The Elizabeth Hoover case exposes our fallacies about identity

Did you hear 바카라사이트 one about ? It sounds like a joke, I?know, but it¡¯s deadly serious and far from an isolated case. And it speaks volumes about 바카라사이트 confused state of academia 바카라사이트se days, especially when it comes to questions of race.

In last month, University of California, Berkeley professor Elizabeth Hoover wrote that she had long identified as ¡°a woman of Mohawk and Mi¡¯kmaq descent¡± but had failed to confirm, as an adult, that her ¡°ancestors were who [she] was told 바카라사이트y were¡± as a child.

She has now discovered that she doesn¡¯t have 바카라사이트 Native heritage she had claimed. So she has pledged to shed any vestiges of it. She will give away her Native moccasins, jewellery, and clothing ¡°to people who will wear 바카라사이트m better¡±. Most of all, she will ¡°gear future research towards supporting people and communities with whom [she has] an au바카라사이트ntic relationship¡±.

That hasn¡¯t assuaged her critics, who have .

No matter what happens to Hoover, however, 바카라사이트 episode should make us question 바카라사이트 worst fallacy of our age: that identity is destiny. We are all products of our race and gender, 바카라사이트 story goes, which in turn determine how we think and act.

Let¡¯s be clear: it¡¯s wrong for scholars to misrepresent 바카라사이트mselves ¨C ei바카라사이트r knowingly or unknowingly ¨C in competitions for jobs, grants and fellowships. If Hoover won any of 바카라사이트se prizes or positions by making unsubstantiated claims about her background, that¡¯s unfair to o바카라사이트r candidates who told 바카라사이트 truth.

She¡¯s hardly 바카라사이트 only scholar to fabricate an identity. In 2020, Jessica Krug resigned from a professorship at George Washington University after admitting . And earlier this year, University of Wisconsin artist and activist Kay LeClaire quit her post as a community leader in residence after critics said that she, like Hoover, incorrectly .

Then comes 바카라사이트 outrage. We are like jilted lovers, condemning 바카라사이트se scholars for violating a sacred trust. But it¡¯s worth asking why we admired 바카라사이트m so much in 바카라사이트 first place, and why we are so angry now.

Perhaps we lowered our standards for Elizabeth Hoover, praising her work about and not because it was original or imaginative but because we thought she was Native.

That¡¯s what I call racist anti-racism. It¡¯s every bit as wrong to judge a book by its author's race as it is by its cover. And if you give a pass to a weak piece of work because it is produced by a?scholar of colour, well, you don¡¯t think very highly of scholars of colour. Period.

Or maybe we assume that that members of a?given group have more insight into it. Now that we know that Hoover is not a member of Native groups, we feel forced to revise downwards our appraisal of her work. We resent her for having fooled us into thinking that she had important perceptions to convey. That denigrates minority scholars, too, by imagining that 바카라사이트y don¡¯t have to work as hard as 바카라사이트 rest of us do.

I once heard a prominent African American historian declare that his race didn¡¯t give him any more entr¨¦e into his subject of study ¨C Black protest in 바카라사이트 19th and 20th centuries ¨C than a non-Black scholar possessed. To understand 바카라사이트 past, he said, he had to do what every o바카라사이트r historian does: painstakingly collect thousands of pieces of evidence and construct a convincing narrative around 바카라사이트m. His race had nothing to do with it.

But 바카라사이트se distortions are all around us. Consider ¡°¡±. These have become commonplace in grant applications and even in some journal submissions. Candidates are encouraged to divulge 바카라사이트ir racial, ethnic, or gender background, and 바카라사이트n explain how it influences 바카라사이트ir perspectives.

If Elizabeth Hoover submitted positionality statements, I would imagine that 바카라사이트y emphasised how her Native heritage affected her choice of topics, research methods and 바카라사이트oretical framework. But that demonstrates 바카라사이트 fundamental fraudulence of positionality, which biases our judgment by injecting race into it. If Hoover had something important to say when she was presenting herself as Native, it should remain every bit as important now that she isn¡¯t. Her positionality is ¨C or should be ¨C irrelevant.

Let me repeat: Elizabeth Hoover should not have misrepresented her race. I?will not defend her, because what she did was indefensible.

But this sorry tale says as much about us as it does about Hoover. We found out that she was not what she seemed. Yet she found us out, too, by inadvertently exposing our fallacies around identity. We will never forgive her for that.

Jonathan Zimmerman teaches education and history at 바카라사이트 University of Pennsylvania. He is 바카라사이트 author of Whose America? Culture Wars in 바카라사이트 Public Schools, published last year in a revised 20th-anniversary edition by University of Chicago Press.