Is the father of modern China an Half Chinese / Half Baiyue Cantonese or an Half Chinese/ Half Hmong Hakka? Thanks to some of my Chinese ancestry in Laos (true baiyue descendants), I was able to go to school and have good level of understanding . My male ancestor trace back to somewhere in Guangdong, but I don't who it's from though.

I find the Zhuang people to be very similar to Laos, in terms of language and culture. They are the same race as the Laos people. I think the Cantonese are an mixture of Han and Zhuangs. While the Laos descended from the Zhuangs and founded their own country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhuang_people

The founder of the kingdom Ahom in india was an Sukaphaa prince. A Tai prince originally from Mong Mao, the kingdom he established in 1228 existed for nearly six hundred years, where they've have ruled the indo-aryans and Tibeto-Burmese for 600 years. The kingdom was descended from Tai-speaking speaking race who are also Baiyue race.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahom_kingdom

Haha, I knew you were some south-east asian monkey

Calling South-east asian monkey is wrong.

Japanese called you dogs
Koreans called you pigs
Vietnamese called you monkeys

They are all wrong. it's no wonder than Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore don't wan't anything to do with China.

"Half Hmong Hakka"....So Hakkas are Hmong? and Baiyue is a race?

dont want anything to do with your group either LOL

Hakka are Han Chinese. Nothing to do with Hmong.

Baiyue is not a race. It's simply a lumping together of many southern people under a single name. I think many people would agree that majority of Baiyue decedents are Tai-Kadai speakers.

Sun Yat Sen? its difficult. But Sun Ke his son was once the chairman of the World Hakka Congress. But it was the Taiping Rebellion that inspired much of modern China revolutionaries. Like it or not, certainly Hakka played major part for the new China.

Then why did you claim to be 100% Chinese,Nanyue?Why?

Is he seriously trying to connect Sun Yat-sen with the...Laos? lolwut.

Lol...Anyone want to claim half, quarter, or 1/16th of Mao?

Because my paternal line was Chinese but I'm mostly of Laos ancestry, I'm not sure if I should even be called Laotian Chinese though, all I know is my male ancestor originated from Guangdong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laotian_Chinese

See, this pretty much shows that he has nothing to do with China. That small link he has with China doesn't really mean much. He's just some self-hater who has an identity crisis. He say he's "Chinese", yet he hates on China and Chinese people. He also fabricates lies about Chinese people as well.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=u8fiAAA...amp;redir_esc=y

"Yat-sen Sun, 广东省社会科学院. 历史研究室, 中国社会科学院. 中华民国史研究室, 中山大学 (Guangzhou, China). 孙中山研究室"

"我是中国人广他问我的家乡是哪一省,我说是广东。他使说: "你是我的同乡,我也是广东人。。他和我走了一小段路,这时又出现另一个中国人 ... 当这第二个中国人出现时,那第一个人说, "这是我们的同乡" ,于是我和他捏了手。他不是广东人,他并没有讲我的方言

He claimed himself Cantonese from this source.

You claimed Chinese yet you said you're "mostly of Laos ancestry". Why even bother?. Identity ultimately stems from what one believes, not what ones bloodline are. There are many cases of this.

Also, mind explaining on what you mean by "Laos (true baiyue descendants)".

WHY EVEN BOTHER?

Why is Li shi min only 1/4 Chinese from paternal line and 3/4 Xianbei from maternal line?
Why are Tanka people considered ethnic Han Chinese, despite having no genetic relation with Han Chinese?
Why are Chinese claiming people such as Manchus as Chinese, but not people with Chinese ancestry?

Me being mostly of laos ancestry, I'm not so certain myself, because both my parents have Chinese ancestry. But I also learned that both of there side married local women in the past, which would in reality make me more laos genetically than Han Chinese.

I don't think you got my points there. It seems like you have set your mind about what matters in pin-pointing one's identity, without taking belief into consideration.

First, becareful about how you use the term "Chinese". There were no "Chinese" in Tang Dynasty but simply "subjects" of Tang Emperor/Dynasty. Han Chinese isn't a pure race, and Manchus are Chinese but not Han, while people with Chinese ancestry (assuming you are talking about oversea Chinese) are Chinese as well (minus the China citizen part).

Han Chinese is an identity, When people talk of Chinese they mean people of Han Chinese culture. if there was Manchu living in Laos, the government census wouldn't consider him Chinese. As for overseas Chinese, I've already read so many comments saying that they don't consider the overseas Chinese as Chinese.
Anyway I'm pretty sure that if told Chinese people that I'm mostly of Laos ancestry with only paternal Chinese heritage, they would look at me very different. They wouldn't even consider me Chinese.

Overseas Chinese does includes Minorities. I wish the term "Chinese" would be less ambiguous but ultimately It really has to do with what one believes. This is sometimes why Vietnamese of Chinese descent are considered as Vietnamese in US. Whether or not, a person checks "Chinese" or "Vietnamese" in their census forms are their personal choice and it is out of the reach of Chinese government. However, most often, Tibetans from China are automatically classified as Chinese when entering the states with Chinese citizenship. There are fewer absolute terms when it comes dealing with a multi-ethnic and racial country, than with a homogeneous country such as Korea and etc.


Well for one, I wouldn't look at you different. You can a full Chinese to me if you think yourself as one and likewise if you think as full Lao. But without a mention beforehand of what you think you are and whatnot. I can only base you on first impressions.

So what made you lie about ur identity,claiming ur are full chinese even though u know u are not?Also whats with the pretending u can read chinese?

I consider you to be Laotian since your mostly of Lao & Hmong ancestory and your not even sure about your Chinese ancestors

There's no point in calling myself Chinese in front of an Chinese from China. I was taught to believe that I'm full Chinese, because the Laos census consider all people with an Chinese father or Chinese male ancestors as Chinese. My Dad and Mum both of them still think there Chinese, even though both admitted that their ancestors married with local women, they kept there traditions, culture, family names and passed to the next male line. However, as I began using the internet I realized that people like to judge you for your ancestry and appearance, and have there own opinions and judgement. Many Chinese people are like this. I'm pretty sure if I was in argument situation against Chinese, I would always have the disadvantage of being called a non-pure blooded Chinese. Psychology plays an huge role in shaping our identity, I know there's always an large percentage of people don't consider mixed bloods as Chinese.

A lot of Chinese like to use pure blood statement against the half breed Chinese ( let alone one who's not even an half breed).

I'm considered 100% Chinese in Laos and I could read Chinese.

That explains ur hatred against chinese.Though do u have any experience of being rejected by chinese people in real life?Or do u just get all these ideas from the internet?

Not entirely, the acts of Mainland Chinese sometimes makes me feel ashamed of my Chinese ancestry. I don't even tell them I'm Chinese, I would just tell them I'm Laos with maybe some or little Chinese ancestry.

sun yet-sun is a hakka, not a hmong. he has no understanding of hmong language or lao language. he speaks fluent hakka and have good grasp of cantonese so maybe people confused he was cantonese. that must be a joke or something. he has nothing to do with lao. in fact, he was the main proponent of a chinese identity which included various ethnics in china at the time.

also be proud of your identity, it's pathetic to affiliate with a ethnic identity that you have nothing to do with. your last name is a huge part whether you're chinese or not. as well as your mother language and what culture your family family predominantly. you're young kid, don't let identity crisis affect your ability to comprehend the difference. ther'es nothign wrong with laotian. actually you should be proud and help your ancestry lao to promote their culture and help the country as much you can.

If so then why did you lie about being full chinese,repeatedly?You dont tell people you are chinese in real life but u do on the internet?

Okay, you're misunderstanding. I'm so NOT ashamed of being Laos, they are an peaceful and nice people. If I have nothing to do with Chinese, than I wouldn't have even kept my Chinese names, or even kept it's traditions and culture. But I do have arguments with my parents, telling them how gullible they are, and that they are not as Chinese as they think they are.

As for Sun Yet sun, he claimed himself as Cantonese as-well. On wikipedia it says he was born from Cantonese-Hakka families. on the book it claims he was an Hakka who considered himself as Cantonese and that his native language was Cantonese. Hakka are mixture of Han and She people (hmong) and Cantonese are mixture of Han and Baiyue. In Laos there is many Hmong and Baiyue descendants.

In real life, it's better to be straightforward. But on the internet opinions can vary and you feel more safe, I'm considered 100% Chinese in the Laos census, and my parents would rather identify as full Chinese.

then you're a chinese lao. chinese ancestry with lao nationality. what's the matter with that? there's no identity crisis. obviously your parent with chinese ancestry may be different from the mainland chinese.

i wouldn't say anything from wiki is accurate to be honest with ya. it's a subject of debate. and from my understanding, he was a hakka who can understand cantonese. it's easier for hakka to learn cantonese than cantonese learning hakka. his mother dialect is hakka and his village name trait to hakka. then you have his family member saying they're cantonese. so they might get confused because during revolution, cantonese plays very big role so he wants to affiliate with the group i guess. never heard of hakka is mixture of han and she people. you seem to flip flop between culture and genetic. maybe you're confused what is han, what is chinese, what is ethnic, what is nationality, what is cultural identity...

My guess is you dont look very chinese.

Don't want to do with China? You are an idiot. Your views are too shallow and see things ONLY on the surface. You don't even understand the situation and I am not going to tell you why either. Sometimes things are not what it appears to be.

The patriarchal society is to blame for all this, if Chinese ancestry was only on my maternal side, than this today wouldn't have ever happened. I guess my parents are also to blame, but than again maybe it's not there fault. They were brought up to be raised like Chinese, all Laotians Chinese were since they were born, but they properly don't know how modern Chinese people can be so judgmental. It's actually foolish for them to believe that they be treated the same way. What bonds them with Chinese is the culture, family name and traditions, but in China they would most likely face some level of prejudice. I read how Chinese government treated Chinese Indonesians, saying that they don't consider them pure Chinese so they didn't allow them entry. This only strengthens the fact that there is really no point in claiming to be Chinese if you're mixed, especially if you only have some Chinese ancestry. I can you show genetic evidence that both the Cantonese and Hakka, and even Teochew have some genetic relations with the Baiyue, Hmong, Southern aboriginals.


As for Sun Yat Sen, I think he maybe an mix of Cantonese-Hakka since he spoke both. Or was an Hakka who identified as Cantonese. There is a lot of evidence that suggests he had something to do with Cantonese.


http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wkh1opd...ily&f=false

Scholars at Sun Yat-sen University who analyzed recently discovered phonograph records of his speeches heard a strong Pearl River Delta Cantonese accent in both his Mandarin and Cantonese, but no trace of a Hakka accent

http://fxylib.znufe.edu.cn/new/printpage.asp?ArticleID=4732

a quote by Sun Yat Sen himself “予途遇之华人既稔予为粤人，始以粤语与予相酬答，且语且行，步履颇舒缓。”


http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=u8fiAAA...amp;redir_esc=y

广东省社会科学院. 历史研究室, 中国社会科学院. 中华民国史研究室, 中山大学 (Guangzhou, China). 孙中山研究室"

"我是中国人广他问我的家乡是哪一省,我说是广东。他使说: "你是我的同乡,我也是广东人。。他和我走了一小段路,这时又出现另一个中国人 ... 当这第二个中国人出现时,那第一个人说, "这是我们的同乡" ,于是我和他捏了手。他不是广东人,他并没有讲我的方言

Dr Sun Yatsen's granddaughter


" Although not mention in her book, she was asked by one of the reporters
whether Dr Sun is a Hakka or a Cantonese. She replied that her father (Dr
Sun's son), Sun Ke, has told her before that they are Cantonese, not Hakka.
The newspapers article also mentioned that previously, evidence in China
and interviews with the Sun's family members have confirmed that Dr Sun is
a Hakka. "

The Theory of Zijin (紫金说)

This theory proposed that Sun Yat Sen's ancestor were from Zijin 紫金 county, which was situated in central Guangdong province. The majority of dwellers of Zijin county are Hakka and thus the theory deduced that Sun Yat Sen was a Hakka.

This theory had its origin from Paul M. Linebarger 's book Sun Yat Sen and the Chinese Republic , which mentioned "Kung Kun" as the location of Sun Yat Sen's ancestry temple. The chinese scholar Professor Luo Xianglin 罗香林 transliterated "Kung Kun" into chinese as 公馆背, and argued that this was mentioned in the genealogy record of Sun's clan at Zijin 《孙氏族谱》. He further argued that Sun Yat Sen's ancestor 孙连昌 was the same person as 孙琏昌, as mentiond in Sun's genealogy record at Zijin and went on to propose a migration path of his ancestor to Zhongshan.

When Professor Luo Xianglin published his book 《国父家世源流考》 (Inquiry into ancestry lineage of Sun Yat Sen) in 1942, he argued that Sun Yat Sen's ancestor originated from Zijin and this was well accepted by the KMT and thus became a widely accepted view. The book mentioned "孙中山，实客家人与广府本地系之混血种，所居翠亨，原名菜坑，盖客家移民，初以种菜为生，故以菜坑名村也" (Sun Yat Sen, was in fact a mix of Hakka and Cantonese, his ancestors were Hakka migrants and initially grew vegetables for a living)

It was only until 1960s that this theory began to be revised as Professor Tan Bian 谭彼岸, Qiujie 邱捷, Lin Jiayou 林家有 gathered more information from artefacts and other historical sources to come into a conclusion that the theory of Zijin was full of flaws, lacked evidences and were unreliable. They generally supported the theory of Dongguan.

The Theory of Dongguan (东莞说)

The theory of Dongguan argued that Sun Yat Sen's ancestors came from Dongguan 东莞, which was situated in southern Guangdong province. As most of the dwellers in Dongguan were cantonese, Sun Yat Sen's ancestors were in fact Cantonese.

This theory was supported by tonnes of evidences from oral, artefacts and research information carried out after 1960s. The evidences are summarized as follow:

1. Information from sources and writings

The genealogy record 《孙氏家谱》 of Sun Miaoqian 孙妙茜 (a relative of Sun Yat Sen) recorded that "始祖、二世、三世、四世祖俱在东莞县长沙乡（即上沙乡）居住。五世祖礼赞公在东莞县迁居来涌口村居 住" (ancestors, 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation dwelled in Changsha village of Dongguan county. 5th generation moved to Yongkou village)

2. Oral Records

Many of Sun Yat Sen's relatives and descendents had mentioned that their ancestors originated from Dongguan and that they were cantonese.

3. Artefacts

Near the hometown (Chuiheng village) of Sun Yat Sen were 39 graveyards of Sun Yat Sen. The records tallied with Sun's genealogy sources such as 《孙氏家谱》、《孙梅景等人卖田契》、《乐安堂仕合号账册》、《孙达成兄弟批耕山荒合约》. It suggested that Sun's ancestors had migrated to Zhongshan from Dongguan around Ming dynasty period.

4. Sources

Most of the academic sources mentioned about the migration of Sun Yat Sen's ancestors from Dongguan to Zhongshan. You can refer to more authoritative source such as 《孙中山年谱长编》 (Sun Yat Sen's Year Lineage, 1991) and 《孙中山辞典》 (Sun Yat Sen's dictionary , 1994). These sources supported the theory of Dongguan.

5. Research

a. Cuiheng village (Sun Yat Sen's birthplace) is today populated largely by cantonese. The village only had a history of 300 years. The first settlers such as family of Mai 麦, Feng 冯 and Lu 陆 were not Hakka. Thus, Cuiheng village was not a place populated by Hakka immigrants. There were also no Hakka immigrants initially. If Sun's family were Hakka, they could not have lived amongst the cantonese. They would have to live in Hakka villages, such as those seen in Zijin.

b. Sun Yat Sen's speech record in 1924 clearly indicated that all of Sun's relatives were cantonese-speaking and not Hakka-speaking. There were no ancestors of Sun who can speak Hakka. There was a saying in Hakka that "one can sell the ancestors' land ,but no forget ancestors' language".

c. During the times of Sun Yat Sen, there were no practice of marriage between Sun's family and Hakka.

d. All of Sun Yat Sen's female siblings, family members and relatives (including mother, sisters) bounded their feet. It had been known that Hakka females do not bind their feet. How could they have bound their feet if they were Hakka?

