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.
Well, I think you deliberately cloud the argument here. The Italian or Nigerian Briton knows they aren't native. England is a country of immigrants now, but the native population still predominates. In Canada you might say the British Isles or French are the native, but of course the First Nations are the true aboriginals. In the British Isles, it's the native NW Europeans who are the aboriginals. The native Briton who is, and who feels they are darker than other native Anglo's, might easily justify they are average. Maybe they tan well and most of their family does too, and so they speak from their own personal experience. Many English have a similar golden tan you see in Scandinavia, and others have a darker tone you'd more associate with southern Europe. But statistics covers all areas equally unbiased as opposed to anecdotal and a personal observation that could be skewed.
Historically England has always been a country of immigrants, Iberian, Roman, Viking, Saxon, Norman, Jewish, Italian, Asian, African etc. Are we led to believe that only 20% or so of the people I work with can consider themselves as 'native' British despite 95% of us having British passports? How far back does one have to go with purely 'white', British born, 'Anglo-Saxon' ancestors to count themselves as 'native' English? Britain isnt the 'Anglo-Saxon' breed that people seem to think, yes there where Anglo Saxons that settle on this island (along with dozens of others from throughout Europe and beyond) At some point in the ancestoral line a great majority of Britons will have a foreign born forefather somewhere.
Historically England has always been a country of immigrants, Iberian, Roman, Viking, Saxon, Norman, Jewish, Italian, Asian, African etc. Are we led to believe that only 20% or so of the people I work with can consider themselves as 'native' British despite 95% of us having British passports? How far back does one have to go with purely 'white', British born, 'Anglo-Saxon' ancestors to count themselves as 'native' English? Britain isnt the 'Anglo-Saxon' breed that people seem to think, yes there where Anglo Saxons that settle on this island (along with dozens of others from throughout Europe and beyond) At some point in the ancestoral line a great majority of Britons will have a foreign born forefather somewhere.
Yes, if 20% or so of the people you work with have known ancestries not from England, then they are not native British. You're playing dumb here. Obviously someone who has African physical characteristics or speaks with a Polish accent is not native English. Depending on how intermixed, you can go back a few generations. It's not the same as the Americas, where everyone is an immigrant except the First nations. My original argument was if a native Briton is darker than average, they have a tendency to argue themselves and others like them as average.
Yes, if 20% or so of the people you work with have known ancestries not from England, then they are not native British. You're playing dumb here. Obviously someone who has African physical characteristics or speaks with a Polish accent is not native English. Depending on how intermixed, you can go back a few generations. It's not the same as the Americas, where everyone is an immigrant except the First nations. My original argument was if a native Briton is darker than average, they have a tendency to argue themselves and others like them as average.
You mis-understand there is FAR more than 20% of Britons with ancestries not from England! Depending on how far back you want to go its a lot more than that, what you fail to understand is that Britain is an island that throughout history has been settled time and time again by people from 'elsewhere'. You say if a native Briton is 'darker' than average yet fail to grasp the concept of an 'average' Briton. Tell me what percentage of Britons (people with a British passport) would you say are blond with pale skin? What percentage would make it an 'average' British colouring?
Historically England has always been a country of immigrants, Iberian, Roman, Viking, Saxon, Norman, Jewish, Italian, Asian, African etc. Are we led to believe that only 20% or so of the people I work with can consider themselves as 'native' British despite 95% of us having British passports? How far back does one have to go with purely 'white', British born, 'Anglo-Saxon' ancestors to count themselves as 'native' English? Britain isnt the 'Anglo-Saxon' breed that people seem to think, yes there where Anglo Saxons that settle on this island (along with dozens of others from throughout Europe and beyond) At some point in the ancestoral line a great majority of Britons will have a foreign born forefather somewhere.
Even the term Briton means the pre-Anglo Saxon population and describes a Celt like the Brythonic people of Cornwall and Wales. The people who were there before the Anglo-Saxons came.
