U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-30-2011, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Where the grass grows
175 posts, read 276,471 times
Reputation: 87

Advertisements

Hi all

Some say that 20% of births worldwide are children of extramarital affairs (of course, that isn't the case with my children).

Based on that data can not be totally real (I hope so...), why we try to follow the line of ancestors of the "fathers"? If that study is true, it would be more logical to follow the female line, because matriline is going to secure a 100% correct, isn't?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-30-2011, 01:07 PM
 
358 posts, read 731,853 times
Reputation: 290
^not anymore with the invention of fertility treatments, not to mention adoption which has been around forever. Although tracing your female ancestors definitely does give you a much better chance of being right. (unfortunately many women have been kept out of the history books).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 07:41 PM
bjh
 
Location: Memphis - home of the king
30,249 posts, read 23,697,458 times
Reputation: 122187
"Some say that 20%.."

What do they know?

I doubt that in most cultures this is true. I especially doubt it was true in most cultures in the past when strictures and consequences for fooling around outside of marriage were much more harsh, even including death penalties. That's still the case in some cultures today, not that it should be, but it is.

20% sounds like wishful thinking of those who have the "everyone does it" mentality. That's a problem in this age. Most of what we see in TV and other media make it sound like everyone is effing everyone else all the time. And maybe in the media world that's true. I saw a clip from a TV show called The Talk just the other day where these women were talking about how they scrod (pluperfect ) dozens of guys. And they were acting like it was ridiculous that one panelist said 3 at the most but ideally only the 1, her husband. I guess they did what and who they had to to get on TV.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 02:57 AM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
8,814 posts, read 13,573,729 times
Reputation: 11414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Housemartin View Post
Hi all

Some say that 20% of births worldwide are children of extramarital affairs (of course, that isn't the case with my children).
I don't know who "some" are, I don't know where they got their info or how that info was collected. Particularly if we're talking about unknown illegitimacy - how would anyone accurately calculate that? You really can't believe everything you hear.

Quote:
Based on that data can not be totally real (I hope so...), why we try to follow the line of ancestors of the "fathers"?
I don't. I try to follow the female lines just as much as the male lines in my tree but the fact of the matter remains that males are easier to research. There are more records for them and since they don't change their surname, it's easier to find their parents. Unfortunately, too many of the women in my tree have unknown maiden names and until I find their maiden names, I'm at a dead end.

Quote:
If that study is true, it would be more logical to follow the female line, because matriline is going to secure a 100% correct, isn't?
Not necessarily. There could have been unknown adoptions or mix ups with step-mothers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 05:54 AM
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
14,131 posts, read 27,013,351 times
Reputation: 6824
This probably could be figured out by matching dna samples with physical records. For instance I match y-dna with someone of my same last name who according to the physical records shares a common male ancestor with me who was born 235 years ago. We can therefore both be pretty certain who our male ancestors were over the 6 generations back to that person. Going back through the maternal lines via mtdna is possible but more challenging because you don't have the last name match.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Where the grass grows
175 posts, read 276,471 times
Reputation: 87
In general, I agree with all you , but with the aim of promoting the maternal line, I would like to introduce into the debate another factor: the issue of fatherless children.

We can find lots of them in the birth certificates (father unknow). However, in the case of the motherless children, none.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 01:56 PM
 
Location: DC
6,507 posts, read 6,426,164 times
Reputation: 3107
I trace all my lines, but the thread seems to be more a political statement about marriage. Genealogy is what I'm interested in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 03:24 PM
 
Location: FROM Dixie, but IN SoCal
3,491 posts, read 5,501,384 times
Reputation: 3751
There are many cultures in today's world that are matrilineal. At one time there were more than there are today. There are some cultures that are patriarchical but matrilineal.

In modern America,there are some sub-cultures that are de facto matriarchies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 05:52 PM
bjh
 
Location: Memphis - home of the king
30,249 posts, read 23,697,458 times
Reputation: 122187
^
True, and that's a nod to the: the mother is definitely known.

As for finding female ancestors, the more the merrier. In addition to expanding the branches of the family tree, they add new family names, which are new clues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2011, 02:10 AM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
8,814 posts, read 13,573,729 times
Reputation: 11414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Housemartin View Post
In general, I agree with all you , but with the aim of promoting the maternal line, I would like to introduce into the debate another factor: the issue of fatherless children.

We can find lots of them in the birth certificates (father unknow). However, in the case of the motherless children, none.
Yes but on the flip side I have found obituaries and death records that only list the father and not the mother. Not that the mother was unknown in their lifetime but because society was so male-centric, they felt the father was the only important one to mention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:50 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top