I'm really not interested in the culture debate over self-identification. But as a rule-of-law guy, I have to ask whether this concept destroys diversity laws and all their unofficial quotas for "looking like" America.
If Bruce Jenner can self-identify as a woman without having the chromosomes or plumbing; and if Rachel Dolezal can self-identify as African American without apparently being any part African American, aren't equal opportunity systems rendered obsolete?
Couldn't the Klan itself instantly become "diverse" by instructing its members to self-identify in comforting numbers as various minorities?
Any business could do this, couldn't it, and thus statistically "look like" America by self-identification?
Heck, couldn't Asian Americans upset that elite educational institutions are rejecting them simply self-identify as some other ethnicity/race/whatever category to escape that road block?
Isn't this whole debate rather absurd? By all means, self-identify all you want.
Be the Czar of all the Russias for all I care (although Putin may dispute that). It's your life. It's a free country.
But sympathy and support--and tolerance--for an individual person's personal issues, while laudable, shouldn't require tying our laws in knots trying to encompass every diverse niche. Should it?
Doesn't slavish defense of this self-identity concept undermine--if not destroy--lots of laws based on external judgments of who you are?
Heck, maybe those who cherish individual rights rather than group rights should jump on board this self-identification bandwagon and push it to its limits. Could it be that this Pandora's Box has to be kept open until hope escapes, too?
I eagerly await a court case where some all-white and all-male company claims it is in perfect compliance with equal opportunity laws because the appropriate percentage of its employees self-identify in the proper categories.
Remember, statistical deviation from those percentages can be used as proof of discrimination.
Who tells these people self-identifying to shut up because they are wrong and struggling against reality?
Doesn't this undermine leftist attacks on conservative women and minorities that they are not "true" members of those groups? Doesn't their self-identification trump that external judgment?
Perhaps Barack Obama is not our first African-American president if Bill Clinton sincerely self-identifies as our first African-American president. (Can we even judge sincerity?)
Do we owe Elizabeth Warren an apology?
Just who judges this whole issue under these new rules?