• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Other than her native American gaff,

    It wasn’t any kind of gaff…

    She said that she has a Native ancestor. Which a DNA test can’t disprove because:

    1. Not all of someone’s DNA gets passed on each generation.

    2. Native Americans have a pretty widespread dislike of DNA tests, so DNA tests don’t really know what to look for.

    Also,

    1. Native Americans focus their community on culture, not DNA

    Because of #3, anytime someone from outside their culture talks about ancestry, a bunch of tribes release boilerplate statements about how a DNA test doesn’t make anyone a Native or not a Native.

    I can’t remember how far back she said that ancestor was, but I think it was so far back that statistically the most likely result was going to be no native ancestry. People think DNA is all stamped with ethnicity of origin or something, it doesn’t work like that. There’s just certain mutations that can be tracked to specific isolated populations.

    Most DNA is just ambiguously human.

    So you take that slim chance of an identifiable mutation getting passed down every generation, and the low sampling rate among native populations, and yeah, lots of people will get negative results.

    However, it was extremely disappointing that she hired that ex Clinton campaign worker, and then took their advice and immediately started attacking Bernie. That was never about helping Warren, they were kamikazing her campaign into Bernie’s.

    And it worked.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I can’t remember how far back she said that ancestor was, but I think it was so far back that statistically the most likely result was going to be no native ancestry.

      That’s not how DNA tests work. The experts consulted were confident she had Native ancestry, but it was unclear how far back. The 1/1024th isn’t a chance, it’s people who don’t understand DNA incorrectly converting “on the upper end of 6-10 generations” to 1 out of 1024 ancestors and then to 1/1024 chance. The statistics of it being true were very high even though the proportion of her DNA from the ancestor was small.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Also, I feel like most of these people are either too young to know life without the internet, or they forget, but this was something white, suburban, middle class people used to say all of the time. It was usually some story (true or not, I don’t know), passed down from their great grandparents or some shit, and probably altered like a game of telephone, until you’ve got a person telling their friends about how they’re “1/32 Cherokee” or some shit.

      There was never any way to check, and nobody really cared. It was a different time.

      I’m not defending what she said, it was a dumb thing to say. But it’s probably just based on some story she was told as a kid that may or may not be true.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Not to mention, I’ve never heard a person- whose basically white, with no apparent native culture- use “I have Native American ancestry” as anything other than a cudgel to insist they can’t be racist.

      Usually while being racist. (Example: my grandfather.)

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Eh, depends on the area.

        The vast majority of “old family” Appalachians have natives somewhere on their family tree, it’s just most people never really talk about it.

        At most it’s offhand mention at family gatherings, which was exactly the context Warren said she heard. Her grandparent or whoever could very well had it and shown up on a test, but it gets exponentially harder the more generations go by

        Warren just happened to mention it on the campaign trail, and a bunch of people jumped on it.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          At most it’s offhand mention at family gatherings, which was exactly the context Warren said she heard. Her grandparent or whoever could very well had it and shown up on a test, but it gets exponentially harder the more generations go by

          it stopped being family history discussions when she mentions it on the campaign trail or on job applications. (I understand there’s conflicting evidence as to the Harvard thing, but, lets be honest here, it’s probably true).

          such things coming up in the context of family history makes sense and wouldn’t (necessarily) be racist. But Warren went beyond that… when it’s usually pretty evident if someone’s family is Native American when they’re talking about it. the handful of soundbites I caught were very much in the manner my racist grandfather used to justify his angry bullshit screeds against Native Americans. that said, DNA tests are definitely never going to be conclusive about that. it’s patently ridiculous to think one’s heritage is genetic- heritage is a matter of culture; and culture is learned… distilling your heritage to a percentage based on DNA is a scam to get your DNA.

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            (I understand there’s conflicting evidence as to the Harvard thing, but, lets be honest here, it’s probably true).

            Lol really giving the benefit of the doubt, huh?

            • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Not really. She annoys me though, so I’m probably biased or something.

              But I really wouldn’t expect there to be any evidence either way, so pick your poison. She has used it in her stump speeches, and that’s verifiable

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        People used to say shit like this all of the time before the internet. It was usually just someone trying to sound cool, or set themselves apart from other kids in some way.

        If they weren’t just making it up whole cloth, It was usually some story passed down from their great grandparents that they’re repeating (probably inaccurately) about how someone x generations ago had a Cherokee father or some shit, then they do the math to claim that means they’re 1/32 Cherokee or whatever.

        Back then, I don’t remember it being used in any way as an argument against being racist. It was usually just people trying to be cool or different, or telling a boring story about their family that they think is true.

        I’m not excusing what she said, it was a stupid thing to say. I’m just not sure if it deserved the criticism it received.