What's new
By:
Filters

Culturally Insensitive man bets a million dollars...

I just want to understand something... So ****ing what if EW said that she had some NA ancestry? How is that something to condemn her for? How is she the villain here?
 
One Brow said:
My employer does. I was not consulted on my bio they put online.

Warren has already made clear that she signed up for an informal list, not on a formal document.
Click to expand...
Have you ever read your bio? Would you dispute it if it weren't correct?
 
One Brow said:
Funny, I don't recall defending her, unless you mean I was correcting inaccurate statements. Yes, after years of heckling, she got upset (aka, "felt stongly") enough to get a DNA test, which I agree was not a good decision.

Politically, Warren's Native American ancestry has only been something the right used to make fun of her, never something she used to advance her career. This has been documented more than once in this thread, and by posters other than myself. However, that's only factual, and I suppose you don't care as much about facts as about smears on this particular issue. So, enjoy the smearing.
Click to expand...
Lol nice little ad hominem, and great deflection. Fact is, it made her look better politically so she never corrected it, let her employer use it which made her more valuable in their eyes. Ever heard of sins of omission?
 
Bulletproof said:
I just want to understand something... So ****ing what if EW said that she had some NA ancestry? How is that something to condemn her for? How is she the villain here?
Click to expand...

It's because a white woman claimed to be Native American and Harvard used her to fill a diversity void after the Griswold 9 protests. I think that was some bs, and I know she brought it up, because it's in two articles directly after she was hired.

Outside of that, I don't really think she needs to be condemned for anything - just made fun of for her backfire of a PR move. It's cute though that her family story is that real to her.
 
Last edited:
Archie Moses said:
It's because a white woman claimed to be Native American and Harvard used her to fill a diversity void after the Griswold 9 protests. I think that was some bs, and I know she brought it up, because it's in two articles directly after she was hired.

Outside of that, I don't really think she needs to be condemned for anything - just made fun of for her backfire of a PR move. It's cute though that her family story is that real to her.
Click to expand...
SHE WAS TOLD BY HER FAMILY SHE HAD NATIVE AMERICAN ANCESTRY!
 
Pssst...

however small, she DOES have Native American ancestry.
 
Bulletproof said:
SHE WAS TOLD BY HER FAMILY SHE HAD NATIVE AMERICAN ANCESTRY!
Click to expand...

I was told by my family I'm related to William Wallace. I've brought that up zero times in school and work.

I don't know, man. It's kind of an eye roll for me that "she was told by her family" so it's cool. It's deceptive and dishonest to me and undermines actual Native Americans (Cherokee Nation says so.) I mean, I'm 100% for sharing that with family and all, but there's a line to me.
 
Archie Moses said:
I was told by my family I'm related to William Wallace. I've brought that up zero times in school and work.

I don't know, man. It's kind of an eye roll for me that "she was told by her family" so it's cool. It's deceptive and dishonest to me and undermines actual Native Americans (Cherokee Nation says so.) I mean, I'm 100% for sharing that with family and all, but there's a line to me.
Click to expand...
She had no reason to believe it wasn't true. And it wasn't entirely not true. She didn't know until she got the DNA test to what degree it was or was not true. Almost all of us base our understanding of our ancestry on what we are told it is by our family.

She told no lies. She was not deceptive.
 
Bulletproof said:
She had no reason to believe it wasn't true. And it wasn't entirely not true. She didn't know until she got the DNA test to what degree it was or was not true. Almost all of us base our understanding of our ancestry on what we are told it is by our family.

She told no lies. She was not deceptive.
Click to expand...

She was told family stories that held very little weight (and now have been proven to be folklore stories.)

We base our ancestry on written records and if we don't have them we usually say we don't know, or keep the family stories amongst our family. Family stories do not mean it's true. Stories do not hold weight as being factual. She has no proof or knowledge as to who in her family was actually Native American. She's no more Native than the average white person.

It's fine if you don't have a problem with her telling people in the past (and even today) she's Native American. I hope you get, at least to some degree, why it's deceptively ignorant of her to fall back on, "well, my family told me." She should have never have brought this up in the past. She should have never been listed as Native American in Association of American Law Schools, Harvard, her cook book that's signed EW - Cherokee, etc. It was wrong, stop making excuses for it.

