Thread: Incest (and other taboos?)

Anyway, certain things are taboo pretty much across all cultures. Incest is one of those examples (here I'm specifically thinking between siblings). But - why exactly is it a taboo?

Obviously a child born to people so closely related by blood would be at an extreme genetic disadvantage, possibly leading to many physical/mental problems. So are we just naturally wired to stay away from incest for this reason? Is this pretty much the only reason, then?

What about people who don't want to have children... Why then would their relationship still be taboo?

What about siblings who are not related by blood (one or both adopted)? Why is that relationship taboo?

Disclaimer: I'm absolutely against incest of any kind (that whole cousins being allowed to marry in certain cultures pisses me off ).. but I'm just trying to understand the reasons behind this pretty much universally unaccepted act.

Most of it (IMHO) is just society trying to enforce a status quo. Fundamentally, I'd say it goes back to the whole 'genetic disadvantage' thing, but in order to control something like that, you have to make the stigma go much deeper than that. It's not good enough to just let people think that "well, it's ok, as long as we don't have children." You have to demonize the act, in all its forms, so that people will stay as far away from it as possible. It's to a point, now, where you couldn't even mention having a relationship with your cousin without risking social ostricism(sp?).

It's a dogmatic insurance policy, so that the extreme case (degeneration of the species, due to inbreeding) is much less likely to happen.

Of course, that's just my speculation on it.

You have to demonize the act, in all its forms, so that people will stay as far away from it as possible. It's to a point, now, where you couldn't even mention having a relationship with your cousin without risking social ostricism

You have to bear in mind that we've only really had the knowledge of why incest is bad (genetic mutations etc) for a relatively short period of time, as well as somewhat reliable contraception. Essentially for much of our history, social and biological influences such as the Westermarck effect have been the only tool available.

As long as people who engage in this don't want to have children together (assuming they are capable of it), then I don't really care.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

You have to bear in mind that we've only really had the knowledge of why incest is bad (genetic mutations etc) for a relatively short period of time, as well as somewhat reliable contraception. Essentially for much of our history, social and biological influences such as the Westermarck effect have been the only tool available.

True. That brings into question, though, exactly how long incest has been taboo, in American culture and others around the world.

I dont think you necessarily need the knowledge in such details (genetic mutations) to know incest is bad for the offspring. Id imagine the negative effects of inbreeding were very easily observable hundreds of years ago, especially to animal breeders.

I think humans, just like many other species have evolved to avoid incest, it doesnt take a genious to see how a trait that supressed the desire to breed with close siblings, as in the westermarck effect, could be beneficial to a species. I also agree with Oneironaut that society acts to demonize incest, most religions have something negative to say on the subject for example.

You guys realize that incest being a taboo is relatively new, right?* Back in the day, in many royal and rich families in many different cultures there was tons of inbreed, due to them considering everything non-royal/rich inferior. Thus cousin and neece often wed each other. Iirc this also happened in Egypt in ancient Pharaoh families a lot. Maybe us only "recently" finding out that inbreed causes genetic disadvantages is related to the fact that incest hasn't been a taboo for that long.

* Never mind. You do. I didn't read the posts in this topic but the OP. (Editlól)

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

True. That brings into question, though, exactly how long incest has been taboo, in American culture and others around the world.

Not that long..

It was common at one time..

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Most of it (IMHO) is just society trying to enforce a status quo. Fundamentally, I'd say it goes back to the whole 'genetic disadvantage' thing, but in order to control something like that, you have to make the stigma go much deeper than that. It's not good enough to just let people think that "well, it's ok, as long as we don't have children." You have to demonize the act, in all its forms, so that people will stay as far away from it as possible. It's to a point, now, where you couldn't even mention having a relationship with your cousin without risking social ostricism(sp?).

It's a dogmatic insurance policy, so that the extreme case (degeneration of the species, due to inbreeding) is much less likely to happen.

Of course, that's just my speculation on it.

It's also my speculation on it. However, I don't think it was consciously planned out that way by humans. I think the response evolved into our biology because of how much incest screws up offsprings. I guess I am agreeing with several people here.

I should admit that I think the idea of lesbian twins is pretty hot.

I know I'm going to open up a whole 'nother can of worms... I can't help it, but I apologize in advance.

If you believe in the Bible and Creation/Adaptation there are several interesting things to consider.
Adam and Eve were perfect, they sinned and passed it on to their children. But it started with perfect genes. Incest was the only option available initially.
People did not eat meat until AFTER the Flood of Noah's day. To me, that indicates that the further the gene pool deteriorated, the more nutrition they came to need.
I don't recall the exact time-line but there was still no Scriptural law against incest until some time AFTER Sodom and Gomorah (sp) were destroyed.
BUT, in Noah's life after the Flood, laws were given against 'seeing the wife of your father naked' and such because it was shameful because to uncover the wife's nudity was to uncover the nudity of the father which was disrespectful.

I know many people don't agree with me, but from my line of thinking> mankind restarted with Noah, Noah's wife, the three sons and their wives. As the families grew, they spread out over more land and carried some basic information with them (regarding God, the story of the Flood, the Mosaic Laws etc) and these were passed on to future generations. By the time the Tower of Babel was constructed and people were strewn across the world, their knowledge went with them. Which is why certain things seem almost universal- it all originated from the same place.

Now, how much further are we away from those perfect genes? People carry disorders, impairments, diseases etc in many forms which at times are highly hereditary. For that reason alone, brother/sister, parent/child sexual relationships should remain taboo.
I don't think relations through marriage count unless the children were brought up as babes together, but that's only because of the possibility of psychological ramifications.

At my Congregation was a high schooler who had been dating a guy for years. They were madly in love... and then their divorced parents met each other and came to fall in love lol. Mom and dad got married which caused a bit of unease with the courting teens.
They couldn't date and live together for obvious reasons lol, but that wasn't a problem because the son lived with his mom. Eventually the two kids got married as well
I, myself, have Aunts who are also Cousins lol but it was because of similar situations as above.

Personally, I knew a retarded couple who were brother and sister and had a very retarded daughter. She was older than me and as sweet as can be, but only reinforced in my mind that such unions are usually disasterous.

I do find it interesting, though, that animal breeders frequently mate siblings or parent/offspring to bring out desirable qualities/traits, and I've wonder why the same couldn't be true for people. I guess humans are simply more complex or something ???

Very interesting thread!!

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

What about siblings who are not related by blood (one or both adopted)? Why is that relationship taboo?

I understand there's definitely a problem when they're teens living under the same roof and getting into a relationship...but must it really be taboo when they've grown up and moved out? After all, they aren't really siblings...