist Jim Crow laws of "just one drop of African makes you fully black."

[Anonymous No.6697489]

trickbaby, and you'd know this if you were black

[Anonymous No.6697496]

The Human Stain by Roth

[Anonymous No.6697500]

>>6697471
What's the difference? Semantics?

[Anonymous No.6697505]

M/F by Anthony Burgess if you're not triggered by ironic incest

[Anonymous No.6697510]

>>6697480
Without having to go into this, I'll just go ahead and use another example.

Al Roker is just as black as Bobby Seale.

There is an intersectionality there that accounts for their difference, but the way practices embedded on their bodies as black people have shaped their subjectivity is present in both of them.

Blackness is something you are born into and blackness is at its very core something from which there is no escape because it emerged from the point at which African bodies were turned into black bodies. Blacks can't go back home. Their entire existence is produced by the negation of home.

[Anonymous No.6697520]

>>6697500
Sartre's freedom is basically: you can do anything you want because you may be thrust into existence but that existence comes with no accompanying essence.

Foucault's work and more strongly, that of Althusser says: Essence is thrust upon existence the moment it manifests itself. You are thrown into a set of practices that creates identity and have very little say in how you can move within that identity.

[Anonymous No.6697523]

>>6697510
The buzzwords you use to identify with a school of thought do not mean what you think they mean within that school of thought. Just sayin

[Anonymous No.6697525]

>>6697475
>Because they don't clearly "pick a side" and instead focus on the complications of race, it isn't thoughtful.
/lit/ is somehow worse than /mu/. Damn.

[Anonymous No.6697528]

>>6697520
So is blackness Sartrean or Foucaultian?

[Anonymous No.6697530]

>>6697510
Obama's white ancestry probably endowed him with a higher brain capacity than an average black man, which will have shaped his subjective relationship with his perceived race.

[Anonymous No.6697540]

>>6697525
No, it just seems like they're afraid to appear wrong. Nothing they said was particularly enlightening. Everyone already knows this is confusing and it's hard to figure out what side to be on. Kukla had some interesting points but the rest was worthless.

[Anonymous No.6697541]

>>6697528
There's no form of blackness and even if there were it would not be blackness itself.

[Anonymous No.6697553]

Transgenderism and transracialism are both ridiculous whether you believe gender and race to be biologically determined or socially determined. They are logically indefensible except from the POV of a crude sort of utilitarianism.

[Anonymous No.6697557]

>>6697528
People like Fred Wilderson make a good case for differentiating blackness from other identities in a pessimistic way.

Read the link posted above:
http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/wanderings-slave-black-life-and-social-death

I think this Dolezal case is a good point at which to start thinking in different ways concerning ethics/politics and identity, difference, and recognition.

Identities matter. They are articulated in very different ways. We have varying degrees of movement within them considering their particular articulations and histories (it's easier to be assimilated into being an American that it is to be assimilated into being a woman).

It's a very difficult question. It pretty much causes most theory from the past 50 years to go into collapse.

[Anonymous No.6697560]

>>6697225
'The Human Stain' is fiction about a black person passing as a jew. 'Passing' seems to be a key word in the experience of light-brown people/near-white in the US, but I don't really know much about it since I'm yurorich.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6697563]

>>6697225
I didn't read your post but we should end capitalism.

[Anonymous No.6697565]

>>6697510
>Blackness is something you are born into and blackness is at its very core something from which there is no escape because it emerged from the point at which African bodies were turned into black bodies. Blacks can't go back home. Their entire existence is produced by the negation of home.

Can't we use this argument against transpeople? That Bruce Jenner shouldn't appropriate a legacy of oppression which s/he can't and will not fully experience? That s/he's basically just enjoying the privileges of his/her new gender.

S/he will never fully know the very real biological and social hardships of being "female." Seems to me like anti-trans-racialism will always tip into transphobia.

[Anonymous No.6697569]

>>6697540
>No, it just seems like they're afraid to appear wrong.
No one said they had to firmly 'pick a side' except you. And again, not "picking a side" doesn't make this less thoughtful than it is.
>Nothing they said was particularly enlightening.
Maybe to you, but I only said that it is the most thoughtful discussion I have seen of the issue. I said that because most people couldn't even reach that level of discourse on the subject. It's mostly been kneejerk reactions about Rachel.
>Everyone already knows this is confusing and it's hard to figure out what side to be on.
I'd love to live in your world, because I've only seen the aforementioned kneejerk reactions about Rachel.

[Anonymous No.6697573]

Remember that there are people browsing /lit/ right now that are so ignorant of biology that they races are subspecies and think that subspecies of human beings exist

Some of these people will just whine about a liberal conspiracy in biology instead of learning about evolution and taxonomy.

[Anonymous No.6697583]

>>6697560
Sounds kind of racist considering the inferior status of black Jews within the greater Jewish community and in Israel but I'll check it out.

[Anonymous No.6697584]

>>6697560
The notion of passing for a certain identity is pretty important here.

Other people may have treated Dolezal as black but she herself does not have a subjective experience of blackness rooted in birth.

She could always retreat into the space of intelligibility embedded onto her as a white person (everyone is just a human being, we're all equal, other universal subject ideology) even when faced with behaviors that shook that space of intelligibility.

People born into blackness can't hear anything really intelligible in the we're all equal human beings schtick because they know it's bullshit.

[Anonymous No.6697604]

>>6697573
We didn't need to be reminded of your presence, third grade understanding of science man. But yes, it was very nice of the teacher to give you a gold star when you got 8½ right out of 10.

[Anonymous No.6697607]

>>6697573

[Anonymous No.6697610]

>>6697565
That's what a lot of radfems think about trans-women.

I guess the question is: Is Bruce Jenner a trans-woman or a woman?

But posing it that way in the categories of identity already presupposes a certain answer.

Identity and subjectivity are even more complex and perplexing than obscure theory thinks it is.

At best, it's time to approach subjectivity in their particular manifestations as products of specific experiences, practices, and localizations.

Again, none of the categories of theory and ethics/politics allow us to come to any coherence here. They simply collapse because there is a complete in-distinction between the notion of complete subjective freedom and the concept of subjectivity formation.

[Anonymous No.6697612]

>>6697563
This is /pol/ in one sentence

[Anonymous No.6697616]

>>6697607
I miss /new/. The memes I mean, not the stupid infographics.

[Anonymous No.6697617]

>>6697604
It's b8 you dumb

>>6697607
Did you see the second part of my post? Apparently not.

[Anonymous No.6697623]

>>6697617
>b8
I'll condescend to anything I want to tyvm

[Anonymous No.6697630]

>>6697612
You seriously think /pol/ is anti-capitalist? You're fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.6698093]

Reminder that Bill Clinton was the first black president

[Anonymous No.6698173]

>>6698093
How? What? I'm Canadian, please enlighten me.

[Anonymous No.6698283]

>>6698173
it's a bit of a famous Toni Morrison quote from during Clinton's impeachment

[Anonymous No.6698367]

>>6698093
Henry Christopher you mean.

[Anonymous No.6698385]

>>6698283
Because he played the saxophone or because he was sleazy?

[Anonymous No.6698404]

>>6698385
In 1998, Nobel laureate Toni Morrison called Clinton "the first Black president", saying, "Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald's-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas"

[SYK FUK RUKUS No.6698421]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXvYlD7Gkew

Don't be indifferent. Please.

[The cats No.6698431]

>>6698404
Wow in 2015 this statement makes her a shitlord

[Anonymous No.6698522]

>>6697530
kek

[Anonymous No.6698778]

>>6698431
>>6698404
>tfw our generation's first black president grew up Hawaii and went to Harvard

Kinda funny the left wing politics got absorbed into the various identity crisis's of the rich. Funny isn't the right word, actually.

[Anonymous No.6699092]

>>6697607
If you want to be technical we're all sub-specials of a single African tribe.

[Anonymous No.6699116]

I've seen this on shelves before, but never read it. Might fit this category.

[Anonymous No.6699134]

>>6699116
>>6699116
It is pretty much blackface, only done by a liberal white in the 1960s.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6699149]

>>6697329
This woman is pathological liar and/or ashamed of her heritage. It's disturbing. This is the Bruce Jenner story all over again.

>>6697563
I did read the post, but not while I was at work.
We should. I think ending capitalism could really reduce this kind of mania.

>>6697612
This is /biz/ in a nutshell

[Anonymous No.6699227]

>>6697610
>Again, none of the categories of theory and ethics/politics allow us to come to any coherence here
The fascists did 100 years ago, as did the psychoanalysts, and the traditionalists: society and mythology has to be structured in a way that gives man subjective meaning.