People that have recent ancestry from outside Britain are not classified as indigenous. Indigenous means native to that country. We talked about this before and an Aboriginal person is indigenous to Australia whereas other Australians know they have ancestry from Europe or Asia or where ever else they come from. When people talk about indigenous Australians people know that is the Aboriginal people. Aboriginal has the same meaning as indigenous.
In genetic testing if you have recent ancestry from outside that country you won't be tested. Most genetic testing requires you to have all your Great Grandparents from that location. This is when they are looking at a country's dna. Dna is also used in medical studies and for looking at genetic diseases and trying to find the cause of these and the best treatment. Different populations have different diseases and different gene combinations. Some medications work best on one population and not another. This is why the Icelandic population is used so much for studying genes and finding the cause of such things like schizophrenia because they have been isolated. If they are testing an English person they would have to have all their Great Grandparents of English ethnicity.
When people move to other countries they don't forget their ancestry. I'm an Australian but I have Irish ancestry and have dual citizenship. People are proud of their ancestry and even if they were born in England they aren't going to forget that Irish grandparent or Jamacian grandparent.
You mis-understand there is FAR more than 20% of Britons with ancestries not from England! Depending on how far back you want to go its a lot more than that, what you fail to understand is that Britain is an island that throughout history has been settled time and time again by people from 'elsewhere'. You say if a native Briton is 'darker' than average yet fail to grasp the concept of an 'average' Briton. Tell me what percentage of Britons (people with a British passport) would you say are blond with pale skin? What percentage would make it an 'average' British colouring?
The British are not very mixed at all. The Irish are a very homogenous population and have not had a great many invaders. The Romans didn't even go to Ireland. Yet the Irish and British cluster together in dna studies so this shows that the British do not have ancestry from many different places. It is only in recent times that people have come to the UK from many diverse places.
Come on Easthome you would know your history quite well. Surely you know that the main people to populate Britain were near neighbours like the pre-Celtic people, Celts, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Normans etc. They were all of similar genetic stock. People did not mix greatly in the past due to barriers like seas, mountains and also due to culture and language barriers. People didn't come from distant places and just pop up in the British Isles.
You mis-understand there is FAR more than 20% of Britons with ancestries not from England! Depending on how far back you want to go its a lot more than that, what you fail to understand is that Britain is an island that throughout history has been settled time and time again by people from 'elsewhere'. You say if a native Briton is 'darker' than average yet fail to grasp the concept of an 'average' Briton. Tell me what percentage of Britons (people with a British passport) would you say are blond with pale skin? What percentage would make it an 'average' British colouring?
I really think you're being evasive here. How far back are you going? 100 years, 300, 1000, 1500, 4000? England is a collection of past immigration from Celts, Saxons, Vikings, Middle Eastern.....How many know the details of their Viking ancestors who settled in their town 1000 years ago. How about a Near Eastern one from 3000 BC? An Italian English person is aware of their ancestor coming to England 100 years ago. There are records, and obviously they feel they are not fully akin to other English people, especially if they have an Italian name. My point is that England is not like North America. In Canada an English Canadian is no more Canadian than a Chinese Canadian in terms of their ultimate origin. Neither originated in Canada. Even the Beatles, who are described as English, are not really of English ancestry. Their origins are English, but ancestries are Irish and Welsh. Paul McCartney is English but he's of Irish ancestry.
I really think you're being evasive here. How far back are you going? 100 years, 300, 1000, 1500, 4000? England is a collection of past immigration from Celts, Saxons, Vikings, Middle Eastern.....How many know the details of their Viking ancestors who settled in their town 1000 years ago. How about a Near Eastern one from 3000 BC? An Italian English person is aware of their ancestor coming to England 100 years ago. There are records, and obviously they feel they are not fully akin to other English people, especially if they have an Italian name. My point is that England is not like North America. In Canada an English Canadian is no more Canadian than a Chinese Canadian in terms of their ultimate origin. Neither originated in Canada. Even the Beatles, who are described as English, are not really of English ancestry. Their origins are English, but ancestries are Irish and Welsh. Paul McCartney is English but he's of Irish ancestry.
