What creates identity

In all the readings, the use of genetic technology to ascribe identity is dangerous: it reduces cultural identity to simply biological standard (Lee “the meaning of race in the new genomics”); it ignores the power relations of colonial history during which categories including race, ethnicity and kinship were shaped (Tallbear “DNA and Native American identity”); and it might bring unexpected consequences that could mentally destroy a family, and even its result is not informative as people think about.(Bolnick, “the science and business of genetic ancestry testing”) Not only the concept of Native American DNA is constructed (Bardill, “Native American DNA”), but also the genetic technology itself is questionable, especially when seen as a commercial product.

On the other hand, this use of genetic technology is proven to be useful in terms of strengthening existing social and cultural bonds, when African-Americans trace their roots in Africa (Rotimi “genetic ancestry tracing and the African identity”), or when families in Bosnia want to reconstruct memories of the nestali (Wagner, To know where he lies). Are we talking about the same entity when comes to commercial ancestry testing and the post- catastrophic scenario? Does the use of technology impose moral judgment or not?

All the papers in this week’s reading, as well as the history of the political and medical construction of race, suggest that identity relies on cultural bonds instead of physicality. The question might be, what create the cultural identity from the beginning, and what drives people nowadays, whether for curiosity or hidden agendas, to pursuit the ancestry testing.