I dont think Ive ever seen anyone with a worse identity crisis than you,Nanyue.

lmao now everyone knows the real reason you are trying so hard to make Southern Han Chinese seem like they are a separate identity from Northern Han Chinese... Hakka isn't a minority the Hakka I met(friends and family) claim they are the purest Han Chinese lol. Hmong are Miao not She... How many times do I have to state this,Cantonese aren't a mix of Nanyue people(who are mixed already) with Tang migrants,migration was sparse in Qin and Han,but picked up speed thanks to nomadic incursions/rebellions tell me do any of the Southern states during the time of the Ten kingdoms view themselves as Baiyue,hell even some Chinese aristocrats thought they were purer than Tang imperial family and they were in the South... Baiyue was just a blanket term for people South of Chinese states nowhere did it say they were all related,they are extinct anyway... lmao you like to fabricate claims such as warring states Yan was altaic and that Manchu aren't Chinese or intermarried with Han... If I go by your logic,my great great grandma was a member of the Pingpu tribe,should I go apply myself as an aborigine in the ROC?

Most Han Chinese in Taiwan have ancestors who have intermarried with local Aborigines (Gaoshan), but they consider themselves to be "Han".

Likewise, many Southeast Asian Chinese in Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore have ancestors who have mixed with Thai, Filipino/Spanish, Malay, Portuguese, Dutch, etcetera but consider themselves to be fully Han Chinese...

As long as you are AT LEAST 75% Chinese, speak a Chinese dialect, and practice Chinese traditions, then you are considered Han Chinese.



China is one of the greatest countries both in the past and in the present..

China may have some blunders (such as tainted milk products with melamine), but ALL OTHER countries including the USA also have their own similar blunders, so there's no use feeling "ashamed" for China.

In fact, if you are Chinese, then you should be proud to be one.

I think Taiwanese would have more Pingpu than Gaoshan since the former had most of its members sinicized,it all depended on when Taiwanese ancestors arrived or where they went,since there doesn't seem to be aborigines on smaller islands such as Penghu,xiao liu qiu etc and if the ancestors were the earliest settlers than they would have to marry aborigines. I don't mind Han Chinese with distant foreign ancestors to view themselves as Han,but it is utterly despicable what people like Nanyue do trying to distort history and make Southern Han Chinese a Baiyue entity.

There is no such thing as Han Chinese

If you are Southern Chinese, you are sinicized Viets/Thais

If you are Northern Chinese, you are sinicized Mongols/Manchus

If you are Southwestern Chinese, you are sinicized Tibetans

If you are Northwestern Chinese, you are sinicized Uighurs/Turks

Yeah that pretty much sums up the China bashers in regards to their view on ethnicity and bloody purity.

lol

What kind of Chinese would be so obsessed with Nanyue and Baiyue lol?

He's a Viet-cong...lol

Says who? Says you? Its pretty interesting that the only person I've seen who said this is from a mixed Chinese with an identity crisis himself with no idea whether he is a Filipino or Chinese.

I am Han Chinese from Malaysia and I travel to Singapore frequently a lot, and both Han Chinese from Malaysia and Singapore got no Malay or nonHan Chinese ancestry at all.

Hahaha, yup,thats about it.

I consider myself pure Han Chinese with Philippine citizenship.
In truth, I'm 1/8 Filipino and Spanish but even that does not even matter. I practice Chinese traditions and culture and can speak Hokkien.



Well yeah. True. When compared to Overseas Chinese from Thailand, Indonesia, or Philippines, Malaysian Chinese are relatively pure with no indigenous mixes because they are recent arrivals; the old arrivals probably are the Peranakan of today.

In Thailand, Indonesia, and Philippines, the Chinese were already present for a very long time, and the older generations always intermarry with the newer arrivals. Which is why in the Philippines, 60% of all people who consider themselves to be "pure Chinese" actually are 1/8 or 1/16 Filipino or Spanish. I guess it's similar with Thailand and Indonesia as well. Most especially in Thailand though, where most of the Chinese are now Thai speakers and practice Thai culture.

After my investigation I found you are either a Viet 'dog' or Filipino 'whore'. He is most active in the forums in the following order:

1. Filipine chat

2. China chat

3. Viet Chat

This is too sketching, it doesn't go with genetics. What we do know is Han Chinese is related with Tibetans, Qiang, Bhutanese.


Northern Chinese are mostly sino-tibetan people, some are mixed with Altaic

Southern Chinese are mostly sino-tibetan people mixed with Southern ethnic minorities

Northwestern Chinese are genetically sino-tibetan people

Southwestern Chinese like Yunnan are genetically like northern Chinese

Hakka are Han and only Han. So what if some She were assimilated that doesn't take away the fact Hakka is Han. Besides aren't the She a Yao-Mien related people?