Exactly!!! And the Beatles are like MOST other Britons in that respect! Im asking you - how far back are YOU looking to go before anybody with a British passport are allowed to call themselves 'indigenous' Britons? How far back does your ancestory have to be 100% British before you are included in one of these ridiculous 'polls'? How many Britons do you honestly think have nothing but 'Anglo Saxon' blood running through their veins!! practically none! I couldnt tell you where my ancestors came from 500 years ago but I can guarantee that 'some' of them were not on this island, am I supposed to consider myself not an 'indigenous' Briton because my hair is dark? does that make none of my 100's of ancestors able to claim themselves to be 'indigenous' Britons? Lets say there is a man from Birmingham and 200 years ago his great grandfather married a Portugese woman - does that mean he is not counted as a 'indigenous' Briton? What about all his Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, 2nd Cousins and all their children and their childrens cousins? Are none of those counted as 'indigenous' Britons because their great great grandmother was Portugese?
Yes that seems to be what studies say. Britain afterall isn't known for a sunny climate so why would people have a need to be able to tan when white skin would be much more beneficial in that sort of climate? The countries with the least amount of sunlight in Europe are places like Ireland, Britain, Norway and parts of Northern Russia.
Parts of the south coast of England (where I am from) have similar sunshine levels to NW Spain & SW France...
But anyway you still cannot say that Britons are all fair skinned & you cannot say that only fair skinned Britons are the only people who should be classed as 'indigenous'... How far back & pure should someone's gene pool be for them to be classed as a true Briton?!? Perhaps thousands of years ago the average British person was fair skinned with red hair, but in this day & age it is simply not true & these people are STILL British...
Perhaps we should only class native American's as actually American & Aborigines as the only only Australian's, where do you draw the line?!?
I really think you're being evasive here. How far back are you going? 100 years, 300, 1000, 1500, 4000? England is a collection of past immigration from Celts, Saxons, Vikings, Middle Eastern.....How many know the details of their Viking ancestors who settled in their town 1000 years ago. How about a Near Eastern one from 3000 BC? An Italian English person is aware of their ancestor coming to England 100 years ago. There are records, and obviously they feel they are not fully akin to other English people, especially if they have an Italian name. My point is that England is not like North America. In Canada an English Canadian is no more Canadian than a Chinese Canadian in terms of their ultimate origin. Neither originated in Canada. Even the Beatles, who are described as English, are not really of English ancestry. Their origins are English, but ancestries are Irish and Welsh. Paul McCartney is English but he's of Irish ancestry.
Interesting that you mentioned the Beatles Mmega. Traveler is always using them as examples of how English people look. All four Beatles had Irish ancestry. John Lennon was of Welsh and Irish ancestry. He was raised by his mother's Welsh family and knew nothing of his Irish ancestry until after his father died. Once he knew of his Irish ancestry he considered himself more Irish than English.
Parts of the south coast of England (where I am from) have similar sunshine levels to NW Spain & SW France...
But anyway you still cannot say that Britons are all fair skinned & you cannot say that only fair skinned Britons are the only people who should be classed as 'indigenous'... How far back & pure should someone's gene pool be for them to be classed as a true Briton?!? Perhaps thousands of years ago the average British person was fair skinned with red hair, but in this day & age it is simply not true & these people are STILL British...
Perhaps we should only class native American's as actually American & Aborigines as the only only Australian's, where do you draw the line?!?
Nothing to disagree with here. I'm not saying that all Britons are fair skinned but the majority of Irish are from studies done and even then there are a minority of Irish that have darker complexions. I'm making a distinction in what is "indigenous" and what isn't. The Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians are the indigenous population and are classifed as such. I'm an Australian but I'm not indigenous. It's not really difficult to understand is it?
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.
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.
