Wednesday, October 17, 2018

heritage

 Elizabeth Warren has taken an Ancestry DNA test to prove her Native American heritage. The results are in, less than 1/64 of her DNA supports that claim. Is it enough to claim that heritage? In my view, no. In fact I believe for legal purposes it should have to contain greater than 50% to claim that heritage. Ah but heritage is not a legality is it? No I suppose it isn't, but I think when used to gain an advantage it should be substantiated by proof. If we don't do that what prevents me from just claiming whatever heritage is expedient at the time? If the scientists are to be believed we all came out of Africa in the far distant past. Using that wouldn't we all be considered Africans? Wouldn't we all be able to claim that heritage. That, to me, is the issue at hand. Do we only need to claim a heritage to qualify? Or do we need to display some physical qualities consistent with whatever heritage we are claiming? And then we would have to define those physical qualities wouldn't we? And if we define those physical qualities wouldn't we be establishing a stereotype? And wouldn't that then lead to racial profiling! Hey, we will not allow that will we? I certainly hope not. So, we are left with a DNA analysis. But, does a DNA analysis reflect our cultural heritage? I submit that it certainly does not. It only reflects our biological heritage. So the question becomes, how far back does your cultural heritage extend? How many generations? Is there a way to determine that? I don't think that there is.
 After reading and hearing the report on Elizabeth Warren and her DNA test results I did some further research I don't know a whole lot about how all that works. The available information I was able to read and comprehend with some clarity, I'm no geneticist or scientist, stated there is no data base of strictly " Native American " DNA to compare the findings with. To be brief about it there is no unique DNA marker identifying any Native Americans. The closet DNA markers would show North American markers, as in the North American continent. Even that DNA would also be consistent with South American peoples, so we could say the America's. Elizabeth Warren hired a Stanford professor to analyze her DNA and he arrived at this conclusion; she has DNA consistent with the North Americans. Interesting but not definitive proof of any Native American heritage unless you wish to consider that on a much larger scale, similar to being European. I haven't had my DNA tested but I'm certain I'm of European descent and probably a few others as well. The thing is, as far as heritage goes, I'm all American in my view. And for that very reason I don't hyphenate anything before that. I'm not German-American or Swedish American, I'm an American. Heritage is what we inherit! Heritage isn't what my ancestors hundreds of years ago had, heritage is what is passed on to me.
 The real issue in all of this is whether she claimed that heritage to gain an advantage. I did some reading about that and there is no proof positive that she did. The only evidence of that is circumstantial. She made no mention of this heritage until she was in her thirties. No mention of that until it was political expedient to do so. And by " political " I mean as in politically correct to claim such, no different in my opinion  than Rachel Dolzal  claiming to be African American. I don't recall her taking a DNA test but her own parents said she was not of African-American descent. She was accused of cultural appropriation. Her defense is, I identify as a black person. Strangely to me, there are those that support her in that claim, probably the same people identifying as things they are not. I'll just leave that to you, the reader, to figure out what I mean by that.
 I have seen a number of these ancestry pie charts. Interesting and an amusing point of discussion. I have yet to see one that shows an ancestry greater than 50% in any one area. The reason is simple enough, no one is 50/50. No one! The different races of people have intermixed since the very beginning of time. Don't the scientist talk about Neanderthals and some other group intermingling? DNA is concerned with genetic makeup not heritage. I wonder how so many people have gotten the two confused? Well, when there is something to be gained I understand completely. Win the lottery and gain relatives! I can take a DNA test to prove I share your cultural heritage. No, my DNA can only reveal my biological heritage. We are both Europeans! That means we are related right?
  For me the question is a simple one. Do you get to choose your identity? Is it optional? If that is the case how many times can I change it? Whenever it becomes convenient to do so? Is your heritage the same as your identity? I believe it is. If you choose to deny that, it doesn't change that. It doesn't change your heritage anymore than a sex change operation changes your sex. Take a DNA test and the X's and Y's you were born with remain the same. In short you are whatever sex you were born regardless of any personal identifying you choose to do. Just a scientific fact. So what Elizabeth Warren and Rachel Dolezal were/are doing is appropriating a culture. Is that a crime? No, but it's delusional, deceptive and dishonest. Describes both of those individuals to a tee in my opinion. Does it matter? Yes, facts matter a great deal in my opinion.          

No comments:

Post a Comment