Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-04 > 1114390853

From: Janell J <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Haplogroup E3a SNP P1+
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 6667

I agree with what has been written, but I would add two things. First, dna research and studies like these will force us all to re-think the value we place on our physical appearance as it relates to our identity. After all, the further back you go in time, the more similar - physically - our ancestors were. It is our culture that has always distinguished us one from the other for most of our existence, certainly not our skin color.

And second, African Americans do understand that the possibilty of non-African ancestry exists, and that it won't change who they are. Caucasians (most specifically Europeans) should come to understand this as well. You are not "less European" just because your direct ancestor from 1,000, 15,000, or 25,000 years ago may have been a black African.

- Jan

Garland Boyette <> wrote:

I agree, African-Americans often react in a similar fashion upon discovery
of an atypical Y-DNA or mDNA haplogroup assignment. See the following
comments from a poster at the Afrigenias DNA Board:

And no discussion is necessary as to whether physical traits should be used
to define us. Our physical appearance is indeed a part of our identity. But
one's physical appearance is still the same after finding out one's
membership in an unexpected haplogroup! It hasn''t changed. And on this
list, I don't don't thinks it's necessary to go into the fact that y and x
chromosomes don't control features such as hair, skin, and eye color. But
it does concern me a bit that there seems to be a view out there that
assignment to a particular haplgroup consititutes membership in a particular
race or ethnicity. Again, these haplogroups are thousands of years old, and
often predate our modern definitions of race and ethnicity, and the strong
language ("shock", "beyond belief") that people often use upon discovery of
unusual haplogroups for their origins, means that there is a good deal of
misunderstanding out there as to what these hapolgroups actually mean. One
sees it over and over again - being R1b doesn't mean your a "Celt" , I1a
doesn''t mean you're a "Viking", and such talk that's often thrown about.
There were no Vikings or Celts 25,000 or 35,000 years ago when these
haplogroups began. Both groups are much more recent, and likely consisted
of many different haplogroups. One should probably keep this in mind when
we get unexpected results.

Administrator, Boyett(e) Surname DNA Project

>From: ellen Levy
>Subject: Re: [DNA] Haplogroup E3a SNP P1+

>Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 09:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
>To the poster who posted about how others shouldn't be
>shocked by their E3a results - remember, it is one
>thing to think about your probable varied racial
>background, another to have direct proof of your
>direct male lineage being from sub-Sahara Africa when
>you are Caucasian. Our physical appearances are part
>of our self-identity. Frankly, from the reports I've
>read, African-Americans have been equally shocked to
>discover R1b ancestry. I don't want to get into a big
>discussion about whether traits like hair and skin
>color should or shouldn't be used to define us as
>individuals here, if possible.
>Ellen Coffman

On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there!

Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more.'s United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more:

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

This thread: