Kissing cousins
April 5, 2012 8:49 AM Subscribe
Can someone shed light for me about the whole, hooking up with cousins?
I got into a debate with my mother, she said this is pretty common especially among Hispanic communities. I wanted to throw up. To me, blood, is blood whether you're first or second cousins. Am I crazy for feeling like this? I have ZERO desire to hook up with a cousin. She thinks I'm crazy. What's wrong with this picture?
I got into a debate with my mother, she said this is pretty common especially among Hispanic communities. I wanted to throw up. To me, blood, is blood whether you're first or second cousins. Am I crazy for feeling like this? I have ZERO desire to hook up with a cousin. She thinks I'm crazy. What's wrong with this picture?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage
"Such marriages are often highly stigmatized today in the West, but marriages between first and second cousins nevertheless account for over 10% of marriages worldwide. They are particularly common in the Middle East, where in some nations they account for over half of all marriages."
So, yeah, it's a thing.
You might want to think about what, exactly, grosses you out so much about it. I mean, if you take a broad view, every single person on planet Earth is 'blood related'.
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:53 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
"Such marriages are often highly stigmatized today in the West, but marriages between first and second cousins nevertheless account for over 10% of marriages worldwide. They are particularly common in the Middle East, where in some nations they account for over half of all marriages."
So, yeah, it's a thing.
You might want to think about what, exactly, grosses you out so much about it. I mean, if you take a broad view, every single person on planet Earth is 'blood related'.
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:53 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Folks, helpful answers or keep walking. Thank you.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:56 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:56 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
It was, back before we started figuring out how genetics worked, a pretty common thing, especially in the aristocratic classes and double-especially royalty.
List of coupled cousins.
posted by griphus at 8:56 AM on April 5, 2012
List of coupled cousins.
posted by griphus at 8:56 AM on April 5, 2012
In very small or insular communities, some degree of cousin marriage is very difficult to avoid.
I'm thinking in particular of some stricter religious sects, and am reluctant to be specific. You can't just pick anyone from the 3 billion or so appropriately gendered folks on the planet in such situations.
posted by bilabial at 9:00 AM on April 5, 2012
I'm thinking in particular of some stricter religious sects, and am reluctant to be specific. You can't just pick anyone from the 3 billion or so appropriately gendered folks on the planet in such situations.
posted by bilabial at 9:00 AM on April 5, 2012
This study from the 60s shows that it's fairly common among the Amish.
posted by jabes at 9:01 AM on April 5, 2012
posted by jabes at 9:01 AM on April 5, 2012
Certain communities of Indian Muslims practice it traditionally - my former neighbours, who were of South Indian heritage, were first cousins born to two sisters and the marriage was arranged by the families while in other communities, the girlchild is bethrothed to her mother's brother.
Consaguinity taboos might be cultural until modern medicine began to demonstrate otherwise.
posted by infini at 9:04 AM on April 5, 2012
Consaguinity taboos might be cultural until modern medicine began to demonstrate otherwise.
posted by infini at 9:04 AM on April 5, 2012
What's wrong with this picture is that you're taking your own preferences as normative and then judging other people as wrong or disgusting if they don't share your preferences. You are absolutely welcome to view a relationship with your own cousins as vomit-inducing. No one is saying you should fuck your cousin. But not everyone agrees with you, and in terms of genetics, there's not much more risk in mating with your cousin than with anyone else.
(Apparently, cousin marriages are pretty common in the plotlines of Spanish soap operas. Drawing conclusions about Hispanic community values from that is approximately as reliable as concluding from American soap operas that people in America routinely get violently murdered and then later come back from the dead and that most children in America are switched at birth.)
posted by decathecting at 9:04 AM on April 5, 2012 [23 favorites]
(Apparently, cousin marriages are pretty common in the plotlines of Spanish soap operas. Drawing conclusions about Hispanic community values from that is approximately as reliable as concluding from American soap operas that people in America routinely get violently murdered and then later come back from the dead and that most children in America are switched at birth.)
posted by decathecting at 9:04 AM on April 5, 2012 [23 favorites]
This is a question that anthropologists have been exploring for ages. The "incest taboo" is universal across all human societies, but it varies widely in its form as to what counts as incest (or more accurately, who counts). Someone had a theory that we feel an "instinctive horror" towards the idea of sexual relations with close relatives, which explains why brothers and sisters aren't normally sexually attracted to one another, and could explain your feelings towards your cousins -- I am presuming that you knew them growing up. If you hadn't grown up close to them, they probably would not feel as much like siblings to you, and then it would be cultural programming that tells you not to view them as sexual partners, rather than biology. And the crux of it is, cultural programming varies tremendously across cultures. Skim these course notes and you'll see it's a complex topic with loads of research and theories behind it.
posted by PercussivePaul at 9:06 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by PercussivePaul at 9:06 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
There's a difference between what you feel for your cousins and what other people might feel for their cousins, first or second or what have you.
In my culture, second cousins marrying is a-okay. Now, I have no desire to ever even think about marrying my second cousins, but that's because of who I am and who they are, and not because they're my second cousins. As far as I know, there's nothing dangerous, with regards to genetics, with second cousins having children together.
It may be icky, to you, but you'd probably feel icky about having sex with a second cousin of yours who was, per chance, adopted, no? It's the familiarity and the rapport you have with them that's making it strange, not genetics.
posted by lydhre at 9:07 AM on April 5, 2012 [2 favorites]
In my culture, second cousins marrying is a-okay. Now, I have no desire to ever even think about marrying my second cousins, but that's because of who I am and who they are, and not because they're my second cousins. As far as I know, there's nothing dangerous, with regards to genetics, with second cousins having children together.
It may be icky, to you, but you'd probably feel icky about having sex with a second cousin of yours who was, per chance, adopted, no? It's the familiarity and the rapport you have with them that's making it strange, not genetics.
posted by lydhre at 9:07 AM on April 5, 2012 [2 favorites]
I haven't been able to find the column in question, but I think this came up with Dan Savage once, and he pointed out that the major flaw in cousin dating was that if you break up, you still have to see your ex at every holiday and family reunion for the rest of your life.
I think that'd be enough to turn me off of the idea!
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:14 AM on April 5, 2012 [4 favorites]
I think that'd be enough to turn me off of the idea!
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:14 AM on April 5, 2012 [4 favorites]
I don't know when being "open minded" became "agreeing that whatever people do is perfectly fine." I think you can imagine how this could happen in the past and even why some people still do it, but I think you can still judge the decision to marry a first cousin (or second if you wish) as wrong. In most cases this isn't an issue of "they didn't choose to be that race/ethnicity/sexuality," it's someone just making a decision that you should be free to not agree with. Exception would be, and where I would have a hard time judging, is someone in an isolated culture who is truly ignorant when it comes to genetics.
posted by Patbon at 9:15 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by Patbon at 9:15 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
I got into a debate with my mother, she said this is pretty common especially among Hispanic communities. I wanted to throw up. To me, blood, is blood whether you're first or second cousins. Am I crazy for feeling like this? I have ZERO desire to hook up with a cousin. She thinks I'm crazy. What's wrong with this picture?
This differs among cultures and religions.
Republic of Cousins is an interesting book tracing the practice in the Mediterranean, which is heavily related to keeping inherited property within the family.
YOU'RE not crazy for feeling like this, because that's your culture and how you were raised to perceive these things, along with the issue of possible genetic problems a couple generations down the line. The question is why the fact that other cultures engage in this makes you feel defensive and "crazy" for feeling otherwise.
posted by deanc at 9:16 AM on April 5, 2012
This differs among cultures and religions.
Republic of Cousins is an interesting book tracing the practice in the Mediterranean, which is heavily related to keeping inherited property within the family.
