cherokee diversity

not anymore:

“Second-largest U.S. Indian tribe expels slave descendants”

“(Reuters) – The nation’s second-largest Indian tribe formally booted from membership thousands of descendants of black slaves who were brought to Oklahoma more than 170 years ago by Native American owners….”

wait a second. hold it right there!

native american slave owners?! say it ain’t so, geronimo! well, that just doesn’t fit the pc-history of our nation, does it? hmmmmmm.

anyway…

“The Cherokee nation voted after the Civil War to admit the slave descendants to the tribe.

“But on Monday, the Cherokee nation Supreme Court ruled that a 2007 tribal decision to kick the so-called ‘Freedmen’ out of the tribe was proper….

“‘This is racism and apartheid in the 21st Century,’ said Vann, an engineer who lives in Oklahoma City.

“Spokesmen for the tribe did not respond when asked to comment.

“The move to exclude the Freedmen has rankled some African American members of Congress, which has jurisdiction over all Native American tribes in the country.

“A lawsuit challenging the Freedman’s removal from the tribe has been pending in federal court in Washington, for about six years.

“As a sovereign nation, Cherokee Nation officials maintain that the tribe has the right to amend its constitutional membership requirements.

Removal from the membership rolls means the Freedmen will no longer be eligible for free health care and other benefits such as education concessions.

d*mn waaaaycist injuns! wait. i thought only white folks could be waaaaycist. ?? i’m so confused….

kinda related indian article: What makes a native American tribe?

(note: comments do not require an email. you don’t have to be a cherokee, either.)

i really AM a chick…

…i SWEAR (like a trooper)!

i joked over here that there ought to be an “is-it-a-chick” turing test to see if female bloggers really are female bloggers.

well, turns out there is such a test @the stevens institute of technology website.

i cut & pasted the text of my genes for altruism post into their gender identification test — and i FAILed miserably! or, rather, they failed:

“The Gender Of The Author Who Wrote This File is: male 60.20%”

well, i guess i write like a guy — but i’m NOT a guy! really! (;_;)

about the test: “It doesn’t always work, however. When the software is fed text, its judgement on a male or female writer is only accurate 85 per cent of the time.”

whew! (^_^)

(note: comments do not require an email. or any b*lls whatsoever.)

new and improved coefficients of inbreeding

so, just the other day i bored you to tears posted (with the invaluable help of the reluctant apostate!) some new and improved coefficients of relationship. (i haven’t quite finished calculating them all — one day, soon, i promise!)

why do i care about all these crazy coefficients of relationship? well, i don’t, really. what i wanted to get at were these other coefficient of inbreeding thingies, but i needed the relationship ones first, so … *sigh* … here we are at last.

without further ado, let me just post the new and improved coefficients of inbreeding that i have, and then i’ll explain afterwards what this is all about (see the previous post for the key to symbols; scroll down for the punchline):

F — s = 0.2460
s — F = 0.2460
F — d = 0.2541
d — F = 0.2500
M — s = 0.2500
s — M = 0.2541
M — d = 0.2500
d — M = 0.2500

B — B (both directions) = 0.2525
Z — Z (both directions) = 0.2564
B — Z = 0.2476
Z — B = 0.2436

PGF — s = 0.1255
s — PGF = 0.1255
PGF — d = 0.1205
d — PGF = 0.1186
MGF — s = 0.1270
s — MGF = 0.1270
MGF — d = 0.1270
d — MGF = 0.1250

PGM — s = 0.1186
s — PGM = 0.1205
PGM — d = 0.1314
d — PGM = 0.1314
MGM — s = 0.1250
s — MGM = 0.1270
MGM — d = 0.1250
d – MGM = 0.1250

FB — s = 0.1255
s — FB = 0.1255
FZ — s = 0.1186
s — FZ = 0.1205
MB — s = 0.1238
s — MB = 0.1238
MZ — s = 0.1282
s — MZ = 0.1303

FB — d = 0.1270
d — FB = 0.1250
FZ — d = 0.1250
d — FZ = 0.1250
MB — d = 0.1238
d — MB = 0.1218
MZ — d = 0.1282
d — MZ = 0.1282

s — FBS = 0.0652
s — FBD = 0.0603
s — MBS = 0.0603
s — MBD = 0.0635
s — FZS = 0.0603
s — FZD = 0.0603
s — MZS = 0.0651
s — MZD = 0.0651

d — FBS = 0.0593
d — FBD = 0.0657
d — MBS = 0.0593
d — MBD = 0.0625
d — FZS = 0.0625
d — FZD = 0.0625
d — MZS = 0.0641
d — MZD = 0.0641

so … eyes glazed over yet? (~_^)

what’s the point? the point is that, following steve sailer and parapundit and stanley kurtz’s leads regarding the effects of inbreeding on human societal behavior, i got to thinking that it’s not just inbreeding that matters but also the type of inbreeding. i think the type of inbreeding is important because we’re not all equally related to all of our relatives.

this very much includes our cousins who, in many societies, also become people’s husbands and wives. so, for instance, i don’t think it’s a coincidence that certain types of behaviors (mostly related to controlling reproduction) occur in societies where there is a high frequency of father’s brother’s daughter marriage.

now, when researchers look at the inbreeding rates in populations, they typically look at the coefficients of inbreeding (here’s an example — see the second-to-the-last column on the right). the usual coefficients of inbreeding look like this:

see first-cousins there? the inbreeding coefficient given is 0.0625. but, that’s not really correct since we are not related to all of our cousins in the same way. for instance, two male paternal cousins share a y-chromosome in common, whereas i don’t share a y-chromosome with any of my cousins since i don’t have one (a y-chromosome, that is — cousins i have a plenty!).

here are the actual inbreeding coefficients for cousins from the point-of-view of a guy (remember, these are probabilities — you might, in reality, be much more related to any given cousin, or not share any genes at all with another, although i think that’s pretty unlikely):

s — FBS = 0.0652
s — FBD = 0.0603
s — MBS = 0.0603
s — MBD = 0.0635
s — FZS = 0.0603
s — FZD = 0.0603
s — MZS = 0.0651
s — MZD = 0.0651

see? they’re not all the same. some are above the 0.0625 figure (which is probably some sort of average i guess) while some are below. so what?

well, if inbreeding does affect our behaviors (especially how we behave towards others), then inbreeding with someone with whom you are more related should accentuate whatever behaviors get affected by inbreeding in the first place. (btw, i think this effect would be stronger the more regular the inbreeding — like in saudi arabia where they’ve been marrying their cousins since before the arrival of islam.)

here’s an example — let’s look at a guy and which of his cousins he can marry. he can marry his father’s brother’s daughter [FBD], his father’s sister’s daughter [FZD], his mother’s brother’s daughter [MBD] or his mother’s sister’s daughter [MZD]. turns out that, from the point-of-view of the guy, he’s most related to his MZD. i would’ve thought that FBD marriage was the most inbred since the types of societies in which you find that sort of marriage seem to be the most clannish and tribal, but that’s not the case from the guy’s point of view. (i’ve included the numbers from the point-of-view of the female cousin|wife, as well. again, when a woman marries a cousin in an FBD arrangement, this is actually one of the least inbred cousin marriages she could enter.):

s — FBD = 0.0603 / d — FBS = 0.0593
s — FZD = 0.0603 / d — MBS = 0.0593
s — MBD = 0.0635 / d — FZS = 0.0625
s — MZD = 0.0651 / d — MZS = 0.0641

however, this is not the only way to consider inbreeding in a society. what happens when we start to look at the relationships of some of the other relatives in these different types of marriage systems? turns out that, from the point-of-view of the uncles or aunts in question, the father’s brother [FB] is the most related to his nephew (the groom):

FB — s = 0.1255
MB — s = 0.1238
MZ — s = 0.1282
FZ — s = 0.1186

that’s because, as i’ve mentioned before, a guy and his FB share a y-chromosome in common (see chart below; the FB = C on the chart) — and when a FB gets his daughter to marry his paternal nephew, he gets to “reunite” his y-chromosome, which his daughter does not carry, with part of his autosomal dna and part of his x-chromosome, which his daughter does carry:

we can even calculate the genetic relatedness of this grandfather (FB, or MGF from the point-of-view of the child) and his grandson. the grandson inherits, via his mother, 1/4 of the maternal grandfather’s autosomal dna plus 1/2 of his x-chromosome. from his father, the grandson inherits his maternal grandfather’s y-chromosome (which is virtually the same as his paternal grandfather’s y-chromosome!). so the calculation is (maths explained in this post):

1/4 autosome + 1/2 x-chromosome + y-chromosome =
(96.42% x 0.25) + (2.60% x 0.5) + 0.99% = 26.395% = 0.2640

without any inbreeding, the genetic relatedness between a MGF and a grandson is 0.2540.

if this is a pattern that holds true for other male relationships in societies where FBD marriage occurs, it may go a ways to explaining why those societies are so paternalistic, i.e. because the males are more related to one another than they are to the females and so, inclusive fitness-wise (if you can say that!), it’d be more in their genetic interests to help out their brothers and nephews and grandsons than their sisters and nieces and granddaughters.

i don’t know if this is true or not. i’m just speculating at this point. i want to run the numbers for different inbreeding scenarios to see what i come up with. might be something. might be nothing at all. stayed tuned….

previously: new and improved coefficients of relationship and all grandmas are not created equal and all cousins are not created equal and father’s brother’s daughter marriage and cousin marriage conundrum addendum

(note: comments do not require an email. did you want fries with that?)

all cousins are not created equal

here’s a chart of standard cousin relationships (charts adapted from here). as you can see, there are four different types of cousins – cross and parallel cousins, both patrilateral and matrilateral:

now it may seem that, apart from being different sexes (triangle=male, circle=female), there’s not much difference between all these cousins, but there is. there are differences in how both the x- and y-chromosomes get passed down in families, and these differences show up in one’s cousins.

first, the y-chromsome — the chromosome that makes men men — passed down virtually unchanged from fathers to sons:

notice that ego shares his y-chromosome with his father (of course) and his brother — AND his father’s brother (i.e. his paternal uncle) AND his father’s brother’s son (i.e. his male paternal cousin). as a group, they are really an inter-generational “band of brothers”, so to speak.

now the x-chromsome.

everybody gets one x-chromsome from their mother, and women get a second x-chromsome from their fathers. the x-chromsome that you get from your mother is a recombined hodge-podge of her two x-chromosomes. the x-chromsome that a woman gets from her father is, like the y-chromosome he passes on to his sons, virtually unchanged.

so, here’s the x-chromosome inherited in the father’s line:

notice that all of a man’s daughters inherit his x-chromosome virutally unchanged.

also, the father’s brother and sister (ego’s paternal uncle and aunt) have inherited an x-chromosome similar to the one that ego’s father has. they are not, however, exactly the same. the three of them have inherited one recombined x-chromosome each from their mother (ego’s paternal grandmother — not indicated on chart). so, while they share some genetic material with each other on their x-chromosomes, the chromosomes are not identical. (ego’s aunt has also inherited one virtually unchanged x-chromosome from her father, ego’s paternal grandfather, not indicated on chart.)

any daughters of the father’s brother will inherit a virtually exact copy of his x-chromosome. so, those cousins’ x-chromosomes (the one they inherit from their father) will be just as similar to their uncle’s (ego’s father) as his brother’s is. (confused yet?!) for instance, if the father and his brother share 50% of the genes on their x-chromosomes, then the father’s brother’s daughters will also share (nearly) 50% of their genes on their x-chromosomes with their uncle (ego’s father). (got it?)

following from that point, ego’s female patrilateral parallel cousins and his sisters will share nearly the same amount of genetic material on their x-chromosomes as the cousins do with their uncle, since ego’s sisters inherit a virtually exact copy of ego’s father’s x-chromosome. (say THAT five times fast!)

ego’s patrilateral cross cousins — the children of ego’s father’s sister — inherit one recombined hodge-podge of their mother’s x-chromosomes each. so, while they do share some genetic material on those x-chromosomes with ego’s father and ego’s sister, it is not such a close relationship as any patrilateral female parallel cousins. it is closer, though, than with any patrilateral male parallel cousins. neither of ego’s patrilateral cross cousins share any genetic material with ego’s x-chromosome, which he inherited from his mother (cue next chart).

so, ego’s mother and her brother and sister (like ego’s father and his brother and sister) share similar genetic material on their x-chromosomes; but, since their x-chromosomes are recombined versions of their mother’s (ego’s maternal grandmother – not indicated on chart) x-chromosomes, their x-chromosomes are not identical to one another.

ego and his brother and sister have each inherited one recombined x-chromosome from their mother. those x-chromosomes are similar, but not identical.

ego’s mother’s sister’s children have each inherited one recombined x-chromosome from their mother. they share some genetic material on those x-chromosomes with ego, but not as much as any of his female matrilateral cross-cousins do. those female cousins inherited an almost exact copy of their father’s x-chromosome (ego’s maternal uncle). they, therefore, probably share a greater amount of genetic material on those x-chromosomes with ego. ego and his male matrilateral cross-cousins do not share any genetic material on their x-chromosomes since those cousins do not inherit an x-chromosome from their father.

whew! got all that?!

i only bring all this up because it has bearing on what i was babbling about in “cousin marriage conundrum addendum“, i.e. that the type of cousin marriage (inbreeding) also matters, not just the coefficient of inbreeding (or kinship or whatever), when we’re discussing the innate social apptitudes of man.”

i also wanted to write all this out to help myself get a grasp of all these relationships. (it ain’t easy!) let me know if you see any errors.

one of these days i’ll terrorize ya’ll with another post(s) showing what happens when all these different sorts of cousins mate. (don’t say i didn’t warn ya!)

see also: Probing Question: Do sisters share a closer genetic proximity than other siblings? and Grandma plays favourites: X-chromosome relatedness and sex-specific childhood mortality

previously: cousin marriage conundrum addendum

update 03/10: i tweaked some of the wording in this post to try and make it a bit clearer. (don’t know if i succeeded or not!) none of the changes were substantial.

(note: comments do not require an email.)

serbians being evacuated from libya!

yay! whew. (*hbd chick wipes brow*) what a relief!

wait. what?

Libya: Serbian workers attacked by armed Libyans

“Tripoli, 21 Feb. (AKI) – A group of 50 Serbian workers have been attacked and blocked by armed Libyans as unrest and violence in the north African country spread to the capital of Tripoli, the Serbian foreign ministry said on Monday.

“The ministry said in a statement there were no injuries and all workers were safe and the government was planning their evacuation in cooperation with Libyan authorities. Serbia had traditionally friendly relations with the regime of colonel Muammar Gaddafi and hundreds of Serbian works have been employed in Libya building roads, factories and infrastructure….”

just another reason for lots o’ libyans to be p*ssed off!

unemployment amongst the under-20s is guesstimated to be over 50% — and they don’t even get to build the ROADS?!

i wouldn’t want to be a serbian in libya for all the slivovitz in belgrade!

btw. here’s the sort of thing that serbians have been building in libya:

previously: libya – land o’ tribes

(note: comments do not require an email.)