Stories do not equate to heritage. Unless you would like to correct the Cherokee Nation
medium.com/@ewarrenisnotcherokee/open-letter-to-elizabeth-warren-from-cherokee-citizens-ab053578bd95
Or indeed, Warren herself, who apologised for her claims of Native American heritage, both by letter and during a presidential forum on Native American issues in Iowa last August.
Her DNA ancestry showed her ancestry as "vastly European" with some evidence of ancestry from the "Americas" (which could be South America as well as North) 6-10 generations removed - i.e., 180- 300 years ago. As I understand it, her results are actually less than the average white American might expect.
Warren's claim allowed Harvard to hold out that it had ticked a diversity box, when it clearly had not. From the article copied below:
According to a much-cited investigation by the Boston Globe, Warren consistently checked “white” on personnel forms throughout her career, including in 1981, 1985, and 1998 while employed at the University of Texas. But in the 1986-1987 edition of the Association of American Law School’s directory and eight subsequent editions, Warren listed herself as a minority. She began identifying as Native American on personnel forms three years into her post at the University of Pennsylvania. And while multiple professors have attested to the fact that Warren was considered white during the hiring process at Harvard University, in 1995 she self-identified as Native American, and the school’s statistics were updated to reflect as much. Harvard recorded Warren as Native American from 1995 to 2004.
Warren now claims that while her self-identification was insufficiently nuanced, she wasn’t being dishonest about her heritage, citing her genetic test and family history as proof. But by focusing on the hereditary aspects of identity, rather than the cultural or experiential ones, Warren undermines the stated objectives of diversity programs.
The purpose of affirmative action is not to increase the numbers of people who merely self-identify as diverse. (If it were, Rachel Dolezal would be a qualified diversity applicant.) Nor is the point to celebrate minute blood quantum among faculty who otherwise present as white and who don’t engage with nonwhite cultural traditions in any meaningful way. Rather, the major goals of diversity in higher education are twofold: Affirmative action is an effort to level the playing field between white men and historically marginalized groups, such as people of color and women.... Racial diversity efforts are also intended to diversify intellectual perspectives with the understanding that race can be a proxy for experiences, and scholarship is enriched by a wide range of perspectives.
An additional goal of faculty diversity is to establish a support system for students who encounter identity-specific obstacles with which a similarly identifying faculty member may be better qualified to assist.
theintercept.com/2018/10/16/elizabeth-warren-dna-video-native-american-harvard/?comments=1
So yes, she took a "diversity role" at Harvard that was intended for someone with a diversity background.
With regard to the Rachel Dolezal point above, this is where I would reference the hypocrisy of Ben O'Keefe, whom I understand is African American. Had Warren made a similarly tenuous claim to being African American, I think he may have been unhappy.
Bringing this back round to his odious tweet against JKR; clearly he -and IIRC Warren - are supporters of TWAW. Another imposter claim. But no, I did not say at any point in my previous post that Warren is responsible for his tweet, so I don't know why you would say that, other than for a cheap gotcha. I merely pointed out that he is working for someone who has made claims to an identity that have been proven to be tenuous at best and have thoroughly offended the group into which she was making a claim. Yet he can see no parallel to the matter at hand. Hence the cognitive dissonance.