From: keith_nuttle@sbcglobal.net
On 11/16/2019 9:24 PM, cecilia wrote:
>
> THoigh I doubnt On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 22:48:28 +0000, Ian Goddard
> wrote:
>
>> On 15/11/19 14:50, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> there are at least two other men with the right Y chromosome that can
>>> help, her father-in-law or a brother-in-law. In either case the man
>>> would probably be anxious to keep it secret to preserve the honour of
>>> the family.
>>
>> It's only recently that the idea of "the right Y chromosome" would have
>> had any meaning.
>
> I agree about DNA being a new idea.
>
> Even with blood groups, my husband and my blood groups were such that
> it is unlikely a non-paternal event would have been spotted.
>
> But family features could reasonably be expected if the husband or
> one of his near-kin was the father.
>
> However, I slightly doubt that it was a frequent choice. Apart from
> anything else, unless certain that the husband's near-kin would keep
> it secret, even when drunk, whether or not he agreed to "help", the
> wife could not afford to raise the topic.
>
This thread has talked a lot about DNA and the fact that the test method
is new. Blood type has been mentioned and everyone seems to think of it
as an old technique. The typing of blood was only discovered a little
more than 100 hears ago. So if you have developed family tree of any
size, none knew their blood type let alone had the concept of blood type.
The problems with technology it makes it easier for people to live in a
vacuum with out depending on other people. I always remember the song
from movie Fiddler on the Roof where the husband ask his wife of many
years "Do you love me?" I believe our ancestors had a much deeper
commitment to marriage than people in the last 75 years. The commitment
came because it was more obvious to them for the need for the male
female relationship, not just for sex but for making a complete working
unit.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
