Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    It is religiously and socially unacceptable, actually, thats why its against the law and against most religions.
    What if your sister/brother rejects your advances. How would that feel on the person who doesn't want it. That would probably make them spiral into depression, knowing their own sibling fancies them. Its not like a random stranger liking you.
    Why would they 'spiral into depression' wtf are you making this up as you go along?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by K the Failure)
    Seriously, do you have that saved in a .txt file somewhere?
    Funny you should say that; I actually have all my wittiest witticisms saved to a .txt file. :yes: Pretty clever, eh? There's a witticism for every TSR occasion, be it an 'I'm 20 and still a virgin' thread, an 'Am I good enough for Oxbridge' thread, or, as you can see, a thread relating to incest.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    I am pretty sure that's for first cousin relationships. That's why people compare cousin relationships to 35+ women relationships.

    "It is much more likely that both parents will carry the same recessive gene if the parents are related. The risk of a serious disease or malformation in a child of such a union is about 1 in 20. However, among married first cousins, the risk increases to about 1 in 11. If the couple are first-degree relatives, the risk is 1 in 2."

    http://www.healthscout.com/ency/68/219/main.html
    I've seen some studies say higher than 1-2% but that's the figure I've seen quoted most often. It certainly isn't as high as 1 in 2 that I'm confident of. Genetics doesn't work like that where if you have a child with your sibling there's a 50% your offspring will be disabled.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CombineHarvester)
    It's around 1-2% higher iirc. However this rises considerably if their parents were also siblings and rises again if their grandparents were siblings.
    Hmm... doesn't really seem large enough to be banning incest, tbh. Although I find it disturbing, that's probably because society has drilled that into me. Surely there are some normal couples that have a 1% or 2% increased chance of having a disabled child purely because of bad luck with genetics, but they're still allowed to reproduce?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skoji)
    The Daily Mail. I ignored all my brain's pleas of "don't click on the link" and read the article anyway, and it reminded me why I hate that paper so much.
    My thoughts exactly.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CombineHarvester)
    Genetics doesn't work like that where if you have a child with your sibling there's a 50% your offspring will be disabled.
    http://www.hhmi.org/genetictrail/e110.html - It's 50/50 chance of being a carrier and 25% chance of inheriting it.

    It's 50/50 if it's dominant disorder.
    Offline

    18
    the title is misleading tbh.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    http://www.hhmi.org/genetictrail/e110.html - It's 50/50 chance of being a carrier and 25% chance of inheriting it.

    It's 50/50 if it's dominant disorder.
    That's a theoretical case using an example with parents already carrying genetic disorders (whether recessive or dominant) but that isn't necessarily the case with siblings. The information on sibling studies in this regard (trying to get percentages) is sketchy because there's so many variables involved but Bennett et al. did conclude that it's somewhere between 7 and 31 percent (much lower for cousin relationships, 1-2% for that) but other sources say that it rises from 0.01% to 0.06%. In any case, it is still incredibly unlikely such birth defects occur so sibling relationships may triple the risk but it'd still be very rare that the child will be born disabled as a result.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CombineHarvester)
    between 7 and 31 percent
    So, 19% then seeing as it's the middle. That's still high.

    PS, the "0.01 to 0.06" claim is from a unreliable source (blog).
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    So, 19% then seeing as it's the middle. That's still high.

    PS, the "0.01 to 0.06" claim is from a unreliable source (blog).
    Yes but it's been quoted many times in other studies, check the comments.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CombineHarvester)
    Yes but it's been quoted many times in other studies, check the comments.
    Yup. There seems to be a lot of speculation. But, the average is still high.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Chocothunder)
    Funny you should say that; I actually have all my wittiest witticisms saved to a .txt file. :yes: Pretty clever, eh? There's a witticism for every TSR occasion, be it an 'I'm 20 and still a virgin' thread, an 'Am I good enough for Oxbridge' thread, or, as you can see, a thread relating to incest.
    ...

    Nice, I guess. :unsure:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Psyk)
    But in this case they weren't already "family". They didn't grow up together, and didn't even find out they were related until they'd already had a child together. I'm not necessarily saying incest should be widely accepted, but these people aren't weirdos who one day fancied shagging their sibling.
    I was talking generally.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    It doesn't really affect anyone.

    As for the kids, if people with inherited conditions e.g. cystic fibrosis have the choice of kids despite a 100% chance of passing it on to their kids, then why shouldn't the bro and sis, whose chance is much less than that?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Surely there is some complex of nature which makes it that you are totally sexually repulsed at your siblings.

    I think that those who engage unacceptably with siblings have not only a prefrontal cortex malfunction, but also a complete brain malfunction!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJ_Black)
    Given that the point of sexual intercourse is to concieve, then it's not an unfair assumption to make is it?
    It isn't necessarily no, nor does a couple necessarily have to engage in sexual intercourse.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    I was talking generally.
    I'd say generally consensual sibling sexual relationships are between people who didn't grow up together. Of course it could just be that when they did grow up together, they're more discrete about it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    If they are happy about it who am I to criticise?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 69Crazyfists)
    As long as they don't have kids :borat:
    um....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    We need to accept everyone, even if it makes us go "ewwwwwwwww!!"
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.