YOU'RE not crazy for feeling like this, because that's your culture and how you were raised to perceive these things, along with the issue of possible genetic problems a couple generations down the line. The question is why the fact that other cultures engage in this makes you feel defensive and "crazy" for feeling otherwise.
posted by deanc at 9:16 AM on April 5, 2012
It's not easy to Google a quick reference for, but there's evidence that in the animal world many animals show a clear preference for mating with cousins over either siblings or non-cousins -- and it's really not that uncommon in the human world either, though it's pretty uncommon in the industrialized west.
The idea, as I recall, is that cousins represent a level of similarity that is close, but not too close (as it would be for a sibling or parent).
Now, this has not been my experience either, but it's not so odd as you make it out to be. After all, many people's first romantic encounters, even in the west, are with their cousins.
posted by gerryblog at 9:27 AM on April 5, 2012
The idea, as I recall, is that cousins represent a level of similarity that is close, but not too close (as it would be for a sibling or parent).
Now, this has not been my experience either, but it's not so odd as you make it out to be. After all, many people's first romantic encounters, even in the west, are with their cousins.
posted by gerryblog at 9:27 AM on April 5, 2012
What's wrong with it is that the degree to which the incest taboo is applied to cousins varies widely by culture.
Additionally, what's defined as a cousin - or relative, at least - is also defined culturally. In traditional Navajo culture, you don't marry within your clan, even if your potential partner is entirely unrelated to you by blood, because culturally, that is the same as marrying your sister or brother.
posted by rtha at 9:34 AM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]
Additionally, what's defined as a cousin - or relative, at least - is also defined culturally. In traditional Navajo culture, you don't marry within your clan, even if your potential partner is entirely unrelated to you by blood, because culturally, that is the same as marrying your sister or brother.
posted by rtha at 9:34 AM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]
one set of my grandparents were cousins, so I never really thought of it as that big a deal or something to be revolted about. No instinctive horror, certainly. All it means to me is an interestingly part-collapsed family tree and a reason to joke about being slightly inbred.
posted by corvine at 9:46 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by corvine at 9:46 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
Someone had a theory that we feel an "instinctive horror" towards the idea of sexual relations with close relatives,
I think the "instinctive horror" is more about emotional closeness, specifically both persons having developed from child to adult next to one another, than anything to do with genetics. I recall reading somewhere that unrelated persons who were born and grew up in Israeli kibbutzim, where the practice was to raise all children together in communal "children's houses", feel a certain degree of revulsion at the idea of having sexual relationships with one another. Emotionally, they are akin to siblings.
Cousins often grow up rarely seeing one another and barely knowing one another. If such is the case, the revulsion might not manifest.
If the revulsion does not develop in the case of first cousins and they do marry and have children together, there most certainly can be consequences. I have a relative by marriage whose parents are first cousins. Hereditary hardness of hearing, relatively mild in the parents, manifested quite profoundly in this person. I've heard there are are a number of genetic issues, including deafness, that are manifesting among the Amish to a much greater degree than in the general population due to first-cousin marriage.
posted by RRgal at 9:58 AM on April 5, 2012
I think the "instinctive horror" is more about emotional closeness, specifically both persons having developed from child to adult next to one another, than anything to do with genetics. I recall reading somewhere that unrelated persons who were born and grew up in Israeli kibbutzim, where the practice was to raise all children together in communal "children's houses", feel a certain degree of revulsion at the idea of having sexual relationships with one another. Emotionally, they are akin to siblings.
Cousins often grow up rarely seeing one another and barely knowing one another. If such is the case, the revulsion might not manifest.
If the revulsion does not develop in the case of first cousins and they do marry and have children together, there most certainly can be consequences. I have a relative by marriage whose parents are first cousins. Hereditary hardness of hearing, relatively mild in the parents, manifested quite profoundly in this person. I've heard there are are a number of genetic issues, including deafness, that are manifesting among the Amish to a much greater degree than in the general population due to first-cousin marriage.
posted by RRgal at 9:58 AM on April 5, 2012
I'm not sure what "shed some light" means here.
As others have said above, it happens often enough that it's clear your passionate reaction is not universal. I've met cousins I thought were attractive and didn't feel like I had to go home and whip myself with a cat-o-9-tails because I was so horrible.
