GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1110077632


From: "Jim Lawson" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Kim TallBear and Stanford lecture series Monday March 7th
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 21:53:52 -0500
In-Reply-To: <b8.6da83a36.2f5b972f@aol.com>


Ann, I suppose I will get hung up on this thread until I finally put my
number 11E in my mouth.
I agree with you to a point regarding the issues Ms TallBear raises
regarding the use of DNA to prove or disprove one is Native American. It
could certainly happen that some court would choose to legislate law again
and that would be unfortunate. I also understand the concerns relating to
the marketing of DNA results.
It is probably a shortcoming of mine that taking the skin of truth and
stuffing it with a lie doesn't set well with me. It is fine to have a
platform, but to hide one's intentions and to immerse that platform in
something some might call science leaves me out.

I am Native American from my great-great-grandmother (Full Blood Choctaw). I
also carry the Haplogroup Q in my yDNA that actually predates the Native
American people. Mine is not Q3 but Q. I am proud of my newfound heritage
and there is much about Native Americans, and Asians for that matter, that
is admirable but I have no intention nor desire to further complicate a
situation that has brought so much pain. I am a culturally a WASP and will
not trade that for some fad. I will support Native Americas in their quest
for identity and rights but I do not want to join them. On the other hand, I
will not lend any credence to or be a party in anyway to the pseudo science
that is part of this person's agenda.

Okay, now it is out of my system, I ask everyone's forgiveness for the rant.

Regards, Jim


>>The Haraway citation for background reading on Kim TallBear's lecture was
added very recently. I just can't relate to Haraway's style or content
myself, but I found myself nodding in agreement with much of the substance
in Kim TallBear's articles. Keep in mind that she is referencing DNA testing
in connection with *tribal enrollment* policies. Tribes are
political/cultural entities, and to include/exclude enrollment in specific
tribes based on DNA testing is not warranted, in my view. Kim is also
critical of some of the technical limitations and marketing approaches,
which we have discussed many times on this mailing list.<<



This thread: