A professor in California who used Native American heritage to secure grants and sell books is facing calls to resign after admitting that she is not actually Mohawk. The Telegraph has the story.
Elizabeth Hoover, a professor of sociology, confessed in a statement on Monday that she was not a member of the Mohawk and Mi’kmaq tribes.
Prof. Hoover’s purported Native American heritage boosted her career, paving the way for fellowships, academic posts and getting her work published.
“Before taking part in programmes or funding opportunities that were identity-related or geared towards under-represented people I should have ensured that I was claimed in return by the communities I was claiming,” she admitted.
However, her mea culpa failed to satisfy 300 students and academics at the prestigious University of California, Berkeley, who demanded she quit.
“I am a white person who has incorrectly identified as Native my whole life, based on incomplete information,” she wrote.
“In uncritically living an identity based on family stories without seeking out a documented connection to these communities.” [sic]
As an academic, she said, she should have conducted thorough research into her ancestry.
“I interpreted inquiries into the validity of my Native identity as petty jealousy or people just looking to interfere in my life,” she added.
“As such, I allowed my ego to drive my response and answered these inquiries with my family’s story, rather than doing the proper research for the correct documentation to unequivocally prove that I was descended from these communities.”
One academic has called for tougher repercussions. Desi Small-Rodriguez, an associate professor of sociology at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that resigning was insufficient.
Prof. Small-Rodriguez, who is of Northern Cheyenne and Chicana descent, tweeted: “The opportunity to resign is not appropriate. Elizabeth Hoover has admitted to professional misconduct, research ethics violations, harming Native students and colleagues, and violating tribal research sovereignty!”
It’s amazing how many people want to be numbered among the oppressed these days.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So objective biological truth is important when it comes to ethnic identification but not sexual identification? How was she “outed”? Perhaps one of her siblings got results from DNA testing and said, “Hey, wait a minute, sis.” Never underestimate the power of sibling rivalry!
I identify as a beneficiary of a trust with billions of investments but I haven’t had any money yet.
How come?
You forgot to answer the e-mails from Nigeria.
Haha, love this ( including video with James Corbett, 24mins ) and I especially love Bob’s cartoon. I’m digging the fact I’m not alone in clocking those dreadful sausage fingers! He’s really not popular at all is he? I know that even anti-monarchists when the Queen was alive wouldn’t have treat her in this fashion, the shouts and pelting with eggs. The monarchy basically died with her as far as I’m concerned. Hopefully it’s not a case of ”long live the King”. I’ve had more than enough of him already.
”I wonder how many of the naïve, moronic NPCs in “Normieland” have any clue about the truth as they clap or bang their pans or whatever dumb-arse act of servitude they’ve been programmed to do today?
Oh year, swearing out loud, or something? I think even I can manage that!
If you haven’t worked it out yet, all these things are connected – COVID, “climate change”, CBDCs… The smart ones are well-prepared for what comes next.
So, rather than “Meet King Charles”, meet King Sausage Fingers I instead – the inbred, pedo-loving, WEF puppet who is really Britain’s next Head of State.”
https://metatron.substack.com/p/not-my-king
I have to say I was disappointed by this offering from Joel Smalley. I know what he means and have been aware of all Charlie’s New- age twittery over the decades. I know Charles is a bit of a pillock but somehow cannot quite sign up to the nastiness implied in the Corbett report and Bob’s cartoon.
Maybe it’s the obstinate church-goer in me but this was just horrible and I want nothing to do with it. It pains me to write this because I’m as big an objector to the current madness as anyone here (and I have the worn shoe leather and ruined fingernails from posting leaflets to prove it).
There has to be a way to win our case without descending to this level.
Yes Jane, it seems the monarchy is quite the contentious subject. I was always very pro when the Queen was alive ( admittedly I was very ignorant about the history of the royal family tbh ) but with Charles we have a completely different kettle of fish and he is not a likeable chap, due to all that we know about him both historically and his visions for the future. In fact, I’ve disliked him since his marriage to Diana went down the pan and all the facts that were subsequently revealed around that particular subject.
However, with my above post I am taking a leaf out of the resident Jeremy Clarkson Fanclub’s book, and if they can defend him for wishing Meghan whatserface would walk down the street naked and have poo chucked at her then I shall defend the hideous portrait of Charles by Bob, in all of its beautiful originality and attention to detail.
I don’t see Bob’s cartoon as nasty.
It harks back to many 18th/19th century cartoons of previous Monarchs who thoroughly deserved to be lampooned.
I’m just slightly surprised Bob left out any reference to Charles’ WEF/Net Zero obsession.
Why does it matter? She identified as one. If people have a problem with that, it tells us more about them and their extremist prejudices than anything. I myself identify as a black veteran astronaut of 178 Apollo missions.
Sometimes I feel like identifying as a Tourettes sufferer just to see what it takes to get banned…
Firkin hell Mogs.
And I don’t know if anyone’s seen this video yet of a soldier at Cardiff castle collapsing today, but it definitely isn’t ”fainting”, not that I’ve ever witnessed anyway. Usually people regain consciousness as soon as they hit the deck but this guy stays completely out for the count, as you can see by his lack of movement or tension in his body as they drag him away. And no I’m not suggesting the you-know-what did it, but I would like to hear some follow up on how this guy’s doing. Any updates would be appreciated. They didn’t even check his breathing.
https://theglobalherald.com/news/soldier-faints-during-coronation-ceremony-at-cardiff-castle/
I don’t know what caused this soldier to collapse but I do know from personal experience that when a person faints, they don’t necessarily regain consciousness when they hit the ground, they can be unconscious for a few minutes after they faint.
What if she had said she identifies as Mohawk?
EDIT can’t get out of the habit of commenting before reading the comments
I identify as no one but myself
************************************
Stand in the Park Make friends & keep sane
Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am
Elms Field
near play area
Wokingham RG40 2FE
I’m struggling to understand the difference between identifying as something you clearly aren’t, and being a delusional fantasist.
Still ….. we have learned something: apparently it’s OK for someone who is clearly male to announce they’re really a woman. But it’s not OK for someone who may (or may not) have a few Native American genes to decide that they have that ancestry.
So I guess any idea that I (who looks female, white with freckles and red hair) can identify as a black man wouldn’t be acceptable. But I could identify as a man?
Is that right?
Fortunately, I’m not a delusional fantasist.
Did you here about the bloke who identified as a pair of curtains.. the shrink told him to pull his-self together..