You mean with saudi Arabia??

FAKE.

NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWS

Haha

What was the name of that news website that rates 4 news articles a day? Tim and Luke meet them at Anarcapoko last year.

!rank

https://twitter.com/michael_ahrens/status/1051843481013014528

https://web.archive.org/web/20181015103125/https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/warren-addresses-native-american-issue/YEUaGzsefB0gPBe2AbmSVO/story.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20181015103125/https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/warren-addresses-native-american-issue/YEUaGzsefB0gPBe2AbmSVO/story.html

There's nothing really false in these articles and they acknowledge how weak the results are. But if you do a survey of headlines today you'll find they're all very misleading.

Once you get to 1-2% of these DNA tests you're frequently talking about noise and random factors in the analysis.

This is literally <1%. Something like 0.5 to 0.09% native american. According to a set of partitions that are defined by looking at a group of people and just drawing an arbitrary line.

what did she originally claim? that she was native, or that she had a native ancestor?

these articles make it sound like she described her family history as having a native american somewhere far back
which is unremarkable but also not false?

I believe it had something to do with way overstating her native ancestry

but thats been a while ago

The latter from what I can tell. The implication would be used to "prove" the former.

You're talking about 6th or 10th generation. That's like 150 or 250 years ago. It could very well be noise as she hasn't released the raw results. Only the analysis performed by someone at Stanford.

Given the ages involved, you could almost disprove her argument if you could trace her family history that far back (but there's so many people at that point it would be hard to exhaustively show none had arrived before then--remember that the *United States* is only 242 years old).

The controversy is that she claimed native american ancestry to get a tenure-track job at Harvard as a diversity hire back in the 90s.

And then they actually traced it back and couldn't find any immediate native american ancestors and she couldn't actually claim membership of any tribes (which is distinct from genetics, actually).

It's more like, lying outright to get a job.

Amusingly, I think this is a great case of the right not actually caring except to rub it in her face.

The inter-sectional left views it as a cardinal sin and it's been haunting her over the primaries in MA.

By any means, the press has been as misleading as ever over this, which is probably as key as story in this as anything.

https://twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/1051770039702093824?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1051770039702093824&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalreview.com%2F2018%2F10%2Felizabeth-warrens-native-american-ancestry-spin-media-fell-for-it%2F
https://twitter.com/APEastRegion/status/1051802107572039680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1051802107572039680&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalreview.com%2F2018%2F10%2Felizabeth-warrens-native-american-ancestry-spin-media-fell-for-it%2F

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/09/01/did-claiming-native-american-heritage-actually-help-elizabeth-warren-get-ahead-but-complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html

apparently she was hired as a white woman

but changed her listed ethnicity after 3 years

<:WaitWhat:433646897383866369>

This will be used against them. Now people with 1% african heritage can start saying slurs and no one can do anything about it.

lol

Cultural appropriation is ok so long as you have at least 1% of whatever you are appropriating.

@shinsoo She claimed she was Native American to get a job.

or to help her get a job.

https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/sunday-times-to-return-prizes-money-for-discredited-reports-20181014

I mean the argument is absurd

but..like she is full of shit on it.

calling her Native American is ridiculous, aye

Yeah, we can argue if it even matters.

But by any means, her claim is specious and it's hard to call her native american.

Also, it could be that it was the university that wanted her to be listed as Native American. There are lots of programs that open up when you can make that claim (just as there are special grants for women and minority owned businesses).

She clearly went along with it at the very least.

As an aside, I think a lot of this shows how dumb IDPol and race is in things like affirmative action.

Clearly, if you draw the line a little (ok, way far out) to one side you can claim all sorts of things.

that would a shady in a whole different way

The whole thing is shady.