Does she have any idea how many other nationalities also have high cheekbones? Most notably Orientals along with Eastern Europeans and Egyptians. Okay, she grew up in Oklahoma where the Cherokee flourished. This makes me wonder where the emphasis was in a relative's comment regarding her grandfather. "He had high cheekbones like all the Indians do," or "He had high cheekbones like all the Indians do." There are two completely different meanings.
All the nonsense aside, the question as to whether or not she should be teaching at Harvard does make me wonder. Women have been defending her all day for what a brillient scholar and lawyer she is and that she absolutely earned her place. If so why did she use her 1/32 degree of minority ethnicity as a tool? Could she not have achieved the same without it? Was she so insecure with her own being she felt the need to put this forward? According to her, not at all. Me? I think she just keeps digging a deeper hole.
Her reason that she used it in order to meet people like herself, with similar tribal roots, is laughable. I don't imagine she found too many Cherokees, or native Americans for that matter, in Boston by doing so.
Actually, I've met quite a few native Americans and have gotten to know many quite well. I don't have a drop of Indian blood in my veins. It's because Hub and I are interested in their culture, have made a study of it and collect their art. Everything developed quite naturally. They are not a mystery people lurking in the shadows waiting to be discovered and recognized.
I will suppose Harvard hired her for her abilities. I will also suppose it would be a good thing if the quest for 'diversity' be retired and academic excellence be rewarded, no matter what sex, sexual preference, religion, or ethnicity one may be.
The more a person uses dubious crutches to achieve, the more I question their achievements.
