Yet another ethnic scammer in academia

[Katrina Gulliver]

Also the reaction (shutting down twitter, website, no response, etc.) looks real bad. My money is on her being a faker.

My thoughts too.

[marshwiggle]

Sooner or later, an interesting scenario is going to happen:

Person is told of their <whatever non-white> *ancestry. Person embraces that "identity", and ultimately gets hired as an academic based on that identity, and uses it as a basis for their outlook, including that of a person with a legacy of oppression. Eventually, evidence comes out which proves conclusively that the claim about ancestry was incorrect. Since the person honestly believed what they had been told, they never knowingly lied.

Was the person actually "oppressed"?
Should the person recant anything they have said based on their incorrect perception of themself as a "victim of oppression"?
Should they retain any position(s), award(s), etc. based somewhat on their perceived status?

This will **eventually happen, and it will be interesting to see how it goes.

*probably some great- or great-great-grandparent.

**Elizabeth Warren to a higher degree????

[Katrina Gulliver]

Sooner or later, an interesting scenario is going to happen:

Person is told of their <whatever non-white> *ancestry. Person embraces that "identity", and ultimately gets hired as an academic based on that identity, and uses it as a basis for their outlook, including that of a person with a legacy of oppression. Eventually, evidence comes out which proves conclusively that the claim about ancestry was incorrect. Since the person honestly believed what they had been told, they never knowingly lied.

Was the person actually "oppressed"?
Should the person recant anything they have said based on their incorrect perception of themself as a "victim of oppression"?
Should they retain any position(s), award(s), etc. based somewhat on their perceived status?

This will **eventually happen, and it will be interesting to see how it goes.

*probably some great- or great-great-grandparent.

**Elizabeth Warren to a higher degree????

The "first woman of color" on Harvard Law's faculty....

[fizzycist]

Sooner or later, an interesting scenario is going to happen:

Person is told of their <whatever non-white> *ancestry. Person embraces that "identity", and ultimately gets hired as an academic based on that identity, and uses it as a basis for their outlook, including that of a person with a legacy of oppression. Eventually, evidence comes out which proves conclusively that the claim about ancestry was incorrect. Since the person honestly believed what they had been told, they never knowingly lied.

Was the person actually "oppressed"?
Should the person recant anything they have said based on their incorrect perception of themself as a "victim of oppression"?
Should they retain any position(s), award(s), etc. based somewhat on their perceived status?

This will **eventually happen, and it will be interesting to see how it goes.

*probably some great- or great-great-grandparent.

**Elizabeth Warren to a higher degree????

Seems pretty unlikely that this scenario could proceed entirely in good faith. If a person is interested in embracing their identity and eventually get to the point of using it for professional gain, then acting in good faith would presumably imply that they do due diligence to verify what is exactly their connection.

[dismalist]

Well, we could institute a sort of Aryan Certificate, run in reverse of course. Ancestry would be checked several generations back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_certificate

We could call it the Opressed People's Certificate.

[Katrina Gulliver]

Seems pretty unlikely that this scenario could proceed entirely in good faith. If a person is interested in embracing their identity and eventually get to the point of using it for professional gain, then acting in good faith would presumably imply that they do due diligence to verify what is exactly their connection.

Due diligence of what? I know someone whose grandmother was adopted. Rumored to be of mixed race. Looking at my friend's family, it's plausible. But what "diligence" could he do? An orphanage in the 1930s was not going to have accurate genealogical records of abandoned or stolen kids. (And when it comes to indigenous heritage, adoption out of the culture is a big thing).
The DNA test route looks even more dodgy. Many of us would show up as having a small percentage of something (often so small I'd call it "margin of error", not "ethnicity"...).

[writingprof]

Well, we could institute a sort of Aryan Certificate, run in reverse of course. Ancestry would be checked several generations back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_certificate

We could call it the Opressed People's Certificate.

Oh, please, please let "oppressed" be misspelled on the certificate!

[fizzycist]

Seems pretty unlikely that this scenario could proceed entirely in good faith. If a person is interested in embracing their identity and eventually get to the point of using it for professional gain, then acting in good faith would presumably imply that they do due diligence to verify what is exactly their connection.

Due diligence of what? I know someone whose grandmother was adopted. Rumored to be of mixed race. Looking at my friend's family, it's plausible. But what "diligence" could he do? An orphanage in the 1930s was not going to have accurate genealogical records of abandoned or stolen kids. (And when it comes to indigenous heritage, adoption out of the culture is a big thing).
The DNA test route looks even more dodgy. Many of us would show up as having a small percentage of something (often so small I'd call it "margin of error", not "ethnicity"...).

If your friend has one grandma who might have a different ethnicity/race, but your friend can't verify or identify what the race/ethnicity even is, then what is there to embrace?

In this case claiming that they were anything in particular (aside from whatever the rest of the family is) and using it for professional gain would not be acting in good faith, IMO.

I don't think that scenario is even particularly close. A closer call might be: what if someone born in the US has one great grandparent who was full-blooded African, can they reasonably "embrace" being African American? I would say no, but maybe others feel differently.