My former landlord was from a latin culture where the children got a hyphenated name that was a combination of the mother's maiden name and the father's last name. And his name was essentially Smith-Smith. I wasn't aware of the tradition and asked him about it. He explained the tradition to me and said with a 90% amused 10% bashful chuckle that his parents had the same name because they were cousins.
Beyond that, what are you looking for, justification? "Blood is blood" sort of overlooks just how genetically and developmentally disconnected cousins can be.
I have a cousin who has never lived closer than 5,000 miles from me. So absent the cultural imperative against family-member-dating it's not like this is someone I grew up around and therefor would associate with as 'family' as a knee-jerk reaction. Do you not have cousins like that? Perhaps that plays into your strong reaction; it's impossible for you to imagine such a disconnection from a cousin.
Biologically two people can be cousins and have pretty dissimilar genetics. My Canadian cousin and I each have one parent who are full-blood siblings, meaning we're at least 50% genetically dissimilar. We'd still be counted as cousins if my dad and her mom had had different fathers or mothers. That's a big difference in shared genes, I'd say, and doesn't even address the fact that you can call someone a cousin even if it's purely a marital connection.
posted by phearlez at 10:02 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
As others have said above, it happens often enough that it's clear your passionate reaction is not universal. I've met cousins I thought were attractive and didn't feel like I had to go home and whip myself with a cat-o-9-tails because I was so horrible.
My former landlord was from a latin culture where the children got a hyphenated name that was a combination of the mother's maiden name and the father's last name. And his name was essentially Smith-Smith. I wasn't aware of the tradition and asked him about it. He explained the tradition to me and said with a 90% amused 10% bashful chuckle that his parents had the same name because they were cousins.
Beyond that, what are you looking for, justification? "Blood is blood" sort of overlooks just how genetically and developmentally disconnected cousins can be.
I have a cousin who has never lived closer than 5,000 miles from me. So absent the cultural imperative against family-member-dating it's not like this is someone I grew up around and therefor would associate with as 'family' as a knee-jerk reaction. Do you not have cousins like that? Perhaps that plays into your strong reaction; it's impossible for you to imagine such a disconnection from a cousin.
Biologically two people can be cousins and have pretty dissimilar genetics. My Canadian cousin and I each have one parent who are full-blood siblings, meaning we're at least 50% genetically dissimilar. We'd still be counted as cousins if my dad and her mom had had different fathers or mothers. That's a big difference in shared genes, I'd say, and doesn't even address the fact that you can call someone a cousin even if it's purely a marital connection.
posted by phearlez at 10:02 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
Another reason some cultures *prefer* cousin marriage is because you already know the family and (since marriage is often as much about property as it is about love) it keeps all the property in the family.
I think Dan Savage's "you'd keep running into them at family functions after you break up" argument assumes that breaking up is an option, which isn't necessarily the case in a lot of cultures/societies/families.
An isolated cousin marriage isn't necessarily a disaster, genetics-wise - I've heard that the increased risk of birth defects in the child of two first cousins is roughly the same as the increased risk of birth defects in a child born to a woman over 40. Lots of famous and successful people married their cousins (e.g. Darwin) or were the children of cousins (e.g. Mendel. iirc).
posted by mskyle at 10:09 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
I think Dan Savage's "you'd keep running into them at family functions after you break up" argument assumes that breaking up is an option, which isn't necessarily the case in a lot of cultures/societies/families.
An isolated cousin marriage isn't necessarily a disaster, genetics-wise - I've heard that the increased risk of birth defects in the child of two first cousins is roughly the same as the increased risk of birth defects in a child born to a woman over 40. Lots of famous and successful people married their cousins (e.g. Darwin) or were the children of cousins (e.g. Mendel. iirc).
posted by mskyle at 10:09 AM on April 5, 2012 [1 favorite]
Apparantly, Kevin Bacon and his wife, Kyra Sedgwick are distant cousins - they just found out by being on thatshow that is going through star's geneology.
posted by rich at 10:41 AM on April 5, 2012
posted by rich at 10:41 AM on April 5, 2012
Yes, as noted above, incest taboos are very culturally dependent.
Marrying first cousins was totally acceptable in Victorian England. Charles Darwin married his first cousin (on both sides) - though after they lost one of their children, he worried about it.
In my own culture (urban Canadian), I would say that dating a first cousin would be weird, but not a second cousin so much; having a cute second or third cousin was considered to be a plus. And it seems to me that the taboo is stronger in the US.
It's all what you were raised with.
posted by jb at 11:03 AM on April 5, 2012
Marrying first cousins was totally acceptable in Victorian England. Charles Darwin married his first cousin (on both sides) - though after they lost one of their children, he worried about it.
In my own culture (urban Canadian), I would say that dating a first cousin would be weird, but not a second cousin so much; having a cute second or third cousin was considered to be a plus. And it seems to me that the taboo is stronger in the US.
It's all what you were raised with.
posted by jb at 11:03 AM on April 5, 2012
Exception would be, and where I would have a hard time judging, is someone in an isolated culture who is truly ignorant when it comes to genetics.
Marrying cousins is not hugely problematic from a genetics standpoint. I am not taking a position on the appropriate degree of consanguinity at which the incest taboo should kick in, only taking issue with the idea that cultures which do not find second (or even first) cousin marriages terrible are ignorant about genetics.
Some aristocratic European houses did run into a spot of trouble but that wasn't because a couple of cousins got hitched one time, it was because of a systematic pattern over the course of many years.
posted by Justinian at 11:35 AM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]
Marrying cousins is not hugely problematic from a genetics standpoint. I am not taking a position on the appropriate degree of consanguinity at which the incest taboo should kick in, only taking issue with the idea that cultures which do not find second (or even first) cousin marriages terrible are ignorant about genetics.
Some aristocratic European houses did run into a spot of trouble but that wasn't because a couple of cousins got hitched one time, it was because of a systematic pattern over the course of many years.
posted by Justinian at 11:35 AM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]
Best answer: Yeah--this happens in the Middle East. My grandparents are first cousins (I'm Arab-American). They didn't really know each other growing up. They got married when they were 16, had 10 children, and fled Palestine together in 1948 for another Middle East country. They were together for almost 70 years. After she died, he sobbed for months and then locked the door to her room. All of her clothes and jewelery are just as she left them. I bet her hairbrush is still on the dresser. Their story doesn't make me want to puke. I actually think it's really lovely. But I also understand the culture. (I'm also not aware of weird genetic stuff going on--also know that the risk is very small, though it's there.)
But also: one of my mom's cousins wanted to marry her, and she said no because they had grown up together and he felt like a brother. But one of my mom's sisters did marry her first cousin--he was about 15 years older and they didn't really know each other. And they're annoyingly happy and in love and have 4 healthy children.
And finally: I was raised in the US. There's no way in hell I would marry one of my cousins. So there's that.
posted by namemeansgazelle at 12:18 PM on April 5, 2012 [4 favorites]
But also: one of my mom's cousins wanted to marry her, and she said no because they had grown up together and he felt like a brother. But one of my mom's sisters did marry her first cousin--he was about 15 years older and they didn't really know each other. And they're annoyingly happy and in love and have 4 healthy children.
And finally: I was raised in the US. There's no way in hell I would marry one of my cousins. So there's that.
posted by namemeansgazelle at 12:18 PM on April 5, 2012 [4 favorites]
Cousin marriage would be wrong for me personally because I don't have one I want to spend more than an afternoon with, let alone marry! (And no doubt THEIR argument - my cousins are all super religious Christians - would be the burning-in-hell sin factor.)
