Native American DNA

The following is another short post for an anthropology class. Native American DNA was one of my favorite assigned texts, and one I shall likely revisit.

Kim TallBear’s Native American DNA scrutinizes DNA and genetic science in the context of race and indigeneity. According to TallBear, many tribes are increasingly using DNA tests for membership in tribal rolls in addition to blood quantum. With that as a point of departure, the author borrows from feminist Donna Haraway, Aura Simpson’s ethnographic refusal, and Linda Tuwihai Smith’s decolonizing methodologies to unpack the ways in which genetic science perpetuates racialization and white domination. Indeed, TallBear’s study is more of an anthropology of white people, reversing the ethnographic gaze. She also adds nuance to the ways in which blood quantum became part of tribal membership, beginning with the 1887 Dawes act. Despite being impose from above, Indian input on who should be a member shaped how federal agents completed the allotment process. Furthermore, her nuanced discussion of blood as a sign of lineal descent, or genealogic tribalism, helps elucidate why blood quantum persists.

As someone less familiar with current trends in genetics, human migrations studies, and bioanthropology, TallBear’s dissection of those fields was often surprising. The use of knowledge of genetics as well as the ways in which indigenous communities’ views, permission, and epistemologies are not respected was not too much of a surprise, but the use of DNA studies to “prove” Native American ancestry is limited because of the faulty assumptions and racial thinking of scientists and genealogists. For instance, mtDNA or Y-DNA only tracks some of one’s paternal and maternal ancestry, meaning someone could be a member of, for example, the Sioux but a DNA test may not indicate any “Native American DNA.” As TallBear shared, many, including herself, have diverse Native ancestry and many of these groups have also formed close ties to whites and African-Americans over the centuries, thereby rendering genetic testing or gene fetishism problematic. Considering the discourse on indigeneity as the reserve of an untapped or “unmixed” gene pool closer to earlier stages of humanity, in danger of extinction or absorption, TallBear effectively argues for the resurgence of previous theories of race and racial domination. Her most powerful example, the documentary program with a white geneticist interviewing men from Tanzania, Mongolia, and a Native American, illustrate how theories of race and the dominance of European and Western ways of seeing the world permeate genetic science. 

However, one cannot help but wonder how inclusion of Native American communities or perhaps interviews with Natives dis-enrolled because of genetic testing could have shaped TallBear’s work. Without their voices, TallBear is leaving out part of the story while possibly blurring differences in the way Native American groups perceive the issue of genetics and research. And despite her criticism of the use of genetics to turn base indigeneity in biology, I am still a little confused by her treatment of blood quantum here. For TallBear, blood quantum is related to the lineal descent and genealogic tribalism, and many tribes assume the higher the blood degree, the more likely the odds of true affiliation. But does this not continue indigeneity through a biological basis? There is a tension here of essentialism that sounds like DNA and racialization.