We've just been ignoring it while the neurosis builds thanks to our juvenile fixation on capitalistic 'individuality'. When totalitarianism comes back in vogue this transexual phase will disappear overnight

[Anonymous No.6699255]

[Anonymous No.6699258]

>>6697301
Man I love being white

[Anonymous No.6699266]

>>6699227
How does the creation of subjective meaning via politics necessitate the elimination of transsexuality? Say what you want, fascism can get pretty lewd.

[Anonymous No.6699504]

>>6698778
>tfw the left will not move away from identity politics

[Anonymous No.6699506]

>>6699266
Because fascism is biopolitics (the fusion of life and law, the body and the nation) in extremis. All nation-states have at their core the function of creating a political body, a biological political entity.

Fascism is this core of the biopolitical state turned into its functioning norm. Nazis worked on producing life in the German political body and necessarily had to negate life that did not fit into that political body.

These neo-fascists take simplified notions concerning the pre-modern European subject as their biopolitical foundation and seek to eradicate anything outside that political body.

There's nothing traditional about what that fucking fascist is saying. It's modern at its very core: founding the nation-state on the production of a political body through biology.

[Anonymous No.6700097]

>>6699149
>This woman is pathological liar and/or ashamed of her heritage.

Yes, how dare she not want to be white? Why in the world would she EVER want to be black?

Nice racism there, white girl.

[Anonymous No.6700103]

>>6699506
Any good reading on biopolitics besides Foucault?

[Anonymous No.6700134]

>>6697488
Well if you find you have a fairly small bit of Native American blood in you, you can qualify to join the respective tribe.

[Anonymous No.6700563]

>>6700134
But isn't that the same thing as Dolezal. You can be the minority but then when stuff gets really tough you can easily back away from it.

At least that's the argument I hear.

[Anonymous No.6702296]

So does Trans-Racial studies exist yet?

[Anonymous No.6703141]

>>6700097
But race in the way she no doubt intended to represent it is something you are, rather than something you choose to be, therefore she was lying.

[Anonymous No.6703204]

>>6703141
She identified as black since age 5. She has black siblings, a black husband, black children. It makes sense for her to identify AS black, rather than saying she ironically wants to be black.

I'm not sure why you're holding Dolezal to a higher standard than Jenner.

Feminism is only doing itself a disservice by not accepting Dolezal as black.

[Anonymous No.6703233]

>>6703204
literally kill yourself if you think this woman's insane delusions are in any way related to societal gender issues that have existed across many cultures for centuries

[Anonymous No.6703303]

>>6697435
this is great

[Anonymous No.6703329]

>>6703233
This will be the death of feminism. It will be seen as a failure both in its hypocritical double-standard of accepting transpeople but not transracial identity (probably for the only fact that she's an activist and therefore a threat to the system, unlike most transpeople).

OR, they try to accept Dolezal as black and basically equate transgender people to wearing blackface.

So far every attempt to criticize Dolezal has been very sketchy semantic arguments that add up to:
1. She's fake because she's fake.
2. She lied because she's actually a fake.
3. She can't be black because being black means irreparably being a victim of racism and this is the only marker of black experience (and thereby implicitly condoning racism).

All the feminist critiques of Dolezal thus far have not stuck and people see through it. Not edgy /pol/tards, not Glenn Beck, but regular people who said "OK" to Caitlyn Jenner and now are puzzled as to why Dolezal can't be "OK" as well.

Feminism will collapse unless it can integrate Dolezal.

[Anonymous No.6703337]

>>6703233
This will be the death of feminism. It will be seen as a failure both in its hypocritical double-standard of accepting transpeople but not transracial identity (probably for the only fact that she's an activist and therefore a threat to the system, unlike most transpeople).

OR, they try to accept Dolezal as black and basically equate transgender people to wearing blackface.

So far every attempt to criticize Dolezal has been very sketchy semantic arguments that add up to:
1. She's fake because she's fake.
2. She lied because she's actually a fake.
3. She can't be black because being black means irreparably being a victim of racism and this is the only marker of black experience (and thereby implicitly condoning racism).

All the feminist critiques of Dolezal thus far have not stuck and people see through it. Not edgy /pol/tards, not Glenn Beck, but regular people who said "OK" to Caitlyn Jenner and now are puzzled as to why Dolezal can't be "OK" as well.

[Anonymous No.6703340]

>>6703329
No. Feminism has always been a white woman's movement.

[Anonymous No.6703348]

>>6703204
she also lied on her uni application as being a minority then attempted to sue when they "discriminated against her for being white"

she is obviously insane.

I think people are only not calling her out because she had done some good work
Thats fine. She is still obviously nuts and perhaps a compulsive liar.
People with massive flaws can still do good.


the issue was never when she "identified" as black, its more she lied about having a black parent.

[Anonymous No.6703370]

>>6703348
>the issue was never when she "identified" as black, its more she lied about having a black parent.

How else could she claim to identifying as black in a time when transracialism is not even known, let alone accepted?

Someone at least knows the arguments for transgender "Well, their BRAIN is opposite gender and gender isn't a social construct." But the arguments for transracialism aren't mainstream yet, so we call it "lying."

[Anonymous No.6703378]

anyone who believes in any of this shit is a retard
there are two kinds of things that you have
1) blood. if your ancestors were from africa you have african blood. if your ancestors were from italy you have italian blood. if you're descended from injuns you have native american blood. etc.
2) nationality. if you are from america and are culturally american, you are american. if you are from portugal and are culturally portuguese , you are portuguese. etc.

anyone who believes in anything other than these two is a retard.

[Anonymous No.6703382]

>>6703348
>the issue was never when she "identified" as black, its more she lied about having a black parent.

People would be saying the same thing 20 years ago about transpeople and their university applications: You're lying about being the opposite gender.

[Anonymous No.6703385]

>>6703378
What about gender?

[Anonymous No.6703394]

>>6700103
>Any good reading on biopolitics
nope

[Anonymous No.6703395]

>>6703385
if you have penis you are male
if you have vagin you are female
if you have neither you are fucked up
if you got castrated you are castrate

[Anonymous No.6703399]

>>6703395
> if you have penis you are male
> if you have vagin you are female

So if genitals determine PRESENT gender, then it's still possible to change genders.

[Anonymous No.6703401]

>>6703370
>>6703382
you're both wrong, but i respect if you adopt an identity of feeling like you are right.

you were not born right though.

[Anonymous No.6703402]

>>6703378
> 2) nationality. if you are from america and are culturally american, you are american. if you are from portugal and are culturally portuguese , you are portuguese. etc.

If I'm culturally African-American (ie, raised the hood) then I'm African-American.

[Anonymous No.6703408]

>>6697565
caitlin bb never has to know any hardships associated with womanhood cuz shes rich

progressive media is a tool of the late capitalist hegemony, wake up!

[Anonymous No.6703414]

>>6703408
yeah pretty much

[Anonymous No.6703419]

>>6703337
>if you accept transgender people you must accept the idea of transrace

No, it's inane shit like this that will be the death of feminism.

[Anonymous No.6703426]

>>6703337
Feminism is already capitulating on the issue of transpeople.

If gender is a social construct, then transpeople are seeking to make gender a biological construct. On the other hand women aren't ready to accept transwomen as fully women but they will still applaud their move because it's non-threatening and real women can act as coaches and role models to transwomen.

So basically feminists are back saying what every conservative is saying "transwomen aren't real women."

[Anonymous No.6703430]

>>6703419
No, feminism will simply abandon transgender advocacy, accept transracial identity or become a laughing stock that arbitrarily chooses what it endorses in a way that common folk cannot follow and thereby lose its mainstream acceptance.

[Anonymous No.6703441]

>>6697510
"Home"

Nationalist nazi shitlord detected

[Anonymous No.6703443]

>>6703402
if you're raised by blacks i'll allow it. otherwise you're probably just white trash. but these are all subcultures which are relatively unimportant compared to the other two.

[Anonymous No.6703446]

>>6703430
There's a scientific basis for transgenderism.

[Anonymous No.6703450]

>>6703443
>I'll allow it

Who made you an authority on anything?

[Anonymous No.6703454]

>>6703443
> i'll allow it

Feminism is little more than patronism. No wonder Marguerite Yourcenar and Doris Lessing dismissed it.

And now they're out there policing race.

[Anonymous No.6703459]

>>6703450
me
>>6703454
implying i'm feminist
but again i'll allow it

[Anonymous No.6703466]

Being white is great because society already told me I don't need an identity!

[Anonymous No.6703468]

>>6703446
Studies mostly suggest that transgender people have similar brains rather than transgender people's brains are like those of the opposite sex.

