GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2001-07 > 0994060126


From: "Allan S. Gleason" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Kincaid Surname DNA Project Plan
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 00:48:46 -0700
References: <3.0.6.32.20010701010539.007aca80@pop.nbnet.nb.ca> <3B3E3896.523B8938@wizzards.net> <3.0.6.32.20010630145633.007b1c70@pop.nbnet.nb.ca> <3.0.6.32.20010701144903.007a6600@pop.nbnet.nb.ca> <3.0.6.32.20010701212046.007a8320@pop.nbnet.nb.ca> <4.1.20010701215829.087676e0@wells.org>


And of course you and Gregg are both right. No one is saying that women
weren't compromised at any time in human history. They have always been
compromised by us men if we could get away with it. I was essentially saying
that men didn't have it so easy as they do today where women think that they
are liberated and thus give it away for free! Society makes the rules for
those who wish to live in it and there are severe penalties for those who
don't. In the past, the rules were much more strict than now (for example,
when I was a teenager, one didn't marry a girl who was not a virgin - and that
wasn't very long ago) primarily because sex has become a pastime with the
advent of birth control. But now we are getting a long way away from our
interest, DNA!

Rather than show a percentage of Well's women as being "shady ladies" might
there be another reason for what appears to be 'out of wedlock,' such as
adoptions. Without modern social services, children whose parents for whatever
reason were unable to care for them were usually taken in by relatives and
included in their families. Granted, usually these were the families of
brothers, (which wouldn't make any DNA difference) but certainly not always.
For example, my 8th great uncle, William Gleason was taken in by his better off
uncle William Page. In this case it is easy to document because there was no
name change, but . . . you get my point.

And Orin! There is no such thing as a "Wells woman"! ALL women in a
patriarchial lineage have unique genealogies! You can't realistically type
cast them!
Allan 'Royal Stuart?' Gleason :-)



Orin Wells wrote:

> At 08:59 PM 7/1/01 -0700, Allan S. Gleason wrote:
> >Of course there has always been some "messing around" ... But back in the
> days when women were subservient and
> vulnerable they were more apt to keep their legs crossed! Don't make the
> mistake of assuming that women of yore behaved as do financially
> independent women of today where the latest statistic is that 1/3 of all
> births are fatherless, ie: virgin?! This did not happen even during the
> times of James Stuart's debauchery! That is pure Hollywood!<<
>
> All the show business aside, Alan. I am afraid I have to disagree with you
> here. There were more than a few out-of-wedlock births that I have seen
> with the Wells studies back into the 1500s even. Maybe it was just
> something with the Wells women, but it certainly happened. If you can
> remember being a teenager you might be able to see how two young people
> together could easily do what they were not supposed to be doing. Shogun
> wedding got it's name from something. In many cases the man did make an
> "honest woman" of the girl and married her so other than the obviously
> short pregnancy evidenced in the births of first children from time to time
> you really won't read so much about it. Parish records often reveal the
> fatherless births too.
>
> There were also any number of people who ended up in Australia in the late
> 1700s and early 1800s, when we wouldn't let them keep dumping their
> prisoners in the American Colonies anymore, who had mothers but no known
> fathers. Given the fact a lot of them were given free trips just to get
> the out of England I guess that shouldn't be too surprising. Records show
> they didn't always change their ways after getting to Australia either. It
> certainly didn't happen to the extent it does today, but happen it did.
>
> Orin R. Wells
> Wells Family Research Association
> P. O. Box 5427
> Kent, Washington 98064-5427
> <>
> http://www.rootsweb.com/~wellsfam/wfrahome.html
> Subscribe to the "Wells-L" list on RootsWeb
>
> ==============================
> Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com!
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

This thread: