Post: #1

"An estimated 0.2 percent of marriages in the United States are between individuals who are second cousins or closer — that means there are about 250,000 people in America..."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-...r-cousins/

   

http://youtu.be/1b7OV6wP3Jg

Post: #2

(05-16-2015 03:39 PM)YossariansRight Wrote:  "An estimated 0.2 percent of marriages in the United States are between individuals who are second cousins or closer — that means there are about 250,000 people in America..."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-...r-cousins/



http://youtu.be/1b7OV6wP3Jg

and they are all probably in Appalachia.

Post: #3

Everyone in their past has had incest of this level, many times over.

As you go back in the generations, the number of direct ancestors you have increases exponentially, and before long, the number of direct ancestors you must have had grows beyond the living amount of people on the earth at that time.

The only way this works is if we had many people filling multiple slots in your ancestry tree, ie. incest. Throughout the world, cousin-marriage has been common in basically any culture you look into.

I doubt these people marrying their cousins today are mostly hillbillies. I would assume more likely they are immigrants from countries where this practice is still commonly accepted:



They say that the risk from marrying a cousin doubles a child's risk of congenital defects, which is about the same effects as waiting until you're 40 to have kids.

Post: #4

I guess the whole "fall of the west" narrative is true.

Post: #5

Waiting for Ali's input/clarification....

Post: #6

We are all related because Adam and Eve were the first two people on earth, and we all come from them.

Post: #7

Used to work with a guy that was married to his cousin. First cousin I believe... They had to travel to Arkansas to get married as it wasn't legal in Wisconsin.

Never met his kid but heard he was pretty fucked up. Of course dad wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed either.

Post: #8

(05-16-2015 08:05 PM)RioNomad Wrote:  We are all related because Adam and Eve were the first two people on earth, and we all come from them.

Post: #9

(05-16-2015 07:40 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

They say that the risk from marrying a cousin doubles a child's risk of congenital defects, which is about the same effects as waiting until you're 40 to have kids.

The map explains why some people get confused looking for the bathroom.

Post: #10

Post: #11

Maybe that's why Dubai pays to shit on Instagram girls. They are tired of fucking their cousins. Look at all the deep red there.

Post: #12

(05-16-2015 08:05 PM)RioNomad Wrote:  We are all related because Adam and Eve were the first two people on earth, and we all come from them.

Anyone with a brain that reads Genesis can tell that Adam and Eve were not alone. The heathen were around in droves but were considered animals to the ancient Hebrews and not even worthy of mention.

Post: #13

(05-17-2015 09:38 AM)rpg Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 08:05 PM)RioNomad Wrote:  We are all related because Adam and Eve were the first two people on earth, and we all come from them.

Anyone with a brain that reads Genesis can tell that Adam and Eve were not alone. The heathen were around in droves but were considered animals to the ancient Hebrews and not even worthy of mention.

Post: #14

The 0,2% number will rise if the right kind of people come to the US:





To be fair - Pakistani officials are trying to fight this, but the people won't listen to reason.

Post: #15

Yeah it is dramatically increased when you have more and more middle eastern immigrants.

I read some article about hospitals in Denmark being concerned about the birth defects due to incest increasing every year. Denmark has shitloads of middle eastern immigrants.

Post: #16

I believe it's around 50-70% for Muslims in Bradford, UK. Not even joking.

Post: #17

When you hear that Muslim nations are very tribal - this is what they mean. They are so distrustful of their own neighbors they'd rather marry their own cousin.

Post: #18

I'm not saying i would marry any of my cousins,but i don't get why cousin marriage is taboo in the Anglosphere

Post: #19

(05-18-2015 12:36 AM)Sailor Wrote:  I'm not saying i would marry any of my cousins,but i don't get why cousin marriage is taboo in the Anglosphere

I wonder why we have to spell it out: incest like relationships produce sub-par genetic offspring. And don't give me the crap about "most of the people are fine". Most genetic complications are not visible - lower IQ, mental instability, weaker immune system, weaker body.

