Avoiding incest in Iceland

Found that in Cyprus too (not the app; the island inbreeding issue)--although there they didn't seem to care all that much if they were banging their cousin.
 
Haha, man, glad I don't need to worry about that. Small family, and my tastes tend towards outside of my ethnicity, anyway. Still, sounds like there's a plot bunny in there somewhere... Someone hacks the app so that it gives only false negatives and positives?
 
I find it kind of odd that people don't know their own cousins in a nation that small. Maybe they are trying to avoid second cousins, which I could understand not recognizing on sight.



It's cuz all them blonde haired, blue eyed people look alike, I think.
 
The American Indians have been doing something like this for several thousand years. Incest is a big taboo so you introduce yourself with your name, clan, and tribe.
 
And if you are Navajo, you identify both your mother's clan and your father's, 'born to the ______ for the _______'. Very specific identification that way.
 
Brother/Sister mating plateaus at 97% homozygosity after 5 generations; First cousin mating takes 15 generations to reach the same plateau. Second cousin mating plateaus at 47%. Third cousin mating is comparable to mating strangers as far as genetic homozygosity goes. In small populations, one can't help but mate relatives, so we find second cousin mating fairly commonly in social systems.
Remember, of course, that incest is a matter of social system: it's mating relatives you aren't supposed to mate, and relatives, as well as who you can mate, is sosioculturally defined. Inbreeding is the biological issue.
 
Brother/Sister mating plateaus at 97% homozygosity after 5 generations; First cousin mating takes 15 generations to reach the same plateau. Second cousin mating plateaus at 47%. Third cousin mating is comparable to mating strangers as far as genetic homozygosity goes. In small populations, one can't help but mate relatives, so we find second cousin mating fairly commonly in social systems.
Remember, of course, that incest is a matter of social system: it's mating relatives you aren't supposed to mate, and relatives, as well as who you can mate, is sosioculturally defined. Inbreeding is the biological issue.

My parents found out after they had been married for years that they were fifth cousins. It wasn't until my mother was doing some geneology research of her side of the family that she discover it.
 
My parents found out after they had been married for years that they were fifth cousins. It wasn't until my mother was doing some geneology research of her side of the family that she discover it.

Given that we all have 64 great-great-great-great-grandparents and that anyone descended from them or a sibling of any of those 64 would be fifth cousins to each other, it's not an uncommon occurence. And even under the old RC Church rules, which forbade third cousin and closer, it wouldn't be considered incest. Genetically, it's no different than mating strangers. It always feels a bit odd when you discover it, though. :D
 
Everyone's related at some degree, it's just a matter of how close you're willing to get.
 
Found that in Cyprus too (not the app; the island inbreeding issue)--although there they didn't seem to care all that much if they were banging their cousin.

Strangest thing here in California {and many other states that are considered progressive} . . . you're allowed to marry your first cousin but not your second, third, etc., cousin or your step-sibling or step-parent . . . but people are allowed to marry their blood-related first cousin.

Unless these laws were implemented to cater to cultures that regularly marry their first cousins {prevalent in the M.E. and African cultures}, I don't see the logic in that. Even stranger, despite all the comical references to states like Kentucky and Arkansas, the Bible-belt states have the most anti-incest laws in the country.

Since most laws are passed and instituted with an eye on money, I can only deduce from this that wealthy people don't want to marry outside of one's family in order to keep their wealth within it {although incorporating oneself removes that possibility}, and most first cousins are close enough for that since marrying one's full-blooded sibling is not a healthy thing and second and third cousins are too distant.

Studies have shown, btw, that the risk factor for birth defects in a first cousin-with-cousin pairing has been overstated and is not that much higher than pairing with a person not of the familial gene pool. Considering that Arabians, Iranians, and Iraqis have been marrying their cousins and producing offspring from that pairing for hundreds of years without above average hereditary problems, this could be the proof in the pudding that first cousin marriage and reproducing isn't all that risky.
 
I wrote a story about first cousins having sex, falling in love and marrying and put it in the 'Incest/Taboo cat. I got feedback flak saying it wasn't incest. I guess what is or isn't incest varies from one area to another. :rolleyes:
 
I wrote a story about first cousins having sex, falling in love and marrying and put it in the 'Incest/Taboo cat. I got feedback flak saying it wasn't incest. I guess what is or isn't incest varies from one area to another. :rolleyes:

Strange. I've never had a single comment or feedback admonishing me for my single cousins story on Lit, in that it isn't really incest. But since the definition for incest is, "sexual relations with close kin" and first cousins fall under that category considering first cousins share blood and are much closer kin than, say, step father and step daughter who share no blood {but who are banned from marrying one another in all states}, you'd think it easily falls under incest/taboo. So I guess you're right . . . it varies from area to area.
 
Strange. I've never had a single comment or feedback admonishing me for my single cousins story on Lit, in that it isn't really incest. But since the definition for incest is, "sexual relations with close kin" and first cousins fall under that category considering first cousins share blood and are much closer kin than, say, step father and step daughter who share no blood {but who are banned from marrying one another in all states}, you'd think it easily falls under incest/taboo. So I guess you're right . . . it varies from area to area.

In much of the Mideast, marriage between the childrenof two brothers is considered positive since all inheritance would be kept in the patrilineal family. Such a system is sometimes found in societies where inheritance is by primogeniture (first-born gets it all) and ownership is male. A first-born woman, then, would loose her inheritance to her husband's family. If she marries her father's brother's son, the wealth and status stay in the partilineage.
In ancient Egypt, the Andean civilizations, and Polynesia, first-born daughters were married to a younger brother to ensure royal succession stayed in the father's direct line of descent.
First cousin marriage is allowed in a number of North American jurisdictions, including Quebec, but requires genetic testing and counselling as well as legal permission.
As a single instance, it rarely has significant biological consequences, though there is, obviously an increased risk of homozygosity for deleterious recessive alleles - hence the value of genetic testing and counselling. It only has biological significance if practiced consistently over a number of generations.
 
I wonder if there people in Iceland that actively look fro family members. That would be interesting to find out
 
In much of the Mideast, marriage between the childrenof two brothers is considered positive since all inheritance would be kept in the patrilineal family. Such a system is sometimes found in societies where inheritance is by primogeniture (first-born gets it all) and ownership is male. A first-born woman, then, would loose her inheritance to her husband's family. If she marries her father's brother's son, the wealth and status stay in the partilineage.
In ancient Egypt, the Andean civilizations, and Polynesia, first-born daughters were married to a younger brother to ensure royal succession stayed in the father's direct line of descent.
First cousin marriage is allowed in a number of North American jurisdictions, including Quebec, but requires genetic testing and counselling as well as legal permission.
As a single instance, it rarely has significant biological consequences, though there is, obviously an increased risk of homozygosity for deleterious recessive alleles - hence the value of genetic testing and counselling. It only has biological significance if practiced consistently over a number of generations.

Thank you for this very informative post! More scientific and in-depth than I can usually appreciate, but I particularly like:

"In much of the Mideast, marriage between the childrenof two brothers is considered positive since all inheritance would be kept in the patrilineal family. Such a system is sometimes found in societies where inheritance is by primogeniture (first-born gets it all) and ownership is male."

Yep. It's all about keeping it {the money} in the family. :D
 
Back
Top