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.
With tribes, like Native Americans and my own Jewish heritage, a lot also has to do with how you are engaged with the community.
For instance, I went on Birthright with siblings who are Jewish culturally but who genetically are only about 1/16th. Their Jewish great grandmother married a non-Jewish man but raised their kids Jewish. Her grandmother married a Black man, but raised the kids Jewish. Her mother also married a Black man, but raised the kids Jewish. The brother recently had a child with his non-Jewish woman but he had a bris and will be raised Jewish in a reform synagogue.
While there's generally genetic requirements for Native American tribal membership, the affiliation is broader than that.
Each tribe sets it's membership criteria. A person wanting to be recognized as an American Indian must apply to the tribe s/he wants to be a member of.
For instance, I went on Birthright with siblings who are Jewish culturally but who genetically are only about 1/16th. Their Jewish great grandmother married a non-Jewish man but raised their kids Jewish. Her grandmother married a Black man, but raised the kids Jewish. Her mother also married a Black man, but raised the kids Jewish. The brother recently had a child with his non-Jewish woman but he had a bris and will be raised Jewish in a reform synagogue.
That’s a great point, and I think we’re on the precipice of families like this becoming commonplace in the American Jewish community.
Each tribe sets it's membership criteria. A person wanting to be recognized as an American Indian must apply to the tribe s/he wants to be a member of.
True.
That being said, my friend who was Native American enough to be tribal enrolled declined to enroll as her mother was a bit of a bigot and preferred that my friend hide her Native roots.
My friend would explain her tanned skin as her "Black Irish" ancestry & say no more.
So in some cases, people just have oddball or sad reasons for skirting around acknowledging their heritages.
That being said, my friend who was Native American enough to be tribal enrolled declined to enroll as her mother was a bit of a bigot and preferred that my friend hide her Native roots.
My friend would explain her tanned skin as her "Black Irish" ancestry & say no more.
So in some cases, people just have oddball or sad reasons for skirting around acknowledging their heritages.
I think this could be done and is not as big of a deal (though wrong in a moral sense) if the amount is very small, say 0.3% is Native American. If it's small but in a bigger category, say 10% or 40%, then that is an issue. At 0.3% you are likely to not have any features on display, at 10% you may or you may not, but at 40% it isn't a question of are features on display but rather how much.
While genetics is more important than social considerations because it is closer to being the truth, in society people go more by how you look than what you truly are (which normally people that aren't much mixed tend to look what they are most, but people that are highly mixed where nothing is a majority can have looks that are very different -they can look less mixed than they are-.)
I think this could be done and is not as big of a deal (though wrong in a moral sense) if the amount is very small, say 0.3% is Native American. If it's small but in a bigger category, say 10% or 40%, then that is an issue. At 0.3% you are likely to not have any features on display, at 10% you may or you may not, but at 40% it isn't a question of are features on display but rather how much.
While genetics is more important than social considerations because it is closer to being the truth, in society people go more by how you look than what you truly are (which normally people that aren't much mixed tend to look what they are most, but people that are highly mixed where nothing is a majority can have looks that are very different -they can look less mixed than they are-.)
It all comes down to personal choice.
A long time ago people had to prioritize survival over all else. In times where saying the wrong thing could get you knocked down several pegs in life over someone else's hangups and prejudices....Most people played it safe.
I think this could be done and is not as big of a deal (though wrong in a moral sense) if the amount is very small, say 0.3% is Native American. If it's small but in a bigger category, say 10% or 40%, then that is an issue. At 0.3% you are likely to not have any features on display, at 10% you may or you may not, but at 40% it isn't a question of are features on display but rather how much.
While genetics is more important than social considerations because it is closer to being the truth, in society people go more by how you look than what you truly are (which normally people that aren't much mixed tend to look what they are most, but people that are highly mixed where nothing is a majority can have looks that are very different -they can look less mixed than they are-.)
Keep in mind, the %'s for ancestry estimates are not "genetics." The regions being examined are non-exome regions of the DNA and have nothing to do with measuring phenotypes. People looking at percentages trying to equal with appearance is not accurate. Ancestry estimates are comparisons against modern world populations of similarities. Actual phenotypes (what you look like) account for 1% of one's DNA.
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.