How British are You?

Wibbs

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So basically the Irish are inbred, is that what you are saying?

Hate to break it to you FF, so are the Welsh, Scots and English. Most of us on these islands have a narrower genetic heritage compared to mainland Europe. Both islands have among some of the highest levels of genetic disorders in Europe. Only the south east tip of the UK can claim more mixing. This is changing with all the immigrant populations so that's a good thing.

Fratton Fred

Doc Ruby wrote: »

See now Fred's a good example of why these things get politicised. Not having enough confidence in his own identity, he instead draws most of his self image from a union jack, like those people with the union jack on their underwear, teacups, and pillowcases. Pointing out that Ireland is genetically and culturally distinct from England is a direct assault on his borrowed self confidence, even if no reference derogatory or otherwise is made to England, so he needs to respond with abuse and accusations of vile practices.

Its quite sad really.

Give it a rest Doc, its called banter. Please don't judge me by your own standards, I don't need to study my genes or constantly shout about my cultural identity to know who I am.

Fratton Fred

Wibbs wrote: »

Hate to break it to you FF, so are the Welsh, Scots and English. Most of us on these islands have a narrower genetic heritage compared to mainland Europe. Both islands have among some of the highest levels of genetic disorders in Europe. Only the south east tip of the UK can claim more mixing. This is changing with all the immigrant populations so that's a good thing.

That kind of makes sense I guess, people would be more inclined to migrate over land, so islands would see less migration and an island off an island even less.

Dudess

senorwipesalot wrote: »

What do you love about our neighbours?

Music, TV, film, literature, theatre, sense of humour, journalism, Viz.

Doc Ruby

Wibbs wrote: »

OK this is off the top of my head here so geneticists look away... Haplogroups have clades, subdivisions within them.

A hapolgroup is a collection of haplotypes, which are a subset of clades. Clades and haplogroups can be used interchangeably as far as I know, depending on the context, but are more usually used as the superset.

Wibbs wrote: »

Basque is one and Irish is another. The studies you link to are largely out of date and this stuff moves fast.

I'm the only one here linking to studies at all from the looks of things.

Wibbs wrote: »

The more recent study of these clades, discovery of L21 and a rejig of the genetic "clock" shows that the Irish population likely spread from Britain/ Northern France. A more northerly route than the Iberian myth claims. Plus northern forms of R1b are much younger than the southern Basque forms. So no they're not the same variant DR and the myth perpetrated by programmes like that "Blood of the Irish" is... well, a myth. I know this most of all, because they're able to tell my R1b is Basque/northern Spain, not Irish. If they were the exact same variant they couldn't.

98% of men in the west of Ireland have the R1b marker, which dates back to the last glacial maximum, higher than anyplace else in the world. Looking at the distribution of this marker its pretty obvious there are concentric rings expanding outwards from Ireland, also mapped to megalithic sites, of which there is a paucity in Basque country as it turns out, as opposed to the west of Ireland, where there is also a global maximum of such sites.

Now the most recent studies I can find agree and further expand on this with the marker R-M269, and once again the west of Ireland stands out.

Now unless you've anything solid to support what you're saying at this point I'm going to go with observer bias and leave it at that. And if you do have something solid there are a few wikipedia articles that need editing.

Wibbs wrote: »

EDIT we're more related to the English and they to us than we are related to Basques or the southern R1b haplogroups.

Actually, no, genetically we're more like the Welsh and Basques than the English.

losthorizon

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That kind of makes sense I guess, people would be more inclined to migrate over land, so islands would see less migration and an island off an island even less.

Don't think that's true at all tbh. Go the National Museum and you will see that there was huge trading links between Ireland and the rest of Europe. In fact us being an Island might have actually increased our contact with the outside world. Ancient nations like the Basques or Hungarians managed to remain more "complete" if thats the right word.

Fratton Fred

losthorizon wrote: »

Don't think that's true at all tbh. Go the National Museum and you will see that there was huge trading links between Ireland and the rest of Europe. In fact us being an Island might have actually increased our contact with the outside world. Ancient nations like the Basques or Hungarians managed to remain more "complete" if thats the right word.

Trading links maybe, but obviously not the mass settlements that England had with the Romans or the Saxons. Otherwise there would be more whatchamacallits in the blood type I guess.

Snowie

In terms of lineage Im english,Welsh,Norwiegion and irish...

My passport I irish And i was born in ireland how ever my blood is certainly not irish Im an anglo being honest I don't really no where the fvck we call home.

Alll I know is it has little consequence only the factor is i was born with some stupid irish guilt ridden issue...

But we do have strong military ties on booth sides of the family through ww2 and ww1 and the bowes war which i believe was fought some were in africa :cool: Other then that theres lost of un recognized artists

forfuxsake

Snowie wrote: »

In terms of lineage Im english,Welsh,Norwiegion and irish...

My passport I irish And i was born in ireland how ever my blood is certainly not irish Im an anglo being honest I don't really no where the fvck we call home.

Alll I know is it has little consequence only the factor is i was born with some stupid irish guilt ridden issue...

But we do have strong military ties on booth sides of the family through ww2 and ww1 and the bowes war which i believe was fought some were in africa :cool: Other then that theres lost of un recognized artists

And which one of these is your first language?

Snowie

forfuxsake wrote: »

And which one of these is your first language?

why don't you say whats on your mind....

Wibbs

Doc Ruby wrote: »

A hapolgroup is a collection of haplotypes, which are a subset of clades. Clades and haplogroups can be used interchangeably as far as I know, depending on the context, but are more usually used as the superset.

Apologies. Within the R1b group, there are subsets and the Basque marker is different to ours. We're L21. The so called "O'Neill" line IIRC. We are not the same population on that score. Related yes, but they're a different population.

98% of men in the west of Ireland have the R1b marker, which dates back to the last glacial maximum,

Not quite. Read your links. For a start the last glacial maximum is 20,000 years ago when Ireland was an ice cube. The clue is in the name itself. It receded 11 odd thousand years ago. The R1b marker is later. At most 8000 years, likely younger. Given there is evidence of human habitation in Ireland soon after the ice receded someone else was here. Who knows who they were.

higher than anyplace else in the world.

The Welsh have higher.

Actually, no, genetically we're more like the Welsh and Basques than the English.

No we're not. Again read your links. We're most like the Welsh, but the Basques are different. "Autosomal genetic studies, on the one hand, confirm that Basques have a very close relationship with other Europeans, especially with Spaniards, who have a common genetic identity of over 70% with Basques". "The principal conclusion is that the male Basques living today have rather recent roots of less than four thousand years, contrary to legend that proposes they lived some 30,000 years ago. Despite the ancient language, it is very likely that the present day Basques represent a rather recent Iberian population, in terms of DNA genealogy." Here's a pic showing the distances between the populations

On the English front, define "English". The English contrary to their own perceptions aren't Saxon, or have very little Saxon DNA, less than 5% reaching 15% in extreme eastern areas. The female lines have none.

losthorizon wrote: »

Don't think that's true at all tbh. Go the National Museum and you will see that there was huge trading links between Ireland and the rest of Europe. In fact us being an Island might have actually increased our contact with the outside world. Ancient nations like the Basques or Hungarians managed to remain more "complete" if thats the right word.

Oh agreed. The sea lanes were well navigated. The cultural evidence is pretty clear. The Basques weren't isolated though. They have a deep history of seafaring. Plus as the genetics show they're neither that "pure" nor ancient as once thought, though their language is.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Trading links maybe, but obviously not the mass settlements that England had with the Romans or the Saxons. Otherwise there would be more whatchamacallits in the blood type I guess.

Like I said England may have had more historic influxes but they left remarkably little evidence of their arrival and settlement.

mackg

Snowie wrote: »

why don't you say whats on your mind....

I think he's coming on to you in a primary school kind of way :pac:

oranbhoy67

I was born in Britain & have a British passport though i never attended boarding school to be buggered by the top boy or participate in mutual masturbation in the dorm all the while longing for my nanny therefore i dont feel very British at all!

Im looking to trade in my Brit paspport for an Irish one when it runs out later in the year.. it`ll be much safer should one of those al jihadi chaps hijack one of my frequent flights over to majorca.. tally ho!

Wibbs

Snowie wrote: »

In terms of lineage Im english,Welsh,Norwiegion and irish...

That list would be repeated all over these islands. Unless your English line is from the depths of east Anglia then you've likely bugger all Saxon in you at all. Norwegian is the only real outlier and there's a fair few Norse/Norman gene's in these islands however diluted.

luckyfrank

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Most of the Brits I have encountered in my life are very stingy, I dont know why that is

I dont think they like beggers

RichieC

I don't like how they seem to get a walk in group to every football tournament and still think they're going to win it.

