A Harvard Crimson article from 1998 welcoming Lani Guinier to the HLS faculty says so explicitly. Of course, it’s a student newspaper and could be wrong.
It’s not the crime, it’s the cover up!
Is Elizabeth Warren the sole Native American on the HLS’s faculty?
bostonshepherd
| Sat, May 5, 2012
8:28 PM EST
Recommended by patrick.
Discuss
20 Comments . Leave a comment below.… but you’ll be in the 2000s soon
It’s not the racism, it’s the… well, yes, it is the racism…. But keep hope alive!!
Even though it happen long ago, Lizzie has not been the most forthcoming on the issue. Goes to character. And tarnishes her middle-class everyman claims. And truthfulness. And the hyper-affirmative-action-ness…1/32nd Native American? The average guy would be embarrassed to even mention that.
1/16? 1/8? 1/4? Just wondering.
A close enough relation such that it isn’t family lore?
I have no idea what that means.
She had no idea how close the relation was. It is only within the past week or so that it has become known that the relation was actually 1/32. I’m suggesting that at the time she had no basis to check off the box at all.
After having got to Harvard, she stopped checking the box. Did she then suddenly have doubts about her claimed heritage? Perhaps she should now be thanking the Brown campaign for putting some light on this issue which spurred a genealogist to track down her Native American relative and give her some closure on this issue.
In 1986, when she first ‘checked off the box’, she had been a well regarded professor and, being a woman, already a minority in the legal profession.
Sounds to me like you want her to be ‘an affirmative action’ hire… that’ll take away some of the pain of her undoubted competence and unquestioned intellect. Sucks to be you.
It’s about how their family identified and was identified and the community they come from and the culture they grew up with. The box isn’t for having a minority in your family tree a hundred years ago, it is for being a minority yourself.
“The box isn’t for having a minority in your family tree a hundred years ago, it is for being a minority yourself.”
Ah, I see. And I know if I’m a “minority myself” how, exactly…?
It’s about how their family identified and was identified and the community they come from and the culture they grew up with. (for adopted people, it’s often about how they look and sound, more than about their community and culture. I mean, not sure, but if a Swedish couple uses a sperm donor or egg donor and the baby has dark skin and curly hair, does the kid count as a minority? Or does he count as Swedish?)
Surely you aren’t saying that we should be doing DNA analysis to classify people by race. That’s what I mean by saying “it’s not abot percentages.”
You have just disqualified yourself from intelligent discussion.
I’m sure you’re just as perturbed when johnd calls our sitting senator “scotto”.
Oh and let’s not forget “mittens” and “chuckles” baker.
I think you know I actually agree with you on this one. A modicum of respect isn’t too much to ask. I’m sure Professor Warren and Senator Brown would agree.
Sorry about that john…
I have no patience with such juvenile garbage from either side of the aisle. I totally agree with kbusch — using language like “Lizzie”, “Mittens”, “Chuckles” and so on essentially disqualifies the speaker.
I prefer the New York Times standard. No honorifics — the choices are “Elizabeth Warren”, “Ms. Warren”, “Scott Brown”, and “Mr. Brown”.
and the post was a basketball shot. Please, try to discuss the actual point of this post instead of crying about some BS.
I don’t like “scotto” or “chuckles”.
I still find “mittens” amusing but that is because Mr. Romney has perfected the skill of lying while sounding authoritative, and I have never referred to him as Mittens.
Finally, I’m reminded of posts on Daily Kos from 2005 or so which described liberal blogs as a place to develop message. The use of derisive names doesn’t get us liberals any closer to defeating conservatives and saving the country.
Let me guess. I’m discriminating against Native Americans.
I think this sorta proves my point.
…You seem extraordinarily concerned with the fact that she might not be fully white and, to boot, proud of it. I bet that’s what stings you the most… that and the fact that she’s generally more qualified, makes more money and is an all around better person than you.
So much for taking pride in their diverse faculty.
…that 1/32 Cherokee helped her get hired at Harvard. Since then there has been ample evidence that she is more than qualified for her position and had gotten great reviews from peers, superiors, and students. When I was applying to colleges I was told that for admissions sure Harvard takes diversity into account, but diversity goals will not keep a student enrolled who demonstrates they cannot continue at Harvard. This is such a non-issue that I don’t even think she and the campaign should be faulted for “not handling it properly” because it never should have come up in the first place!
« Blue Mass Group Front Page
Thu 23 May 1:35 AM