As a country I would ban it completely under punishment of fines, prison sentences and subsequent sterilization if they continue having children. If you have wide-spread cousin marriage you have a country of morons and sub-par genetic stock after many generations.

If that is alright with you then go ahead.

Personally I don't care if you fuck your cousin - just don't have offspring with him.

Post: #20

Post: #21

Even this sort of incest is unacceptable in my book. I'm amazed at how people can even consider marrying any sort of relative.

Post: #22

In The 1800s Charles Darwin, who was married to one of his cousins, had the idea that marrying your cousins might be harmful after observing inbreeding in plants. He asked an MP to collect information on cousin marriage in a census in 1871, the idea was rejected as an unacceptable invasion of privacy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...eding.html

Post: #23

(05-18-2015 07:33 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  In The 1800s Charles Darwin, who was married to one of his cousins, had the idea that marrying your cousins might be harmful after observing inbreeding in plants. He asked an MP to collect information on cousin marriage in a census in 1871, the idea was rejected as an unacceptable invasion of privacy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...eding.html

The Darwins are reputed to have intermarried with only 2 other families for over a century. It produced a bunch of geniuses and then also a number of both mentally and physically challenged children - way above the average number of the population.

The Rothschilds are reputed to have done so too in the 19th century. All of them stopped in the 20th century realizing that family relations are genetically too close. Maybe if you do it with a cousin 3-5 times removed.

Also there are behavioral studies on humans that point towards the fact that we have an intrinsic resistance to see our close family as romantic subjects. It's of course not related to anything genetic - we could fuck our sister if we did not know she was related.

They have plenty of data from Kibbutzim in Israel. As the people have a very communal living there children grow up together. They found out that the boys and girls practically never desired to intermarry contrary to the wishes of the parents. They simply saw each other as siblings despite not being related.

In times past we would have grown up with our close cousins in a larger joint family structure and we would have developed a natural resistance against seeing our close relatives as romantic material. In a way our behavioral nature gave us a tip towards genetic research that came along only later.

On paper it would have made sense - an intelligent family like the Darwins or Rothschilds attempting to eugenically even improve their own family stock by marrying their cousins. But - it proved to be a scientific error like blood-letting.

Post: #24

Post: #25

In the contemporary West cousin marriages are going to overwhelmingly involve Muslim immigrants, rather than Westerners. But in the past this wasn't always so.

As for the comments that only idiots would marry their cousin. Consider that both Darwin and Einstein married their first cousins. In my book, and most others, those two would be in the top 5 list of most brilliant men of all time. So before you go around calling people stupid you should consider the possibility that your view may be based on a certain kind of contemporary bias - rather than something inherent. Basically we all have a biological aversion to incest, but when and how this is triggered, is partly determined culturally. So Einstein and Darwin didn't have people talking behind there back and snickering. There was nothing particularly unusual about their marriages in their cultures at the time. Also, I understand that in China(I'm open to correction from people who know more about this) pretty much anyone with the same surname is considered "related" even though in any practical sense this is untrue of most people with the same surname. Especially considering the small number of total surnames in China. So for them the incest reflex is activated for someone a Westerner would consider not at all related. Whereas an actual first cousin, but with a different surname would not trigger the reflex. So incest aversion itself. i.e. the feelings of disgust, are biological. But when and how it is triggered is partly determined by culture, which can and does change. This is what people find difficult to accept. They wonder: "How on earth could Einstein have married his cousin. That is just disgusting. And I know it is disgusting because because I can feel the disgust in the pit of my stomach, and it is real." Yes, it is real, but the reason it triggered in you is based on what you have absorbed from popular culture rather than a purely biological reaction.

As alluded to in another post the majority of every single one of our family tree's involves a majority of cousin couplings (Yes, I know you don't want to hear this). If you take your tree back even only 1000 years the average rate of consanguinity probably puts the average coupling at "second cousin". And, no 1000 years is not a long time. At least in biological terms.