Again for me personally, two issues come up: First, this that Jenfullmoon referred to: I haven't been able to find the column in question, but I think this came up with Dan Savage once, and he pointed out that the major flaw in cousin dating was that if you break up, you still have to see your ex at every holiday and family reunion for the rest of your life. (IIRC, it came up in a Slate column on cousin marriage as well.) Assuming you have no kids together, if you don't like your ex, you can burn that bridge completely. It's harder to do so with family unless relationships are very distant. This wouldn't apply if the relationship turned out to be happy and lasting, but I wouldn't want to take the chance.
The ick factor in some cultures with cousin marriages is that some of those marriages are forced marriages. It's not the cousin factor - it's the forced factor. I would worry about the woman being made to marry a man she doesn't like, or being made to stay in a marriage where she is mistreated. Of course, that is not unique to cousin marriages and is more a function of how a family or culture treats its women rather than whether cousins marry; unfortunately "cousin marriage" cultures sometimes overlap with "forced marriage" cultures.
Here's a link to the family tree of Carlos II of Spain, who with his family is often trotted out as an example of why cousin marriage is bad. Note that the inbreeding going on in that family tree is a LOT more than just one set of first cousins marrying one another. Uncle married niece more than once, for starters. Cousins married cousins for generations. That's where you run into trouble, especially if your family founder (Juana La Loca) did not have healthy genes to hand down.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 2:02 PM on April 5, 2012 [2 favorites]
Again for me personally, two issues come up: First, this that Jenfullmoon referred to: I haven't been able to find the column in question, but I think this came up with Dan Savage once, and he pointed out that the major flaw in cousin dating was that if you break up, you still have to see your ex at every holiday and family reunion for the rest of your life. (IIRC, it came up in a Slate column on cousin marriage as well.) Assuming you have no kids together, if you don't like your ex, you can burn that bridge completely. It's harder to do so with family unless relationships are very distant. This wouldn't apply if the relationship turned out to be happy and lasting, but I wouldn't want to take the chance.
The ick factor in some cultures with cousin marriages is that some of those marriages are forced marriages. It's not the cousin factor - it's the forced factor. I would worry about the woman being made to marry a man she doesn't like, or being made to stay in a marriage where she is mistreated. Of course, that is not unique to cousin marriages and is more a function of how a family or culture treats its women rather than whether cousins marry; unfortunately "cousin marriage" cultures sometimes overlap with "forced marriage" cultures.
Here's a link to the family tree of Carlos II of Spain, who with his family is often trotted out as an example of why cousin marriage is bad. Note that the inbreeding going on in that family tree is a LOT more than just one set of first cousins marrying one another. Uncle married niece more than once, for starters. Cousins married cousins for generations. That's where you run into trouble, especially if your family founder (Juana La Loca) did not have healthy genes to hand down.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 2:02 PM on April 5, 2012 [2 favorites]
"Exception would be, and where I would have a hard time judging, is someone in an isolated culture who is truly ignorant when it comes to genetics."
Marrying cousins is not hugely problematic from a genetics standpoint. I am not taking a position on the appropriate degree of consanguinity at which the incest taboo should kick in, only taking issue with the idea that cultures which do not find second (or even first) cousin marriages terrible are ignorant about genetics.
Some aristocratic European houses did run into a spot of trouble but that wasn't because a couple of cousins got hitched one time, it was because of a systematic pattern over the course of many years.
The Role of Inbreeding in the Extinction of a European Royal Dynasty goes into the amazing levels of consanguinity in the Habsburgs. Generation after generation of uncle-niece and double-cousin marriage -- genetically you might as well be siblings.
I ran across that paper a while ago when I was looking for data on the elevated risk of genetic disorders in children of first-cousin marriages, but I actually came up with very little hard data. As with many things, I think "knowledge of genetics" is a smokescreen here used to justify pre-existing cultural taboos. The real genetic shitstorms arise in isolated communities where there simply aren't enough people to avoid marrying a person who may not be your sibling or your first cousin, but is probably your second or third cousin three times over. (If there was a "real" problem in Darwin's family, that was it -- it wasn't just that he and his wife were cousins, but that their entire family had an elevated consanguinity already. I know I've seen a paper on that, I'll try to dig it up.)