[dismalist]

Maybe we could make ancestor certificates tradable.

[kaysixteen]

Random observations:

1) what exactly does 'Chicano/a' mean, etymologically, and is its Webster's English definition different from this?

2) Is Patti Jinich Chicana?

3) WRT using commercial DNA testing services to ascertain one's ethnic origins, I have never been impressed.   Recall the commercial with the dude with the NY accent who said that he growing up had always been told his ancestry was German, only to take the test and discover it was not German, but predominately Scottish, motivating him to swap his lederhosen for a kilt.   Exactly what is 'Scottish' or 'German' DNA, and how can these things be ascertained by a DNA test?

[Hegemony]

Notice her job title of "Asst prof of African American history". In the current climate, being just plain "white" wouldn't cut it for that kind of position. Some sort of "POC" cover would be necessary.

Yes, demonstrably untrue. My own department has two assistant professors of African-American literature, both of whom are "just plain white."

[jerseyjay]

I have to say that this whole exercise of doing (sort of) genealogical research on somebody to prove or disprove their ethnicity seems macabre and grotesque, and reminds me of South Africa or Nazi Germany. First, the anonymous post seems to be based on her twitter account. The CV she has posted on her website does not say anything about her ethnicity. (It says she speaks Spanish, which is not the same, obviously.)

Second, this whole exercise seems to have a rather ignorant conception of what "Chicana" means. Yes, she has light skin and, yes, she has an Anglo name. Neither of this means very much. Linda Ronstadt is Chicano, and Vicente Fox is Mexican. The mayor of Mexico City is Sheinbaum. Previous mayors of Bogotá include Paul Bromberg and Antanas Mockus. One of the leading Mexican American politicians in Bill Richardson. The richest Mexican is probably Carlos Slim. If you hang out in Santa Fe or Polanco in Mexico City, or San Pedro Garza García in Nuevo León, you will probably see lots of people who are white with non-Spanish names. Not many of these people would consider themselves "Chicanos" (the term actually has a negative connotation in much of Mexico) but they are certainly Mexicans.

Personally, I think there are some good Spanish terms to describe people who want to dig into other people's family history to make a half-baked political point. Two that come to mind are metiche or hablardora. 

[Vkw10]

I have to say that this whole exercise of doing (sort of) genealogical research on somebody to prove or disprove their ethnicity seems macabre and grotesque, and reminds me of South Africa or Nazi Germany. First, the anonymous post seems to be based on her twitter account. The CV she has posted on her website does not say anything about her ethnicity. (It says she speaks Spanish, which is not the same, obviously.)

Second, this whole exercise seems to have a rather ignorant conception of what "Chicana" means. Yes, she has light skin and, yes, she has an Anglo name. Neither of this means very much. Linda Ronstadt is Chicano, and Vicente Fox is Mexican. The mayor of Mexico City is Sheinbaum. Previous mayors of Bogotá include Paul Bromberg and Antanas Mockus. One of the leading Mexican American politicians in Bill Richardson. The richest Mexican is probably Carlos Slim. If you hang out in Santa Fe or Polanco in Mexico City, or San Pedro Garza García in Nuevo León, you will probably see lots of people who are white with non-Spanish names. Not many of these people would consider themselves "Chicanos" (the term actually has a negative connotation in much of Mexico) but they are certainly Mexicans.

Personally, I think there are some good Spanish terms to describe people who want to dig into other people's family history to make a half-baked political point. Two that come to mind are metiche or hablardora.

Looking at DNA to show ethnicity seems inappropriate. My niece's DNA would indicate Southern Chinese ancestry, but she was adopted as an infant and grew up in an upper middle class, small town, southern American home with parents whose DNA indicates Western European ancestry. Her DNA may be Asian, but she's a cornbread today, quiche tomorrow, pizza for breakfast American girl.

[Hibush]

These comments show that there are many people who are prepared to be the arbiters of what constitutes an authentic claim to an ethnicity. If we accept that situation as normal and acceptable, then the question changes to who is the appropriate arbiter for a specific situation. The Caledonian Club of Glasgow may have different criteria for Scotsmanship than the University of Munich's diversity committee. Is there anything wrong with that disparity?

When is it appropriate to have a specific ethnicity as a criterion for a faculty position? In those cases, who appropriately decides on the criteria for qualifying?

I don't have an answer for either of those questions in regard to faculty hiring in my field.

[marshwiggle]

These comments show that there are many people who are prepared to be the arbiters of what constitutes an authentic claim to an ethnicity. If we accept that situation as normal and acceptable, then the question changes to who is the appropriate arbiter for a specific situation. The Caledonian Club of Glasgow may have different criteria for Scotsmanship than the University of Munich's diversity committee. Is there anything wrong with that disparity?

When is it appropriate to have a specific ethnicity as a criterion for a faculty position? In those cases, who appropriately decides on the criteria for qualifying?

I don't have an answer for either of those questions in regard to faculty hiring in my field.

I have an answer for each of those.
Never.
No one.

I think MLK might back me up on that.