What's More Important: Paternal Line or Majority Ancestry?

[Kyp]

Depends on what you or the specific society think of as 'important'.
Scientifically both in equal measure.

[Smeagol]

Scientifically both in equal measure.

Not unless you're half of two things. If you're like 1/8 of something paternally it's obviously less important than the majority of your ancestry.

[Moje ime]

There is no 80% 70% of something, you have only two parents, each already have identity.

Paternal line is most important in ex Yugoslavia but I think if person wants to belong to another (mother's) ethnicity and acts like that then nobody can change that (this applies only to European ethnicities, ex Yugoslavian in first case).

[Kyp]

Not unless you're half of two things. If you're like 1/8 of something paternally it's obviously less important than the majority of your ancestry.

yes but you'd still be ~50% your father and ~50% your mother.

[Smeagol]

yes but you'd still be ~50% your father and ~50% your mother.

I know. I don't see why the father's side should matter more than mother's though if you have more of a connection to your mother's side. I personally identify much more with my mother's side of the family.

[Gwydion]

Not unless you're half of two things. If you're like 1/8 of something paternally it's obviously less important than the majority of your ancestry.

So what about mixtures of fairly similar people? Let's say a man who by blood is 80-90% Southern English but whose paternal line, surname, and 20% of their ancestry is Scottish?

[Óttar]

I have my maternal grandfather's last name. My mother's side has been in what is now the US for 400 years. My paternal line has only been here ~ 150 years. I'd like to maintain my maternal grandfather's surname in the family as I am only one of three remaining members. My aunt, my mother and myself.

[Kyp]

I know. I don't see why the father's side should matter more than mother's though if you have more of a connection to your mother's side. I personally identify much more with my mother's side of the family.

I agree with you. I never said the father's side is more important.

[Smeagol]

So what about mixtures of fairly similar people? Let's say a man who by blood is 80-90% Southern English but whose paternal line, surname, and 20% of their ancestry is Scottish?

Genetically they're obviously much more English. Culturally I guess it depends on how the individual is seen and identifies.

[Creoda]

So what about mixtures of fairly similar people? Let's say a man who by blood is 80-90% Southern English but whose paternal line, surname, and 20% of their ancestry is Scottish?

I would consider them a part-Scottish Englishman. They might even have an Anglo-Scottish surname. If they were diaspora they would be considered Anglo-Australian/ Anglo-American etc, but also just British.