It also doesn't take away the fact Hakka are mixed, only the mtDNA study shows Hakka are heavily mixed with southern aboriginals. Hakka have 31% Northern mtDNA but 58% Southern mtDNA. 62% northern Y-dna and 38% southern Y-dna. Cantonese 20-23% northern mtDNA but 70% southern mtDNA, but with 76% Northern Y-dna and 24% Southern Y-dna.

Han/Meixian, Guangdong (Xue et al. 2006)
3/35 = 8.6% C3-M217(xC3c-M48)
1/35 = 2.9% K-M9(xNO-M214, P-92R7)
1/35 = 2.9% N1-LLY22g(xN1a-M128, N1b-P43, N1c-Tat)
7/35 = 20.0% O1a-M119
5/35 = 14.3% O2*-P31(xO2a-M95, O2b-SRY465)
1/35 = 2.9% O3-M122(xO3a3a-M159, O3a3b-M7, O3a3c-M134) [LINE1-]
9/35 = 25.7% O3-M122(xO3a3a-M159, O3a3b-M7, O3a3c-M134) [LINE1+]
1/35 = 2.9% O3a3a-M159 [LINE1+]
2/35 = 5.7% O3a3b-M7 [LINE1+]
1/35 = 2.9% O3a3c-M134(xO3a3c1-M117) [LINE1-]
4/35 = 11.4% O3a3c1-M117 [LINE1-]

Han/Meixian, Guangdong ( Tian Dong-ping et al. 2009)

15/80 = 18.7% O1a-M119
13/80 = 16.2% O2*-P31(xO2a-M95, O2b-SRY465)
6/80 = 7.5% C3-M217(xC3c-M48)
1/80 = 1.2% O3-M122(xO3a3a-M159, O3a3b-M7, O3a3c-M134) [LINE1-]
31/80 = 38.7 O3-M122(xO3a3a-M159, O3a3b-M7, O3a3c-M134) [LINE1+]
1/80 = 1.2% O3a3a-M159 [LINE1+]
2/80 = 2.4% O3a3b-M7 [LINE1+]
1/80 = 1.2% O3a3c-M134(xO3a3c1-M117) [LINE1-]
9/80 = 11.2% O3a3c1-M117 [LINE1-]
1/80 = 1.2 % K-M9(xNO-M214, P-92R7)
1/80 = 1.2 % N1-LLY22g(xN1a-M128, N1b-P43, N1c-Tat)


Chaoshan and Cantonese, Hakka difference in the genetic background of maternal
http://eng.hi138.com/?i278537_Chaoshan_and...und_of_maternal

[Abstract] the purpose of the Guangdong Department of the Han people or three large Chaoshan, Cantonese and Hakka are the descendants of landlocked Central China the Han immigrants, this study reflect the maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) evidence of three major differences between the people of the genetic backgrounds . Chaoshan blood samples were collected 89 and 48 landlocked Central Plains high incidence of esophageal cancer among blood Taihang Mountain to build each individual's mtDNA haplogroups; Cantonese and Hakka haplogroup data from the literature. these 3 Department of a large crowd of people haplogroups and the distribution of population and the south of Taihang Mountain comparative analysis of Aboriginal people. Results Taihang Mountain Han people mainly from the north constitute the major haplogroups, Cantonese and Hakka, Aborigines South Main Zeyi haplogroup mainly Chaoshan showed major haplogroups in northern Han slightly above the main indigenous southern haplogroups. haplogroups based on the frequency of the principal component analysis, together Taihang Mountain and Chaoshan, Hakka and Cantonese people are aboriginal groups and the South together. Conclusion 3 large public system, only the Han nationality Chaoshan blood is more pure, and the closest Taihang Mountain population, which may also be the high-risk groups for the South coast of esophageal cancer One of the reasons; Cantonese Hakka and aboriginal people are in the South have more matrilineal descent blend.

We are all human. What the purpose of all these genetics debate? As the German philosopher, Karl Jasper said:' human have history behind them, animals have history after them'. A chicken will always acting like chicken because it is their genetics that tell them, you are a chicken.
Human is without boundaries, even when you call it 'genetics proofs'. We are what we do.