The soft bigotry of “high cheekbones”

The soft bigotry of “high cheekbones”

Greg Pollowitz at National Review asked, Which Is Worse: ‘High Cheekbones’ or ‘Redskins’?

A few things are bothering me about Bob Costas calling the term “Redskins” a slur on Sunday night.

One, Democrats had absolutely no issue when then senate candidate Elizabeth Warren justified her Native American heritage with her “high cheekbones.” That’s the same as me saying, “Can’t you see I’m half-Jewish from the size of my nose?” If it was anybody but liberal-darling Warren, there would be outrage at her saying such a thing. But since Democrats have tacitly endorsed “high cheekbones” as politically acceptable, I vote to rename the Redskins “The High Cheekbones.”

The song even works, “Hail to the Cheekbones! Hail Victory!”

For those of you who don’t remember, Elizabeth Warren supposedly (doubtfully) relied on “family lore” to justify checking the Native American box in order to get herself put on a short list of “Minority Law Teachers” and “Women of Color in Legal Academia” as she was climbing the law school ladder towards Harvard Law School. 

Among those stories (now cast in doubt) was about her Aunt Bea and high cheekboned ancestors:

Warren has admitted she did not meet the legal definition of Native American.  She never associated with Native Americans, and did not even list herself as Native American when she joined the Senate.

So, is falsely claiming to be Native American for employment purposes only, and telling stories of ancestors with “high cheekbones” to justify that conduct, offensive?

It matters to some people.

But not to the progressives who demand The Washington Redskins change their name, and who will demand that Warren run for President.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.