I once read a book (of course I promptly forgot title and author, am getting old) that explained taboos and rules of behaviour put up by institutionalized religions, and they came up with totally mundane explanations in ALL cases.
As for the incest thing it made very much sense in earlier centuries to be forbidden, because people were living in much smaller communities and often never travelled farther than a day's walk in all their life. So the number of people they would meet and come to know in their life was necessarily much smaller than ours today. Therefore the temptation to just marry your sister/halfsister/cousin must have been much bigger just because they were available and you knew them. Then this 'don't marry too close'-rule was sensible because otherwise - if interfamily marriages would have occurred generation after generation - they really would have ended up with nine-headed babies all over the place, so to speak.
But nowadays this reason is pretty much gone as - unless you have a life-threatening genetic disease in the family - people even in smaller countries are so thoroughly mixed up that the occasional brother/sister-coupling would really do no harm at all. The reason that this taboo is still so strong in the USA has, I believe, simply to do with the fact that church/religion still has a more powerful position over there, so Americans have it more deeply ingrained that incest is such a squicky thing.
Here we have the occasional yellow paper story about brother and sister growing up apart and ending up married unknowing of their origins, but most people in my acquaintance would just shrug and say 'so what?', if they're both healthy or just won't have kids to exclude any risks, what's the big deal?
I find those culture clashes often really funny, because I absolutely didn't get it at first when Americans were talking about 'incest' meaning cousin/cousin. To have your first love affair/sexual experience with a cousin is almost a tradition over here.
But nowadays this reason is pretty much gone as - unless you have a life-threatening genetic disease in the family - people even in smaller countries are so thoroughly mixed up that the occasional brother/sister-coupling would really do no harm at all.
That's absolutely correct. And mating between cousins carries no higher risk of genetic deformities than that of the general population. For anyone interested in scientific explanation/backing, a (relatively) concise one can be found here.
To have your first love affair/sexual experience with a cousin is almost a tradition over here.
I've always gotten that impression as well. And I had a lot of cousins my age, at least one of which it wouldn't have been out of the question--we probably wouldn't have actually dated or anything, but if we had experimented or something I really don't think it would have been odd at all--at least not any more odd than fooling around with a good friend.
What you're saying about the rules about incest make perfect sense--I remember reading something once where they talked about how if you thought of a primitive band of people it would make sense to rule out incest just to keep the peace. You'd rather have the young men out to find mates rather than having them fight over the females you had.
I especially don't understand the idea of meeting someone you didn't know you were related to and feeling like it was incest. It's one thing to discover you're married to the baby you gave up for adoption (eep!) but a sibling you never met? Eh. Even if it bothered you enough to get divorced I don't see any reason to feel like you've done anything morally wrong. Particularly when you consider things like sperm banks etc. That's yet more ways you could not know who you were with!
What you're saying about the rules about incest make perfect sense--I remember reading something once where they talked about how if you thought of a primitive band of people it would make sense to rule out incest just to keep the peace. You'd rather have the young men out to find mates rather than having them fight over the females you had.
Yes, exactly, and by doing so they made sure that the gene-pool got well mixed up by literally bringing new blood into the community. So, because of our ancestors mostly abiding by this rule they enabled us today to more or less neglect it now.
I especially don't understand the idea of meeting someone you didn't know you were related to and feeling like it was incest. It's one thing to discover you're married to the baby you gave up for adoption (eep!) but a sibling you never met? Eh. Even if it bothered you enough to get divorced I don't see any reason to feel like you've done anything morally wrong. Particularly when you consider things like sperm banks etc. That's yet more ways you could not know who you were with!
Well, divorce was inevitable in this case, because sexual relations to close blood relations (mother, father, siblings) are still prohibited by law, at least in Germany. So, although no one *I* know would point an accusing finger at a brother/sister couple, they wouldn't be allowed to legalise their relationship.
As for the incest thing it made very much sense in earlier centuries to be forbidden, because people were living in much smaller communities and often never travelled farther than a day's walk in all their life. So the number of people they would meet and come to know in their life was necessarily much smaller than ours today. Therefore the temptation to just marry your sister/halfsister/cousin must have been much bigger just because they were available and you knew them. Then this 'don't marry too close'-rule was sensible because otherwise - if interfamily marriages would have occurred generation after generation - they really would have ended up with nine-headed babies all over the place, so to speak.
But nowadays this reason is pretty much gone as - unless you have a life-threatening genetic disease in the family - people even in smaller countries are so thoroughly mixed up that the occasional brother/sister-coupling would really do no harm at all. The reason that this taboo is still so strong in the USA has, I believe, simply to do with the fact that church/religion still has a more powerful position over there, so Americans have it more deeply ingrained that incest is such a squicky thing.
Here we have the occasional yellow paper story about brother and sister growing up apart and ending up married unknowing of their origins, but most people in my acquaintance would just shrug and say 'so what?', if they're both healthy or just won't have kids to exclude any risks, what's the big deal?
I find those culture clashes often really funny, because I absolutely didn't get it at first when Americans were talking about 'incest' meaning cousin/cousin. To have your first love affair/sexual experience with a cousin is almost a tradition over here.
Reply
That's absolutely correct. And mating between cousins carries no higher risk of genetic deformities than that of the general population. For anyone interested in scientific explanation/backing, a (relatively) concise one can be found here.
Reply
I've always gotten that impression as well. And I had a lot of cousins my age, at least one of which it wouldn't have been out of the question--we probably wouldn't have actually dated or anything, but if we had experimented or something I really don't think it would have been odd at all--at least not any more odd than fooling around with a good friend.
What you're saying about the rules about incest make perfect sense--I remember reading something once where they talked about how if you thought of a primitive band of people it would make sense to rule out incest just to keep the peace. You'd rather have the young men out to find mates rather than having them fight over the females you had.
I especially don't understand the idea of meeting someone you didn't know you were related to and feeling like it was incest. It's one thing to discover you're married to the baby you gave up for adoption (eep!) but a sibling you never met? Eh. Even if it bothered you enough to get divorced I don't see any reason to feel like you've done anything morally wrong. Particularly when you consider things like sperm banks etc. That's yet more ways you could not know who you were with!
Reply
Yes, exactly, and by doing so they made sure that the gene-pool got well mixed up by literally bringing new blood into the community. So, because of our ancestors mostly abiding by this rule they enabled us today to more or less neglect it now.
I especially don't understand the idea of meeting someone you didn't know you were related to and feeling like it was incest. It's one thing to discover you're married to the baby you gave up for adoption (eep!) but a sibling you never met? Eh. Even if it bothered you enough to get divorced I don't see any reason to feel like you've done anything morally wrong. Particularly when you consider things like sperm banks etc. That's yet more ways you could not know who you were with!
Well, divorce was inevitable in this case, because sexual relations to close blood relations (mother, father, siblings) are still prohibited by law, at least in Germany. So, although no one *I* know would point an accusing finger at a brother/sister couple, they wouldn't be allowed to legalise their relationship.
Reply
Leave a comment