DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2008-10 > 1222865095


From:
Subject: [DNA-R1B1C7] Questions ??
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:44:55 +0000


Hi Jeff,

>I think the term "non-paternal event" is misleading, I think it should
>be more accurate in describing what is meant.

>?How about "Extra-genealogical event" denoting an occurrence from
>outside normal genealogy? Or a "paternal lineage incursion"?
>"Undocumented paternal event" (Gee should we sent them all back?)?

>Seriously we need a better lexicon

Seriously, you need to take your campaign somewhere where people who make these decisions congregate! Talking about this here is a waste of time as it will have no impact. The people who write the books will continue to use their preferred terminology.

Though frankly your ideas seem worse than NPE <grin>. NPEs are neither normal or abnormal genealogy. They are biology and there is nothing abnormal about them as they produce children the same old fashioned way. Actually NO paternal events are documented. Births often are these days and the births of English royality at least were witnessed in the past. But so far as I have heard, the act of fathering a child usually is a rather private affair. Even when filmed secretly, there is no evidence that a child was actually fathered but only that a child could have been. It's fairly obvious when a woman mothers a child but not when one is fathered. Fatherhood, despite the efforts of societies all over the planet, remains an ephemeral occurrence that is difficult to prove outside of the lab.

Good luck with your campaign.

Linda Merle

This thread: