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.
Many whites in the south will have black ancestry, but that blood becomes "native American" after a few generations of lying.
Blacks as a whole average about 20% European blood (higher amounts up north, lower percentages in the deep south), and many think that they're actually Native American. When a black person has slightly straighter hair or reddish skin, it's attributed to being Creek or Seminole instead of Scots-Irish.
Whites with black ancestry are equally rare though. Most of the people with indian grandmother oral histories don't test African either.
The Black stories can be understood as a way to explain away the obvious mixed race appearance of certain relatives that had unknown white ancestors. For instance, I'm almost certain that my "Indian" great-grandmother, who was "faired-skinned with hair down her back", was just mulatto. I haven't taken a test but I found all of her grandparents in the 1870 census listed "mu".
For white americans though, the stories are made up out of whole cloth. They're looking at dark brunettes, people with hooked noses, and uncles with bones in their feet, and seeing indian. It's a bit harder to understand.
"The whole premise of OP's post is that people are positively lying about being Native American, and that this is apparently rampant."
It's not that they are lying; they actually believe it. It's family lore that they have been told all their life, but seldom checks out...and it is rampant.
It don't believe that it is rampant. Perhaps in the circles that you run with, but I don't think for the population as a whole it is true. At least not with the young. Through reading this thread I get the impression that such "tales" were more common amongst the older members of society, and I think this "myth" is something that is going to die out with the Boomers as I have yet to come across any Xer or Millennial who speaks of this "myth", let alone who gives a hoot over whether they are 1/32 Native American or not.
Now, I do now some who will once in a blue moon say that they have a relative who married someone who was related to... ...one of the Native Indian tribes, but not one who actually claims to be a member of that tribe, nor of "Native" blood. It may be a Wow, cool, didn't know that about my family moment, then quickly lost to ambiguity; Well, considering that I have two parents, and they each have two parents, and so on... ...at some point we are all going to be related, right.
The Boomers were the last generation to hear the stories passed done from generation to generation. The Xers and Millennials just get anecdotal information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mapmd
It's generally considered "cool" among progressives to pretend you have as little white in you as you can possibly get away with.
Having Norwegian or Polish or Scottish heritage is not exactly PC when Whites are being demonized in the media day after day and on the road to becoming second class citizens.
Right, okay; you have no idea what you are talking about.
Everyone I know with Polish heritage is pretty darn proud of it, no matter how progressive they are. Some are a little too proud, but that is a discussion for another thread. I was teased nearly everyday when I was younger, for being "Polish". I was never able to work out if it was just meant to be good-natured ribbing or not, but man, I was so close to going postal if I heard that submarine joke one more time...
It was an odd thing to grow up with; I'm white, and American, and Polish, but not American, and not Polish, and Polish-Amerian, but still white. It made my head spin and was enough to make me feel shame for being Polish. I tried to hide for a while, pretend I was Czech, or Russian (which, ironically was not as bad as being Polish. I mean, Russians had nukes. The Polish had submarines with screen doors).
Anyways, proud to be Polish. Proud to be American. And proud to be progressive.
TL/DR: Point being, all progressives I know only really "claim" their immediate heritage as their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 601halfdozen0theother
This is an example of how the myth developed. Define which American Indian tribe the people in the photos look like? What is it about their features or the way they are dressed makes you "see" it?
So, just because someone cannot pinpoint a specific NA tribe that is proof positive that they are lying? Many, many peoples invaded Ireland, only to assimilate into Irish society. No one gives a hoot where the "blood" came from, expect for those who argue over the "black Irish", or claim to be. For everyone else, it is simply "Irish". Yet, for some reason, when it comes to Native American blood it HAS to be traced to a specific tribe in order to be true
Now, I do agree that likely at least one looked through old family photos, saw someone who looked "Indian", recalled the word Cherokee as Cherokee seems to have become synonymous with "Indian", and made the [false] connection.
I just disagree with the notion that this whole thing is rampant.
* edit to add:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOS2IAD
And now a question---are there any DNA tests that can narrow it down to which tribe? I ask because in my case I believe my ancestors were Taino. However, my Dad thinks they were Arawak.
To my knowledge, the ethnic marker is mapped through the Y chromosome, so only males can take that type of test. I am not sure if NA ancestry can be mapped through the mitochondria as I have heard that if it were a female relative who was NA then your best bet is to do the mapping the old fashioned way... ...through public records and family history.
What I don't understand is why there is so much negativity connected to this topic- are there so many people who either don't know the facts about their history, or lie about it?
I mean I've never seen anyone go "You say you're part Irish- haha, everybody says that."
So what's the negativity concerning Native Americans?
Someone should not claim to be "part Cherokee" unless they have an actual tribal membership. If its just based on hearsay in the family tree, its not worth much.
Besides, notice how Americans who claim native ancestry always say its Cherokee tribe? There were many many tribes in North America!
Someone should not claim to be "part Cherokee" unless they have an actual tribal membership. If its just based on hearsay in the family tree, its not worth much.
Besides, notice how Americans who claim native ancestry always say its Cherokee tribe? There were many many tribes in North America!
Part one is bunk. There were various reasons individuals who were eligible for the rolls refused to sign up.
In my case, my father actually knew his grandfather who was one of those individuals.
Second, not from my experiences. All the Native Americans I've met in recent years are Sioux.
Part one is bunk. There were various reasons individuals who were eligible for the rolls refused to sign up.
In my case, my father actually knew his grandfather who was one of those individuals.
Second, not from my experiences. All the Native Americans I've met in recent years are Sioux.
there an indian tribe around here, that been claiming indian for the last fifty years, they did dna and one person had 2%, all the other members was 100% african american , they had the indian lifestyle and culture but not had any indian dna
If you live the lifestyle and culture isn't that a lot more important than genetics devoid of anything else?
Similarly, I think someone early on nailed this. Very few people are lying as they actually believe what they are saying. Is this any worse than them doing the same about any European or African heritage they may have? How many people whose families have been in the US more than 100 or 150 years actually researched and have proof that their ancestors were from Ireland, Germany, or what have you? It may be out there, but how many can actually say they know rather than it just being family lore?
Someone should not claim to be "part Cherokee" unless they have an actual tribal membership. If its just based on hearsay in the family tree, its not worth much.
Besides, notice how Americans who claim native ancestry always say its Cherokee tribe? There were many many tribes in North America!
Official tribal membership is often (maybe always) based on being a certain percentage. A person could have absolute proof they are 1/64 something and be denied official membership because it does not meet the minimum requirement. As a fact that person has the ancestry but will never have it officially recognized with a tribal membership.
Again with the negativity and disbelief- and again my question: what is the reason for it? I don't see anyone demanding people "prove" their ancestry when it comes to other races/nationalities/etc. And that's basically what it comes down to.
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.