Gawd, this is an embarrassing story. My old man has told my brother's and I a story of how he was attacked by bigfoot in Mapleton Canyon while deer hunting in the 70s. It was getting dark, he felt he was being watched and followed while walking back to his motorcycle. He started to run (he was a college sprinter btw) and whatever it was chased him and caught him easily. It knocked him to the ground and it knocked him out. He woke up later, realized where he was, ran back to his bike and headed home. There is no difference in this story that my hold man swears by than the EW family stories (especially after the DNA tests.) I don't use his story to tell people bigfoot exists, and I have no reason not to believe my old man. I don't though, because it's just a story.

Telling family stories to advance one's career or to list them as minority status is wrong. She lied, knowingly or not. She was deceptive - she had people believe she was Native American and she's not. Her family stories are poor excuses.

Elizabeth Warren has repeatedly identified herself as Cherokee. From 1986 to 1995 she listed herself as Native American in the Association of American Law Schools directory of law professors. After gaining tenure, she insisted University of Pennsylvania categorize her as Native American, too. She then identified herself as Native American to Harvard - in her application and hiring materials and in other forms beyond.

Harvard has insisted that Warren's Native American ancestry made no impact on their hiring decisions. Yet, the university immediately held up the recruitment of Warren, a "Native American woman," to push back against claims that they were insufficiently diverse and diffuse pressure to hire more people of color. Warren was described as Harvard Law's "first woman of color" in a 1997 Fordham Law Review article. She even published multiple recipes to a cookbook, Pow Wow Chow: A Collection of Recipes from Families of the Five Civilized Tribes - all signed, "Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee."

Warren has consistently struggled to substantiate her claims to Native American ancestry (beyond her grandfather's "high cheekbones"). Warren asserts her mother was "part Cherokee and part Delaware," yet a prominent Cherokee genealogist who traced Warren's maternal ancestry all the way back to the Revolutionary War era found no evidence of any Native American heritage. Some relatives have publicly disputed Warren's narrative about their family. And, of course, Warren phenotypically presents as white.

For these reasons, she has faced consistent accusations that her claims to Native American ancestry were either mistaken or cynical. The president of the United States mockingly refers to her as "Pocahontas" - and told Warren he would pay $1 million dollars to a charity of her choice "if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian." He precited Warren would decline this challenge. It would have been better for her if she had.





What the test shows (and doesn't)

According to the test, Warren's DNA is between 1/64 and 1/1032 Columbian, Mexican and/or Peruvian (used as proxies for measuring Cherokee heritage for reasons described in the report); between 0.1 percent and 1.5 percent of her DNA may be Native American in origin; she may have had a Native American ancestor between six to 10 generations back.

Warren depicted this as "slam dunk" proof that she really is of Native American ancestry. This is a base-rate fallacy. In fact, the average white person in America has 0.18 percent Native American DNA - meaning they could be described as about 1/ 556 Native American or as having a Native American ancestor nine to10 generations back. Warren does not seem to have a unique claim to Native American heritage over and above the typical white American.



. The president has refused, insisting he won the wager. Unfortunately, he is correct: although Warren did take the test it did not prove she is "an Indian."





And so, rather than neutralizing Trump's attacks, it is now has made it far easier to portray Warren as a phony: She appropriated Native American heritage for years in both private and professional settings.

Confronted with evidence that her claims were illegitimate (her DNA is comparable to the average white; she has no other empirical proof of heritage) - Warren nonetheless claimed vindication, emulating Trump's "post-truth politics."

Throughout, she failed to challenge (and in fact, reinforced) Trump's false narratives about race, Affirmative Action and the quality of the minority applicants who benefit from it.

Rather than using her platforms and energies to discuss her own agenda, hold Trump accountable for his record and proposals, or speak to constituents' priorities - we are instead discussing Warren's (lack of) Native American ancestry because she herself dragged the issue into the spotlight.

Elizabeth Warren tried to play Trump's game. She lost. Democrats, take heed.

Musa al-Gharbi is a Paul F. Lazarsfeld fellow in sociology at Columbia University.
Click to expand...
 
IMG_72501_zpsbwdon1nl.jpg
 
Archie Moses said:
She was told family stories that held very little weight (and now have been proven to be folklore stories.)

We base our ancestry on written records and if we don't have them we usually say we don't know, or keep the family stories amongst our family. Family stories do not mean it's true. Stories do not hold weight as being factual. She has no proof or knowledge as to who in her family was actually Native American. She's no more Native than the average white person.

It's fine if you don't have a problem with her telling people in the past (and even today) she's Native American. I hope you get, at least to some degree, why it's deceptively ignorant of her to fall back on, "well, my family told me." She should have never have brought this up in the past. She should have never been listed as Native American in Association of American Law Schools, Harvard, her cook book that's signed EW - Cherokee, etc. It was wrong, stop making excuses for it.

Gawd, this is an embarrassing story. My old man has told my brother's and I a story of how he was attacked by bigfoot in Mapleton Canyon while deer hunting in the 70s. It was getting dark, he felt he was being watched and followed while walking back to his motorcycle. He started to run (he was a college sprinter btw) and whatever it was chased him and caught him easily. It knocked him to the ground and it knocked him out. He woke up later, realized where he was, ran back to his bike and headed home. There is no difference in this story that my hold man swears by than the EW family stories (especially after the DNA tests.) I don't use his story to tell people bigfoot exists, and I have no reason not to believe my old man. I don't though, because it's just a story.

Telling family stories to advance one's career or to list them as minority status is wrong. She lied, knowingly or not. She was deceptive - she had people believe she was Native American and she's not. Her family stories are poor excuses.
Click to expand...
You grew up LDS in Utah. You think people get their lineage from written records most of the time. That's an LDS thing. Most people get their family history from their family.

There are many many people who are like "I'm Scottish" who only know that because their name sounds Scottish and they were told they were Scottish.

You're saying what she did was wrong. Cool. I don't think she intentionally mislead anyone. I think you care about this because it's part of the "identity politics" narrative that is being driven by conservative pundits. Have fun with it!
 
LogGrad98 said:
Lol nice little ad hominem, and great deflection.
Click to expand...

If you are going to pull out logical fallacies, use them correctly. Commenting on your actual behavior in this discussion is not an ad hominem. I'mnot sure what you think I was deflecting from.

LogGrad98 said:
Fact is, it made her look better politically so she never corrected it,
Click to expand...

If she never used it politically, how could it make her look better?

LogGrad98 said:
let her employer use it which made her more valuable in their eyes.
Click to expand...

How does that help Warren? It has no effect on professorial pay, and offers no job security.
 
Bulletproof said:
You're saying what she did was wrong. Cool. I don't think she intentionally mislead anyone. I think you care about this because it's part of the "identity politics" narrative that is being driven by conservative pundits. Have fun with it!
Click to expand...

I didn't even know who EW was until I read about her releasing her DNA. I think I heard that Trump was calling someone Pocahontas but had not idea what that meant other than he was probably being a racists to an Native American.

To me, this isn't a conservative or liberal thing. This is a white lady who's tried to take credit for something she's not and it's as simple as that. The fact that she doubled down with her DNA test proves that she's the one making this identity politics. She's identified with family stories more than reality.

We're obviously not going to agree on this. I'd bet my life on it I'd think the same damn thing about her if she was a conservative though. Would you still have your same stance on it?
 
I'll say one more thing. I see the outrage over EW as similar to another type of completely disingenuous outrage. It's something that is very peculiar to me. It's when a person or group acts outraged with another person or group over something that the the outraged party has historically, sometimes very specifically, not been at all concerned over, and that the now-accused party has held as an important value.

Example is when Muslim extremist groups bomb innocent people intentionally. It's an establish part of their overall strategy. Western powers condemn the brutality and cruelty towards innocent people. Muslim extremists response is GFYS, we don't care. Fast forward, Western powers are using military force against the militant Muslim extremists. The militants intentionally embed themselves into civilian populations and use what looks like religious, medical, etc. buildings as military bases. Western powers take extreme measures to try to avoid civilian casualties. But they aren't perfect. They hit a school or a hospital they thought was actually a military base (and might have been serving that dual purpose) and now the militants who bomb buses and daycares 100% to kill innocent people are shoving dead children in our faces screaming about the injustice of it all, how dare the western powers.

Anyway, that's pretty much how I'm reading AMs posts in this thread, the militant Muslim extremist who has never cared about dead women and children before shoving a dead child in our face and pretending to be outraged.
 
Archie Moses said:
She was told family stories that held very little weight (and now have been proven to be folklore stories.)
Click to expand...

Evidence that they are untrue?

Archie Moses said:
She's no more Native than the average white person.
Click to expand...

Factually untrue, although I realize you don't care about the facts here anyhow.

Archie Moses said:
Telling family stories to advance one's career or to list them as minority status is wrong.
Click to expand...

Warren did not do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top