Marriage between first cousins

Charles Darwin blamed himself for the death of his first daughter Annie (she died at age 10) on inbreeding through his marriage to his first cousin, Emma Wedgewood.
 
I worked with a bloke who married his first cousin. Having met her I could see why - she was a stunner, even at the age of forty!

Mind you, their kids did have some health problems that were down to their parents consanguinity (zat the right word?).
 
Parents being consanguineous would be their consanguinity.

Meaning related by blood by the way. If you meant it another way, than no, that's not the right word.
 
WildCat said:
In most of Europe you can even marry your sister/brother.

Lots of creepy people in Europe.

Even zoos don't mate animal siblings.
Click to expand...

Yes, because if it's legal, it means everyone is doing it...

I guess the only thing keeping you from marrying your brother/sister, Wildcat, is the law, right?

It's too bad your zoo trainers failed. ;)
 
Last edited:
In an age where the right to get marriage is being fought over by gays, why no one stands up for cousins who are in love with each other?
Click to expand...

Oh, don't you worry. Once gay "marriage" passes, any and every group currently forbidden to marry -- polygamists, fathers wishing to marry their (adult) daughters, "free love" random-sexual-partners advocates, and, yes, first cousins -- will demand the same treatment.

(Polygamy would be especially "nice" -- wouldn't it be fun to live in a country that resurrected that age-old women-repressing practice? Bye-bye feminism...)
 
I don't get how having more than one wife is intrinsically repressing women.
 
On the Peninsula in the state of Maryland, there's a group termed "SMIBS", for "Southern Maryland Inbreds".
They even have their own website.
http://forums.somd.com/life-southern-maryland/11067-hello-all-you-smibs.html
Many blond jokes in the region use SMIB instead of blond.
I spent a few years in Caroline County, VA, and noticed the lack of surnames in the schools, with many folk having the same last name, but denying kinship.
 
Luciana said:
I'm astounded by learning that in some US states marrying a first cousin is prohibited.

The quotes below are from Wired, but I suggest reading the entire article, which is short and enlightening.



In an age where the right to get marriage is being fought over by gays, why no one stands up for cousins who are in love with each other?

And how come it became associated with backwardness, poverty? In Europe it was common practice among the royalty. It must have been common practice in the vast majority of tribes throughout history.

To deny marriage to a couple because their children is at higher propensity for genetic disorders is a major can of worms we don't want to get into, and one which I don't foresee outside of a totalitarian society. So why can't first cousins get married in so many US states?
Click to expand...
Well since Aunts and Uncles share the same DNA with one of your parents wouldn't marrying one of their children be like marrying a half sibling? Half incest?
 
I don't think it's that uncommon, nor that our immediate recoil is founded.
I know there are some other threads I have read on this forum about this.
Here is a link explaining some of the issues:
http://www.cousincouples.com/?page=facts

I'm still not sure I'm that comfortable about that closeness, but I still see people choose mates that are similar, if not knowingly genetically close.
 
Luciana said:
So why can't first cousins get married in so many US states?
Click to expand...
I can see at least a few possibly valid reasons:

1. While the risks to the children of any particular cousin-couple may be negligible, the loss of genetic diversity harms society as a whole. Specifically, if cousins A and B marry and have children Y and Z, while cousin C and D marry to have children W and X, what are the risks for the children of X and Y if they marry?
This is similar, by the way, to the problem of vaccination: it may not be a big deal for any individual to avoid vaccination, but if enough people do it, everyone else is at greater risk.

2. Cousin marriage may lead to greater nepotism, stronger inter-familial ties, and thus weaker extra-familial ties. Depending upon how common the practice became, society may become more and more "tribalised" (as in, split into separate groups who look out for each other, but do not cooperate with members of other groups, and perhaps actively compete with them.)
This may seem far fetched, and I don't know that's it's particularly likely, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a correlation between societies with a predominance of cousin-cousin marriage and this sort of "tribalism" (for lack of a better word).

Of course, I'm not suggesting that this is an argument in favour of banning cousin marriage unless and until that connection is shown to actually exist. I certainly haven't done so, nor seen it done. I'm only speculating on possible justifications here. That same is true of the first point I made, actually.

In the end, I'm mostly in favour of it not being banned, but could be convince (with strong enough evidence of the above, for instance) to change my mind.
 
One other issue that has not been bought up yet. A man sees a pretty woman, has sex with her which produces a child. The same man also has sex with his wife who then produces another child. The two children meet and want to get married. Currently there is nothing to stop them. I know the probability of this happening is very low, but the number of marriages happening is so high that it must happen from time to time.
 
Sweden is the only country in Europe which allows marriage between people who share one parent only (half-siblings).
 
How about the awkwardness it causes for the rest of the family? How do a grandmother and a grandfather react to two of their grandchildren having sexual relations with each other? How do an uncle and an aunt react to their niece/nephew marrying their son/daughter? A father or mother feel about their child being with a person they regarded as a loved niece or nephew and that they now have to treat like a child's partner? How do siblings feel about their brother or sister being with their cousin?

If the marriage works out, is happy and lasts until death, that's one thing. If they date and don't get married, what then? Or if they divorce but still have to see each other as family?

This would make for some very awkward Thanksgiving dinners.

I'm not against marriages between relatives because it is practised by the poor and uneducated (or rather, perceived to be practised by them. Surely there are plenty of middle-class and wealthy people who have done it, as well), I'm against it because it's too problematic.
 
rjh01 said:
One other issue that has not been bought up yet. A man sees a pretty woman, has sex with her which produces a child. The same man also has sex with his wife who then produces another child. The two children meet and want to get married. Currently there is nothing to stop them. I know the probability of this happening is very low, but the number of marriages happening is so high that it must happen from time to time.
Click to expand...


And then there's this:

Twins who were separated at birth got married without realizing they were brother and sister, a lawmaker said, urging more information be provided on birth certificates for adopted children.

A court annulled the British couple's union after they discovered their true relationship, Lord David Alton said.
Click to expand...
http://cbs2.com/watercooler/Twins.unwittingly.got.2.627900.html

Roboramma said:
1. While the risks to the children of any particular cousin-couple may be negligible, the loss of genetic diversity harms society as a whole. Specifically, if cousins A and B marry and have children Y and Z, while cousin C and D marry to have children W and X, what are the risks for the children of X and Y if they marry? This is similar, by the way, to the problem of vaccination: it may not be a big deal for any individual to avoid vaccination, but if enough people do it, everyone else is at greater risk.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting part of the question. Obviously if cousin marriage became the human norm, there would be some big problems evolution-wise. (I'm no genetic biologist, so correct me if I'm wrong here.) However, assuming that the incest taboo is hardwired into us, there wouldn't be that much of it occurring naturally. And those isolated spots where it did, it would hardly make a difference in the grand scheme of things. So I guess what I'm saying is that if cousin marriage is legalized, it wouldn't be that much of a problem for us as a species, because our innate distate of it would keep it at a low incidence. No science to back that up, just a thought.

I'm kind of torn on the issue. Intellectually I understand the defect risks posed by cousin marriage are pretty slim. And if that's the sole argument, then we need to criminalize all sorts of marriages that currently are completely acceptable. On the other hand, when I was a kid, I sorta had a crush on a cousin I saw once a year. I'm adopted, and she was the granddaughter of my grandma's 4th husband, so there was absolutely nothing genetically dangerous about it. But, I still kind of had that "eww" feeling.
 
Roboramma said:
I can see at least a few possibly valid reasons:

1. While the risks to the children of any particular cousin-couple may be negligible, the loss of genetic diversity harms society as a whole. Specifically, if cousins A and B marry and have children Y and Z, while cousin C and D marry to have children W and X, what are the risks for the children of X and Y if they marry?
This is similar, by the way, to the problem of vaccination: it may not be a big deal for any individual to avoid vaccination, but if enough people do it, everyone else is at greater risk.
Click to expand...


But I doubt that people will get all excited to get married to their cousins enough to make any difference in the genetic pool, which is even more true in developed and diverse societies. The taboo will be lifted and some people will go down that path, but how is this kind of inbreeding any more harmful than, say, religious cults that isolate themselves purposefully, or close-knit far-away community with a small pool of people?

For example, I know of some gypsy communities that choose to get married between themselves, a group of about 500.There's no law to prevent that and I don't think there should be. Micromanagement of people's lives is not the role of governments.

2. Cousin marriage may lead to greater nepotism, stronger inter-familial ties, and thus weaker extra-familial ties. Depending upon how common the practice became, society may become more and more "tribalised" (as in, split into separate groups who look out for each other, but do not cooperate with members of other groups, and perhaps actively compete with them.)
This may seem far-fetched, and I don't know that's it's particularly likely, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a correlation between societies with a predominance of cousin-cousin marriage and this sort of "tribalism" (for lack of a better word).
Click to expand...

Some religious groups are already like that, and I don't see any movement to prohibit those.

One very important aspect is that we're talking about a developed society where arranged marriages are not the norm. In that case, your scenario becomes more far-fetched, because we're talking about cousins who fall in love to each other, not cousins forced to marry because their families want them to.
 
EeneyMinnieMoe said:
How about the awkwardness it causes for the rest of the family? How do a grandmother and a grandfather react to two of their grandchildren having sexual relations with each other? How do an uncle and an aunt react to their niece/nephew marrying their son/daughter? A father or mother feel about their child being with a person they regarded as a loved niece or nephew and that they now have to treat like a child's partner? How do siblings feel about their brother or sister being with their cousin?
Click to expand...

I don't know. Why don't you ask those questions to a couple married in any of the 31 US states that allow it?

And how is that any of your problem? Why can't people choose? Why are picking the most pessimistic outcomes? What if the family is delighted because the familiarity is proof of goodwill, the character of those involved is already known, no stranger will join the family, etc? Let people choose.

I'm not against marriages between relatives because it is practised by the poor and uneducated (or rather, perceived to be practised by them. Surely there are plenty of middle-class and wealthy people who have done it, as well), I'm against it because it's too problematic.
Click to expand...

Then don't do it. But it's not a valid reason to be against it, because some people will want it even if it's problematic. And which marriage isn't? Many couples are perfectly civil when they divorce, for example.
 
"Whatever their motivations, the laws are not supported by science. According to the National Society of Genetic Counselors, birth defects are 2 to 3 percent more common in children born to first cousins than among the general population — a real risk, but not enough to justify the bans."


2-3 percent seems like a pretty big number to me, particularly when applied to the possibility of producing a flipper baby. That better be one HOT cousin.
 
That's the thing. Marriage is already problematic enough without marrying your uncle's son.

I'm not saying I think it should be criminally punished by the law and by society...but it should not be exactly encouraged, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom