Tuesday 22 August 2006

Ramblin Jack rules, ok?

I wonder why it is that some people just seem not to understand that DNA contains more than one genetic marker?  On the politics board someone is claiming that because a piece of research has shown that some of the (very) few people whose DNA has actually been tested have a genetic marker in common with the ancient found in the Cheddar Gorge that therefore proves that he, and presumably anyone else who is white and cares to make the same claim, is 100% through and through British.  <soz for the Levinesque sentence there>
 
The whole 'genetic Brit' argument is the argument of dummies who don't know even the first thing about genetics.  Asked about the origin of the many other genes in their DNA they have no answer - obviously as very very few could answer - but still fall back on this old dimndumma argument.  None of us knows for sure who or what nationality or race each and every one of our forebears were - and that's without mentioning the fact that even in today's scientifically au fait world it's a rare man who knows his father.  Of course many men believe they know their father and the vast majority are correct, but even so, a goodly few are calling a man Dad when the milkman has the same eyes <gg>
That so few are able to trace their matrilineal lines simply adds to my point.
 
Someone else on the message board has countered with a claim that being British is nothing to do with genes and everything to do with culture.  I'm left wondering which culture she means.  The Sun readership culture?  The culture of the aristocracy?  The culture of remote Scots fishing villages? My culture? Yours?
You know I think everyone's culture shares just one thing with my culture - all are a mix of subcultures.  For me there's my two professional subcultures, my educational subculture, my family subculture, my women friendship circle subculture and that of the friends I share with my husband which is very different.  Then there's those who share my particular taste in music - so that would be bluegrass fiddler subculture which in turn is a division of Cajun, which is a subculture of American folk music, which is..... etc etc  Not forgetting my WI jam making subculture, my gardening subculture etc etc  - and those of us who surf the net are ourselves an 'umbrella' subcultural group for all the other subdivisions of our surfing subculture of which we may each belong to several; bloggers; videologgers; message board posters; chatroomies; simple surfers; researchers; shoppers; games players; music fans - the lists of the subcultural groups we each pick and choose from is endless.
 
You may think that these are not cultural groups at all - but you'd be wrong.  They all have a specific language and historical references which apply only to them but not to others.  My point is that belonging to a specific set of them says sfa about nationality.
 
What makes someone British is emotional attachment to a land and the national life of the land.  As far as I'm concerned if someone themself says s/he is British - and only British so dual nationalities are excluded here - then they are as British as the next Brit.  And that applies even to crinoids who can't argue a rational case but can only come out with crap about genes.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I found that extremely interesting ,in as much as I hadnt given these factors any thought ,so in a way we are all muticultural ....Hmm?      Jan xx

Anonymous said...

Based on what I know, I'm a mixed race of Celtic, Aryan, Native American, but predominately Anglo-Saxon.  I'm sure that hardly no one is of a pure race, despite what one may think.