There has been a lot of chatter the last few weeks about Rachel Dolezal, civil rights activist and the former head of the NAACP in Spokane, WA. Although she presented herself as African American–a bit of a prerequisite for heading up a chapter of the NAACP–it turns out that she is not black after all. Indeed she was a blonde, freckle-faced white girl born to two white parents. She has merely changed her outward appearance.
Of course, objective facts regarding biology, genetics, and ethnicity have not proven to be a deterrent to Dolezal’s insistence that she is black. “I identify as black,” she told Matt Lauer. In other words, I get to decide what is true. Reality is what I make it.
Many have pointed out the similarities between Dolezal’s case and that of Bruce Jenner and his declarations that he is now a woman. And the comparison has been (rightly) used to expose how intellectually vacuous the transgender cause really is. One cannot determine their own gender any more than a person can determine their own race. “Can the Ethiopan change his skin or a leopard his spots?” (Jer 13:23).
But, there is more going on here. And we have to be careful not to miss it. What is happening with Dolezal should not be viewed as just a rebuke of transgenderism (although it is). It is also a rebuke of the entire postmodern project of our Western culture over the last 50 years.
Dolezal is simply acting out the worldview she has learned from the Western culture within which she was raised.
No doubt she has heard, from her earliest days, that there is no objective truth. She has probably been told (repeatedly) that there are no absolute realities “out there” beyond ourselves. Over and over she has gotten the message that truth is simply a construct of the self.
And these messages probably didn’t come from her parents. They likely came from broader influences. TV shows have reminded her that her own feelings are what matters most. Pop culture has convinced her that she has to be “true to herself.” Musical lyrics have called her to a life of “authenticity”–which simply means live a life that makes you feel good and meets your personal needs.
In other words, the voices around her, for 37 years, have given her one clear message: you determine your own reality.
So, who can blame her for just living consistently with what she was taught?
Well, it turns out, just about everyone. The very culture that taught her that truth is relative has now turned on her. What it gave to her with one hand, it has taken away with the other.
And it is here that the Rachel Dolezal story exposes the silliness and the absurdity of postmodernity, and its accompanying commitment to relativism. It shows–perhaps more clearly than any other recent example–that postmodernity simply doesn’t work. It shows that we can’t create our own realities after all. We can’t make something true just because we want it to be. Any person with common sense simply knows that saying you are black doesn’t make you black.
Or, as Lev Grossman said in book NY Times best-seller The Magicians, “If there’s a single lesson that life teaches us, it’s that wishing doesn’t make it so.”
But, the Rachel Dolezal story reveals more than this. It not only shows that postmodernity is false, it shows that it is deeply and inherently hypocritical.
Postmoderns claim one thing, and yet do another. They say there is no absolute truth, but, when push comes to shove, they concede there is absolute truth after all. They pretend like reality is a construct of the self, but it turns out they don’t really live like that.
That’s why Bruce Jenner can be called a courageous hero, and, at the same time, Rachel Dolezal can be lambasted as a heretic. Postmoderns are comfortable saying people get to determine our own truth–but only when its convenient.
All of this simply reveals what the cultural elites have always known (but won’t admit), namely that they are inevitably selective about the way they apply their relativism.
When it comes to who a person sleeps with, they are relativists. When it comes to evidence in a criminal trial, they are not. When it comes to sexual identity, they are relativists. When it comes to global warming, they are not. When it comes to gender identity, they are relativists. But, unfortunately for Dolezal, when it comes to race identity, they are not. Or at least not yet.
And there is a reason for such (obvious) inconsistency. No person could really live as if reality were entirely determined by ourselves. Such individuals will always, and inevitably, keep bumping into the real world. And the real world has an irritating habit of not getting out of the way.
This hypocrisy–which is inherent to postmodernity–tells us something very important. It tells us that we humans make lousy gods. That’s what postmodernity is, after all. It is the human attempt to be god. It is the human attempt to control our own reality and determine our own truth.
But, in the end, we fail miserably. We just can’t pull it off. Our hypocrisy shows that we are only fake gods. Bad fakes.
And, as fake gods, our own “creations” are fake too. Bruce Jenner has tried to make himself a woman, but he is just a fake woman. Rachel Dolezal has tried to make herself black. But she is a fake black.
Postmodernity, then, has led to a culture of fakeness. That is the only kind of culture a fake god can create. We stride around proclaiming ourselves to be the lord of our private universes. We put on a good show. But, in the end, we are frauds.
We are like the man behind the curtain in The Wizard of Oz. We project a facade of power and control. But, in the end, we are weak, scared, and hiding.
We have to recognize, therefore, that the postmodern project, at its core, did not start fifty years ago. It started at the initial fall of Adam and Eve when they took of the fruit because they wanted to “be like God” (Gen 3:5).
The only solution is for humans to abandon the quest to be God; to abandon the quest to make our own reality. The only things that aren’t fake are things that the true God has made. And God made Bruce Jenner a man. And God made Rachel Dolezal white. “And God saw that it was good” (Gen 1:9).
dantespencer says
Contradiction is the hallmark of unbelief. It has to be. When unbelief is ultimately relying on truths to support its falsehood, there’s going to be contradictions.
Ed Dingess says
Bravo and a heart AMEN!
Collin Brooks says
It seems rare to find anything new in regards to this issue. So many Christians have responded in cyberspace so appropriately that I wasn’t expecting to hear anything new. But I did hear something new. Well done. Well done Dr. Kruger
alex says
The NAACP does not require a person to be black to head a chapter of it. Many white people suffered along with blacks to establish this organization.
As far as Postmodernism being rooted in the Fall and humans acting like they are gods as per the original temptation, I agree totally. This is why Jesus said that in order to follow Him, one must die to this type of self.
Tim Reichmuth says
Alex,
You miss the point! It is not whether a white person can head up a chapter of the NAACP, but that she claimed she was “black”!! It was this claim that fulfills postmodern thought, ” you are who you want to be” or ” live as you believe you are authentically”! Yet, when Ms. Dolezal did, she was not elevated by the culture like Jenner because the very culture she desires actually limits who she “can be” to what they, the cultural spokesman say she can be!!
Tim
jpsibley says
Tim, I’m pretty sure Alex not missing the point. He is pointing out the inaccuracy of Dr. Kruger’s phrase: “…a bit of a prerequisite for heading up a chapter of the NAACP.” Alex is pointing out that this is incorrect. Being black (or claiming to be black) is not a prerequisite for heading up a chapter of the NAACP as Dr. Kruger claims.
Bill Lonas says
Do you honestly think she would have been given the job if she didn’t claim to be black?
Teddy w. (@Eastofrockies) says
Yes.
anaquaduck says
True, humanity operates within a void within itself, something lost long ago & proceeds to fill it with all manner of ideas & social norms throughout the ages.
It also reminds me of the film “Jerry Maguire” where he has an ‘enlightenment’ moment, writes a manifesto then finds himself on the outer, lost & alone. Ultimately being made complete though can only be accomplished by God, in Him there is no hypocrisy.
Grant says
“The only solution is for humans to abandon the quest to be God; to abandon the quest to make our own reality. The only things that aren’t fake are things that the true God has made. And God made Bruce Jenner a man. And God made Rachel Dolezal white. ‘And God saw that it was good’ (Gen 1:9).”
True, but the way postmodernity selectively/hypocritically deals with reality unfortunately gives them an “easy” way out: ignore or even silence (perhaps not too long from now) the announcement of their hypocrisy, and carry on with their agenda.
It arises from the fallen, sinful nature and heart of man, and only the Father, Son and Holy Spirit can undo that by sovereign grace.
Christy R Maniyattu says
The culture of hypocrisy today is highly encouraged everywhere prominently through the media arena. The word is spreading everywhere that you need to be who you want to be. The place for the fear of God is diminishing from everywhere. Thanks Dr.Kruger for taking up this topic and screening it against the requisite of the established word of God. God bless.
Russell says
The Weekly Standard has pointed out that Dolezal claims she was raised in a teepee and hunted wild game using a bow and arrow. She must also believe she is an American Indian of some kind. So, the story has many weird facets to it.
Katherine A. says
I love that you ended your post with “God saw that it was good.” His creation is good.
And God is good.
In our culture, where we are told we are unloving for not affirming the fakeness, it is encouraging to remember that we are not trying to speak truth merely to be right. But rather, we want to speak the truth, because we believe in the God who is truth. And he is a good God. And we can trust him.
It is good (and loving) to affirm what he says is good.
Bography says
Goog. The Jewish sages say that when God days “VERY good,” it was after he created both the good and evil inclinations in man.
Bography says
Sorry for spelling! goog = good, days = says
dantespencer says
That’s not helpful at all because such Jews would not have been wise at all. God did not create evil inclinations in man. To say that is very different from him ordaining the Fall.
Chris says
I agree completely with your article, but a line of thinking has started to bother me, and you articulated it perfectly in your closing paragraph. Here is my thought/question: In what sense has God made Bruce Jenner a man that he calls “good”? Forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but the verse you quoted from Genesis comes before the fall; but now, after the fall, we do not look at diseases, distress, famine and plague as “good” things that God creates. We bow to God’s sovereignty while acknowledging the reality of sin in our broken world. If we treat illnesses, both “physical” and “mental” (pardon the rough distinction), then what stops us from describing transgender as a mental illness that should be treated?
Here’s another way to phrase the question: what causes us to say that gender/sex has not been affected by the fall? If it has been affected, then why can we not treat it through scientific advances, in the same way we treat headaches, cancer and schizophrenia?
dantespencer says
You’ve asked a large question and I personally cannot respond to all of it off the top of my head, but I’ll offer something and hope it’s helpful. Beginning with your second paragraph that restates your thoughts, the Fall has indeed affected us in our entire being in addition to creation itself (Rom 8:19ff). That would mean the Fall has corrupted humanity with regard to gender though God in his common grace restrains our sinfulness so that we do not all express our depravity in the same ways and do not sin as greatly as we could. Sexual sins cannot be dealt with in the same way as a headache because sin comes from our heart – it is moral in nature – whereas physical illnesses do not necessarily have any relation to a depraved will. Psychology, up until not that many years ago, did identify homosexuality as a mental illness. I don’t know exactly what they said or now say about transgender – you could look it up – but I strongly suspect it was also considered a perversion. Psychology is a “soft” science and when they don’t know the Creator, they will never have a sound view of his fallen creatures (see Calvin, Institutes I.i.1-3). I suspect psychology changes their judgment of things the way the Supreme Court changes their rulings – through the influence of public opinion.
Rev. Bryant J. Williams III says
Dear Mike,
Postmodernism, as you aptly put, does not believe that there is objective truth, but truth is subjective. In fact, the philosopher Berkeley, as well as, Mary Baker Eddy of Christian Science fame, believed that a person made their own reality. Therefore, the truth is what a person wants it to be.
Today, a person is born either male or female. A person is born black, brown, red, yellow or white. These are conditions that one is born with. What a person thinks about himself or herself is not able to be empirically tested. It is based on feelings that are notoriously difficult to, if not impossible, to empirically test. Jeremiah 17:9, “the heart is deceitful above all things; and desparately wicked; who can know it?” As far as I know I am not aware of any empirical studies that indicate otherwise. What is clear is that a person can change his/her behavior. I Corinthians 6:11 is quite clear on that score.
What needs to be done is not accept the premise behind the argument; that gets us nowhere.
Chris says
I suppose I’m disheartened that you decided not to clear my first comment, in which I described a growing question that’s been forming recently in my mind. Not that it matters much, but blogs lose much of their credibility when they won’t post dissenting opinions. Mine was a genuine question; I am a reformed believer, and I was hoping to find help and an answer to my question. I had hoped that you or others might be able to help me. But you’ve robbed me of that possibility and forced me to continue on my own, silently pondering without any guidance. I’m not sure in what way that’s preferable to simply posting my question and allowing others to weigh in on it. Oh well. No need for this comment to clear; I’m not sure how to email you directly, so take this comment as an email.
anaquaduck says
I find this site to be credible, even if feedback is not forthcoming.I doubt anyone is robbing you, maybe Dr Kruger is a busy man & passing on your 2nd email is confirmation of that.
Even if gender has been effected by the fall, the saving power of the gospel & the gift of the spirit enables us to say no to ungodliness.This is in regard to the alleged gay gene.God is mighty to save & does.
In both cases, the individuals decided to go against what God has made good to fulfill a desire that has taken control of their lives, a desire that is contrary to what God made good. Although the fall decimated our relationship with Him due to our temptation & pride God in his goodness still provides his created order to be a blessing despite the terrible curse.
I dont know if this helps, sometimes I connect to the article feedback icon at other times I dont, this time I just happened to click on & noticed extra feedback.
Chris says
Yes, I suppose I should’ve waited longer for my 1st comment to clear. Patience isn’t always my best virtue 🙂 Thanks for your response. I do have one thought:
Against your statement, “the individuals decided to go against what God has made good to fulfill a desire that has taken control of their lives, a desire that is contrary to what God made good,” I would say that manhood and womanhood are not evil; and in the same way that a sick person desires health, to deny him that health is not to say that he is desiring that which is contrary to what God made good. I think the transgender issue differs from homosexuality in this way: whereas God does declare homosexuality to be sinful, there isn’t the same declaration about manhood and womanhood, or as the case may be for the transgendered person, health when we they sick (ie. “health” or their “proper” gender when they are “sick” with the “wrong” gender.) So I don’t think we can quite make the correlation that you’re drawing between homosexuality and transgendered individuals.
anaquaduck says
It can get technical, but in terms of post modernism the message is follow your dream, be what you want to be, except when we say so even if it is a contradiction or hypocrisy.
We can fall in love with a culture or a car or a TV show as much as wanting to be something or someone that we are not. All these things can be good in & of themselves but that doesn’t mean that is God’s purpose for us.
Modern psychology tends to hinge on evolutionary ideas which society takes in without question.This might be a good site if you want to get into the brain, thoughts, chemicals side of it. It has lots of follow up & connected articles.
http://creation.com/transgender-arguments-hinge-on-sex-versus-gender
Websites can be funny, one moment still & quiet then they can come to life like a valley of dry bones. Good to chat too…
Mike says
This is a fantastic article and one that highlights clearly the contradiction that man engages in to make “reality” what he wants it to be. As Dr. Kruger posits, regardless of how much man tries to live to the “anything is good” mantra, they are unable to do so consistently. No one lives that way, regardless of how hard they try. And I was especially impressed with the way Dr. Kruger sets forth the inconsistencies that society lives under. I think it would be amusing for someone to produce a tv program or play that showed a day in the life of a postmodernist pointing out every decision and the thought processes that led to them. It would vividly show the absurdity of that world view. Thank you Dr. Kruger for an excellent piece!