View previous topic | View next topic

Incest

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

djgordy
304429.  Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:14 pm Reply with quote

CB27 wrote:
Mutation is actually a positive thing and is a great driving force for evolution because it was mutation which led to the various body parts and functions we have today and even to the development of our brains.

If a mutation leads to a positive effect, it's likely that the carrier of that mutation is sought by members of the oppositie sex to breed and over time family lines of those who do not carry this mutation may probably die out.


Of course, but in the (for want of a better term) wild natural selection plays a part and offspring that are not healthy or viable in the long term are weeded out. In the human world, those offspring tend to live because we, quite rightly, take care of them.

 
CB27
304491.  Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:13 pm Reply with quote

Ahh, but without sounding too heartless here, how much harder is it for people born with severe disabilities to find partners and produce children? Natural selection wins out in the end.

 
crissdee
310883.  Sat Apr 05, 2008 4:16 am Reply with quote

I read once in an early issue of "Bizzare" magazine that it had come to the attention of the kind of people who look at such things, that given the socially closed nature of the huge estates such as Byker in Newcastle, the inhabitants were creating their own little gene pool and mutations that were otherwise rare were, while not common, at least happening more often in such communities. Incidentally, I almost got into a fight in a curry house in South Ockenden while expounding this idea to a friend. The couple at the next table took offence at my suggestion that they were part of a gene pool. Kind of backs up my argument really doesn't it!

 
Flash
310885.  Sat Apr 05, 2008 4:25 am Reply with quote

djgordy wrote:
In the human world, those offspring tend to live because we, quite rightly, take care of them.

The influence of this on our evolution remains to be seen, though: primate evolution works over thousands of generations and hundreds of thousands of years - and we've had the ability to actively distort the process only for a century or so.

 
Dedeme
319801.  Sat Apr 19, 2008 3:36 am Reply with quote

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23494953-2,00.html

Here is an article about an Australian Father and Daughter....or rather an Australian couple.

 
General_Woundwort
325922.  Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:31 am Reply with quote

Ugh.

 
Sadurian Mike
326058.  Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:33 pm Reply with quote

General_Woundwort wrote:
Ugh.

Quote:
His wife Rosemarie had allegedly not been aware of what was going on.

For 24 years? Am I the only one to be a tad cynical about that claim?

 
hmloyal.com
333358.  Fri May 09, 2008 10:56 am Reply with quote

I'm no geneticist, but I have been told that the progeny of incestuous copulation can inherit some great skills and talents, as well as the negative effects of being prone to diseases and conditions carried in the gene pool. For instance Cheetahs at one point were down to a very small number, and it is because of this they were able to evolve their great speed.
Incidentally, in the southern USA 'a very close family' who had the unfortunate genetics of lacking the ability to create a certain vitamin, actually turned blue!! Their skin literally did turn a Smurf-like shade! At least they weren't in danger of being called rednecks I suppose!

 
Sadurian Mike
333502.  Fri May 09, 2008 5:37 pm Reply with quote

hmloyal.com wrote:
I'm no geneticist, but I have been told that the progeny of incestuous copulation can inherit some great skills and talents, as well as the negative effects of being prone to diseases and conditions carried in the gene pool.

There is that to be said; essentially you are simply limiting the genepool from which your offspring will get their genes, so they may get lucky and inherit a beneficial mutation.

Unfortunately the majority of mutations are negative in some way.

Skills, by the way, are never inherited; they are learnt, but I take your point.

 
Invidentia
811706.  Sun May 01, 2011 4:39 am Reply with quote

hmloyal.com wrote:
For instance Cheetahs at one point were down to a very small number, and it is because of this they were able to evolve their great speed.


Now i don't have any articles to support this, but based on the fact that they were forced to a very small number primarily by the rapid expansion of humans and since i doubt that they have drastically changed their way of living in such a short amount of time i would find it a fair assumption that they were also then hunting by merrit of their great speed and that this speed is not something to be attributed to this recent decline in numbers.

 
maddi906
823920.  Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:58 pm Reply with quote

The post I have read on this page has all been about incestuous couples procreating, and the mutations that child might have. That was not what I was looking for when I searched incest. Most people are aware of these factors, but is that really why this incest is a taboo? Is it not as when people who have Aids/HIV or Down's syndrome want to have kids? That is way more accepted than two siblings having a kid, adopting a kid, marrying or even just being together as a couple. The taboo is in the definition of the word; "incest- the crime of having sexual intercourse with a parent, child, sibling or grandchild". I don't think incestuous relationships are a crime when it's just about having romantic or sexual feelings for someone in your close family, but I don't think that incestuous couples should be having kids together. Bringing a kid into the world when you know it runs a huge risk of having a serious disfunction, and that there are many kids in the world who need parents and homes, seem to me just pointless and a bit selfish. I don't think we can control who we fall in love with (if we could, would gays ever existed?), but that you can choose not to act on your feelings. But why should people give up on their love just because it's a bit out of the ordinary? Why would we take away their chances of being happy together as married/having sex/with kids (adopted or born by surrogate or sperm donor)? It is not the relationship that is bad, only the negative effect the close biological relationship between the parents, a kid might get. I won't say I get how anyone could be in love with their brother, sister, parent or grandparent, but you love who you love.

 
samivel
824021.  Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:38 am Reply with quote

So you think it's OK to have sex with someone who is in your own immediate family, but not someone who is your own sex.

Well, it's a point of view, I suppose.

 
Sadurian Mike
824044.  Wed Jun 15, 2011 7:38 am Reply with quote

Incest is a crime because successive generations have thought it socially unacceptable enough to make it illegal.

There are always those who disagree, the same as there are those who believe that theft should be legalised, but laws are made by those elected by the majority* and not the relative handful of individuals whose views go against the bulk of society.


* I do know that many democratic systems don't literally have a majority voting in governments, but you know what I mean.

 
CB27
824045.  Wed Jun 15, 2011 7:40 am Reply with quote

There's plenty of study about incest and incest taboo. Freud suggested that kids growing up will naturally lust after members of their own family, by process of sexual imprinting, much in the same way animals (and humans) are conditioned to seek mates with certain characteristics and/or traits. He looked at how men seemed to unconsciously seek women who were similar to their mothers, and women seemed to unconsciously seek men who were similar to their fathers.

Westermarck argued the opposite, and suggested that close domestic proximity during early years desensitizes us to later sexual attraction. Studies into communities like Kibbutzes, where unrelated children grew up together, yet had low proportions of marriages between the, look like proving the general principal of this argument.

Furthermore, there's something called GSA (Genetic sexual attraction), which occurs when siblings (or other close relatives) are brought up separately, withlittle or no contact, and develop sexual attraction when they meet at later life. This suggests that the Westermarck effect works to combat the effect of sexual imprinting.

These are all the scientific explanations of why incest occurs, and why it's not common, and also explains why so many also consider incest as wrong.

How to legally deal with it when it happens is another matter.

 
CB27
824046.  Wed Jun 15, 2011 7:41 am Reply with quote

Sadurian Mike wrote:
* I do know that many democratic systems don't literally have a majority voting in governments, but you know what I mean.

Hmm, pre-empting bob's reply? :)

 

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group