Snowie

Wibbs wrote: »

That list would be repeated all over these islands. Unless your English line is from the depths of east Anglia then you've likely bugger all Saxon in you at all. Norwegian is the only real outlier and there's a fair few Norse/Norman gene's in these islands however diluted.

my norse blood is 3rd generation, most of my family are either military or trawlier men in terms the other side is all military and his side I believe are artists were tracing him at the moment...

my second name how ever dates from normandy 1200 ad or some ****, so yeah we are a little mixed but its a lot of celtic/norse mixing... through out the family tree were good at loosing our tempers :pac:

LordSutch

Most Irish people are British to a degree, but they just don't recognise it.

Say no more, i'll get my coat )

mongoman

LordSutch wrote: »

Most Irish people are British to a degree, but they just don't recognise it.

Are you for real?

That is kinda like saying most heterosexuals are actually gay, but they just don't realise it.

Nodin

mongoman wrote: »

Are you for real?

That is kinda like saying most heterosexuals are actually gay, but they just don't realise it.

He believes that in every paddy, there's a repressed British citizen dying to get out and doff the cap. On the bright side, this belief does not make him go out and steal womens underwear, as far as we know.

Old Tom

Wibbs wrote: »

Fat tattooed English people are a far cry from posh in accent. Jeremy Kyle fodder alright.

Hence the " "

later12

LordSutch wrote: »

Most Irish people are British to a degree, but they just don't recognise it.

Say no more, i'll get my coat )

You don't need your coat, just get yourself a copy of Census 2011 demographics.

Unless you're talking about genetic heritage, which I generally find mind bogglingly irrelevant, but it seems to be something that nationalists (and I include unionists in that) take great comfort in.

Can someone's self-identity really be so poor that he has to compensate for it by clinging to an emotional attachment to the long forgotten dead, instead of building his or her identity on the contemporary society he lives in?

Evidently so.

Grayson

mongoman wrote: »

Are you for real?

That is kinda like saying most heterosexuals are actually gay, but they just don't realise it.

I knew a gay guy who believe that.

ejmaztec

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

I was born in Britain & have a British passport though i never attended boarding school to be buggered by the top boy or participate in mutual masturbation in the dorm all the while longing for my nanny therefore i dont feel very British at all!

Im looking to trade in my Brit paspport for an Irish one when it runs out later in the year.. it`ll be much safer should one of those al jihadi chaps hijack one of my frequent flights over to majorca.. tally ho!

It might less safe than a British one, especially if the jihadists think you could be Mossad. You might have to drop your pants to prove you're not circumcised.:p

Wibbs

LordSutch wrote: »

Most Irish people are British to a degree, but they just don't recognise it.

Genetically most English people are Irish to a degree so...

Given how related we all are on these two damp little islands on the edge of the world and how much back and forth has been going on since the ice ages pissed off it's amazing how fecking narky we can be with each other. TBH I blame the Normans. Before that we weren't particularly like that at all. Even when the Romans showed up in England. Hell they found an Irish guy buried in a Roman cemetery in the south of England. I doubt he was the only one. The Welsh were coming here and we were going there. The Scots? Their countries very name originally meant the small land of the Irish. St Paddy and northern Briton straddled both and the Roman. Then on the back of him and others we went and brought religion and re introduced books to Scotland and most of northern England. At least a century before Augustine of Canterbury was a gleam in his mammies eye.

Then came the Normans. They had such contempt for the local Britons they didn't bother using or learning the language for 4 centuries. Yep the Scandinavian French, thems the bastids. And religion. The religion that helped educate and modernise post Roman Britain (and Ireland) came back and bit us all in the arse down the line when the Roman version took off. Then when the Protestant slant on the Roman version took off we pretty much all got boned on both islands with that daft bit of Swiftian farce. Lots of English people ended up as kindling on religious pyres, never mind the utter shíte that kicked off here on the back of it. Throughout all this the common man and woman, whether Irish, English, Welsh or Scot always got it in the neck. Shít the English had their own famines among the poor in the 18th century.

Wibbs

later12 wrote: »

it seems to be something that nationalists (and I include unionists in that) take great comfort in.

And the joke is they shouldn't.

Son Of A Vidic

OP - we are not British, but since we are now citizens of greater Germania. We could perhaps consider ourselves to be German?

WoollyRedHat

Awfully British darling, awfully British. Although I don't care much for their tea, Earls Grey ... it's trite darling.

Fratton Fred

RichieC wrote: »

I don't like how they seem to get a walk in group to every football tournament and still think they're going to win it.

That pesky British football team.......

Fart

Mmmmmm ale.

ejmaztec

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

OP - we are not British, but since we are now citizens of greater Germania. We could perhaps consider ourselves to be German?

In that case, in a roundabout way we must be British then.

KeithAFC

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

OP - we are not British, but since we are now citizens of greater Germania. We could perhaps consider ourselves to be German?

On my signal, release hell..

LordSutch

later12 wrote: »

You don't need your coat, just get yourself a copy of Census 2011 demographics.

Unless you're talking about genetic heritage, which I generally find mind bogglingly irrelevant, but it seems to be something that nationalists (and I include unionists in that) take great comfort in.

Can someone's self-identity really be so poor that he has to compensate for it by clinging to an emotional attachment to the long forgotten dead, instead of building his or her identity on the contemporary society he lives in?

Evidently so.

I'm not really talking demographics; Firstly there is Britishness, then there is 'being from Britain', then there is being a person being born in this group of islands (T.B.Is), then there is the culturally British thing, then there is the heritage issue, then there is the genetic family connections, so what I am saying is that there are many Irish people who can tick at least on of those boxes. One may not identify at all with the Union flag, but that doesn't mean that the pesron hasn't some kind of British seam running through them, take the 2nd/3rd generation Irish in London for example, are they British?

How Irish are You? might also throw up some interestiong thoughts.

Chuck Stone

Our cultures and heritage cross over hugely.

Like Wibbs has said their jingoism can be somewhat disturbing. How the British establishment is able to turn military disasters into something to be 'celebrated' or at least making it part of the British psyche, that is held dear, is quite some achievement.

I watched a program about British soldiers who'd returned from Afghanistan with their legs and arms blown off and couldn't help but wonder why British people put up with their young men being sent thousands of miles away to die for obtuse reasons.

The British have an incredible industrial, scientific and cultural heritage and yet they seem to overlook it to celebrate the Royals and things of a military nature be they successes or failures.

Odd.

Fratton Fred

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Our cultures and heritage cross over hugely.

Like Wibbs has said their jingoism can be somewhat disturbing. How the British establishment is able to turn military disasters into something to be 'celebrated' or at least making it part of the British psyche, that is held dear, is quite some achievement.

I watched a program about British soldiers who'd returned from Afghanistan with their legs and arms blown off and couldn't help but wonder why British people put up with their young men being sent thousands of miles away to die for obtuse reasons.

The British have an incredible industrial, scientific and cultural heritage and yet they seem to overlook it to celebrate the Royals and things of a military nature be they successes or failures.

Odd.

What military failures do we celebrate in Britain?

later12

LordSutch wrote: »

take the 2nd/3rd generation Irish in London for example, are they British?

I guess they should consult their passports on that one.

My passport says Ireland. I presume it is the same for most Irish people. That much is pretty straightforward.

I have no idea why some people want to change the focus to align themselves with what their ancestors' ethnic or geographical backgrounds were - sometimes going back hundreds of years. How on Earth is this relevant to anything today?

LordSutch

later12 wrote: »

I guess they should consult their passports on that one.

My passport says Ireland. I presume it is the same for most Irish people. That much is pretty straightforward.

I have no idea why some people want to change the focus to align themselves with what their ancestors' ethnic or geographical backgrounds were - sometimes going back hundreds of years. How on Earth is this relevant to anything today?

Yes I agree with all that Later12, I have an Irish passport therefore I am Irish, that's perfectly true, but I am talking about 'another level' where people do and say things which reflect a deeper cultural identity which is part of being born in, and raised in these islands. Those Irish people born in London or Manchester with Irish passports will claim to be 100% Irish (Not British), therein lies part of the wider debate.

Certainly, British culrural identity is very strong here in the ROI, but as I say, most Irish people would dismiss this straight away.

I am 100% British and very proud of it despite having spent most of my life in Ireland.
What I find hilarious is that there are people in this country who have Irish passports and yet cannot speak Irish or English.

KeithAFC

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What military failures do we celebrate in Britain?

Not many I would imagine. The Empire didn't lose that often.

Chuck Stone

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What military failures do we celebrate in Britain?

I put 'celebrate' in inverted commas for a reason.

It's more that dying in far flung fields seems to be glorified. The British role in WW1/II seems to be a preoccupation of the British media.

Poppy day has grown from being remembering the dead day to a strange brand of poppy fascism with TV presenters and politicians wearing it for days before.

This isn't just confined to the British btw. All states seem to be partial to a bit of glorifying death and destruction to some degree.

ricero

im probably more influenced by british customs and cultures even though im 100 per cent irish

DEFTLEFTHAND

KeithAFC wrote: »

Not many I would imagine. The Empire didn't lose that often.

Not often yes. The Battle of Isandlwana springs to mind during the Zulu war. However Britain were vastly outnumbered to be fair.

later12

LordSutch wrote: »

Yes I agree with all that Later12, I have an Irish passport therefore I am Irish, that's perfectly true, but I am talking about 'another level' where people do and say things which reflect a deeper cultural identity which is part of being born in, and raised in these islands.

If someone wants to align themselves with what they perceive to be a specific cultural identity, that's fine by me. I'm sure most of us have UK relatives of some kind. But please don't dismiss that as most Irish people being British even "to a degree". If that's a cultural identity someone like you wants to construct for yourself, fine. Maybe leave others out of it though.

I for one am happy to consign to irrelevance the notion of a "cultural background" which has no bearing on life today.

KeithAFC wrote: »

Not many I would imagine. The Empire didn't lose that often.

Winning a war and suffering a human disaster are only mutually exclusive if avoiding a war incurs a greater human cost than its pursuit.

I'm not sure that British history is exactly brimming with unavoidable warfare.

That's not a slur on British people today by any means, it's just relevant to the point you seem to be making, I feel.

Dudess

IrishGeordie wrote: »

Irish through and through brother!

I'm not convinced. I'm reading that in a Gazza accent. :pac:

pragmatic1

I have an Irish name, grew up in a gaeltacht, love Irish culture and history, and don't in any way, shape or form identify with the British.

sock puppet

Deleted User wrote: »

What I find hilarious is that there are people in this country who have Irish passports and yet cannot speak Irish or English.

Damn right. Fucking toddlers.

sdanseo

senorwipesalot wrote: »

What do you love about our neighbours?
Do you like them alot more than the kuntz next door.


Ya?

I hear you're a racist now. father.

Wibbs

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I watched a program about British soldiers who'd returned from Afghanistan with their legs and arms blown off and couldn't help but wonder why British people put up with their young men being sent thousands of miles away to die for obtuse reasons.

That's an imperial mindset for you. The French and Germans and the US to name but three have it and 9 times outa 10 it's the working class being shot to hell. To be fair to the British military, they'll also throw their upper class into the bullets too. More than some anyway.

Their sentimentality can be odd too. I remember that IRA bomb that targeted the household cavalry in London in the early 80's(IIRC). Men killed and horribly injured. Horses too. Whose name of the victims do I remember? Sefton. A horse. I remember the outpouring of grief for the horse. I remember it showing up on Blue Peter with the chap who had been in his saddle when the bomb detonated. He had been badly injured too, but of his name I remember naught. It was all about the bloody horse.

The British have an incredible industrial, scientific and cultural heritage and yet they seem to overlook it to celebrate the Royals and things of a military nature be they successes or failures.

Again that's imperial thinking for you. Though with the empire more a memory and the royals as much a soap opera as anything that does seem to be changing. Good for them too IMHO.

KeithAFC wrote:

Not many I would imagine. The Empire didn't lose that often.

True, though it can be viewpoint too. Remember Agincourt! can be a cry of victory and yep they won that battle, but were soundly thrashed by the French in the overall war. Meh all cultures are like that. Individuals the same. We tend to avoid looking at the darker parts and the failures and the "jaysus that was lucky Ted". The Irish are the same. We look with green tinted eyes at our own history. Though we're slightly different in that we're also OK with celebrating glorious failures more often. Then again the English can sometimes do that too. Charge of the light brigade and all that. We're generally better at being poetic about it mind you.

I would say the Irish are more willfully contradictory as a people though. It's one of the things I love about us. Even this very thread question shows it up.

ejmaztec

Domo230 wrote: »

English people are too health and safety conscious. Thy don't know how to let go unless it is when they are blitzed out of their skulls with drink.

It's good to share something in common.:pac:

Richard

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Not often yes. The Battle of Isandlwana springs to mind during the Zulu war. However Britain were vastly outnumbered to be fair.

Yes, but there were Zulus. Hundreds of 'em.