And some goes as far as to claim it's a mental illness.

Do some studies on the brains of transracial people and compare them to other races. Maybe Dolezal has a black brain? Maybe she claps on beat 2 and 4?

Again, there's no consistent argument for transgenderism while being against transracial identity. And feminists better figure this out and decide what they want.

[Anonymous No.6703488]

>>6703468
Most studies I've read suggested exactly that, that transgender peoples brains are like those of the sex they identify as.

Transgenderism is a worthy cause; transracialism is bourgeois nonsense I have no idea why people waste their time on.

[Anonymous No.6703502]

I hate niggers. I don't conisder myself a nigger, I'm actually black for real, well almost. I will be when I live in Oakland though. Right now I'm studying ebonics, robbery and I'm following Looting, the way of the nigra. This is why I hate niggers that know 5 gang signs and use them all the time, West side bloods ghettos motherFUCKERS. I'm actually trying to become black for real unlike all these faker nigras. FUCK YOU NIGGERS
So my question is, how good are my chances of becoming black for real?

[Anonymous No.6703520]

>>6703488
>using bourgeois as an insult unironically

[Anonymous No.6703521]

>>6697225
ITT:
>failure to distinguish between biological and social "constructs"
theyre not mutually exclusive either

[Anonymous No.6703527]

>>6703488
> Rametti and colleagues used diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to compare 18 androphilic male-to-female transsexuals with 19 gynephilic males and 19 typical (heterosexual) females. The androphilic transsexuals differed from both control groups in multiple brain areas, including the superior longitudinal fasciculus, the right anterior cingulum, the right forceps minor, and the right corticospinal tract. The study authors concluded that androphilic transsexuals are halfway between the patterns exhibited by male and female controls.

> The researchers found sex-typical differentiation between the MtF transsexuals and non-transsexual males, and the non-transsexual females; but the gynephilic transsexuals "displayed also singular features and differed from both control groups by having reduced thalamus and putamen volumes and elevated GM volumes in the right insular and inferior frontal cortex and an area covering the right angular gyrus."

> Johns Hopkins researchers in 2005 reported on another test of brain functioning using test performance. The study subjects included 27 MtF transsexuals and 16 control men, and the authors reported that no female-typical patterns in cerebral lateralization or cognitive performance were found within the transsexual sample

> In 2009, UCLA researchers used MRIs to examine a mixed sample of 24 non-hormone-treated male-to-female transsexuals (6 were androphilic, and 18 were gynephilic), comparing them with 30 non-transsexual males and 30 non-transsexual females. The results "revealed that regional gray matter variation in MTF transsexuals is more similar to the pattern found in men than in women," except for the "right putamen.". They concluded that "These findings provide new evidence that transsexualism is associated with distinct cerebral pattern, which supports the assumption that brain anatomy plays a role in gender identity."

Most studies find that transgender people have brains that are unique and differ from those of males and females. In other words, transgender brains are like other transgender brains.

[Anonymous No.6703533]

>>6703488
>transracialism is bourgeois nonsense

She's literally fighting for the rights of black people. That's the opposite of bourgeois. Nice try though.

[Anonymous No.6703558]

>>6703520
>being an idiot

[Anonymous No.6703561]

>>6703558
Stop posting and return to Gawker.

[Anonymous No.6703566]

>>6703527
our understanding of neuroscience is so primitive that shit like this is may as well be phrenology

[Anonymous No.6703702]

>>6703533
Really?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/rachel-dolezal-discrimination-lawsuit-786451

Now who is she really fighting for?

[Anonymous No.6703704]

>>6703533

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6703936]

>>6703204
>I'm not sure why you're holding Dolezal to a higher standard than Jenner.
I'm sure not. He's a man and she's white.

Though I take back the "disgusting" comment as too strong.

[Anonymous No.6704902]

>>6703936
You're alright, butterfly.

[Anonymous No.6705809]

>>6703441
Nazism includes nationalism already.

As well as socialism.

[Anonymous No.6705829]

>>6697607
Race makes more sense applied to insular gene pools.

Civilizations are not insular.

[Anonymous No.6705869]

>>6697301
>Race is, as the proverb tells us, a social construct
Kek, but more seriously -
>>6703348
>then attempted to sue when they "discriminated against her for being white"
How can she do this when literally every university in America does this and gets away with it.