I invite people to recall that in Jane Austen's _Mansfield Park_, the heroine marries her first cousin (and, indeed, one of the objections to her being brought to Mansfield Park in the first place was that one of her cousins might fall in love with her -- the issue not being cousin marriage, but that she had no money on her father's side); Mr. Darcy was "destined for his cousin" and was flouting his aunt's wishes by marrying Elizabeth; and Anne Eliot's cousin (though not a first cousin) was considered a perfect match to her, to the point where his proposal consisted of asking her to "never change her name."
The reason those marriages were considered advantageous was that they consolidated family wealth. One argument goes that the extension of the incest taboo to first cousins was a strategy of the Church to prevent the accumulation of wealth and power in secular hands.
on preview:
The ick factor in some cultures with cousin marriages is that some of those marriages are forced marriages. It's not the cousin factor - it's the forced factor. I would worry about the woman being made to marry a man she doesn't like, or being made to stay in a marriage where she is mistreated.
I've seen it argued that cousin marriage is meant to ameliorate the mistreatment of women in arranged marriages -- she's not a stranger, she's family already, and her father is your father's brother (and your daughter-in-law is your brother's daughter), and so it confers a degree of protection.
I'm not wedded to that point, but it's something to consider.
posted by endless_forms at 2:08 PM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]
Marrying cousins is not hugely problematic from a genetics standpoint. I am not taking a position on the appropriate degree of consanguinity at which the incest taboo should kick in, only taking issue with the idea that cultures which do not find second (or even first) cousin marriages terrible are ignorant about genetics.
Some aristocratic European houses did run into a spot of trouble but that wasn't because a couple of cousins got hitched one time, it was because of a systematic pattern over the course of many years.
The Role of Inbreeding in the Extinction of a European Royal Dynasty goes into the amazing levels of consanguinity in the Habsburgs. Generation after generation of uncle-niece and double-cousin marriage -- genetically you might as well be siblings.
I ran across that paper a while ago when I was looking for data on the elevated risk of genetic disorders in children of first-cousin marriages, but I actually came up with very little hard data. As with many things, I think "knowledge of genetics" is a smokescreen here used to justify pre-existing cultural taboos. The real genetic shitstorms arise in isolated communities where there simply aren't enough people to avoid marrying a person who may not be your sibling or your first cousin, but is probably your second or third cousin three times over. (If there was a "real" problem in Darwin's family, that was it -- it wasn't just that he and his wife were cousins, but that their entire family had an elevated consanguinity already. I know I've seen a paper on that, I'll try to dig it up.)
I invite people to recall that in Jane Austen's _Mansfield Park_, the heroine marries her first cousin (and, indeed, one of the objections to her being brought to Mansfield Park in the first place was that one of her cousins might fall in love with her -- the issue not being cousin marriage, but that she had no money on her father's side); Mr. Darcy was "destined for his cousin" and was flouting his aunt's wishes by marrying Elizabeth; and Anne Eliot's cousin (though not a first cousin) was considered a perfect match to her, to the point where his proposal consisted of asking her to "never change her name."
The reason those marriages were considered advantageous was that they consolidated family wealth. One argument goes that the extension of the incest taboo to first cousins was a strategy of the Church to prevent the accumulation of wealth and power in secular hands.
on preview:
The ick factor in some cultures with cousin marriages is that some of those marriages are forced marriages. It's not the cousin factor - it's the forced factor. I would worry about the woman being made to marry a man she doesn't like, or being made to stay in a marriage where she is mistreated.
I've seen it argued that cousin marriage is meant to ameliorate the mistreatment of women in arranged marriages -- she's not a stranger, she's family already, and her father is your father's brother (and your daughter-in-law is your brother's daughter), and so it confers a degree of protection.
I'm not wedded to that point, but it's something to consider.
posted by endless_forms at 2:08 PM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]
Was the Darwin/Wedgwood Dynasty Adversely Affected by Consanguinity? Does what it says on the tin.
posted by endless_forms at 2:10 PM on April 5, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by endless_forms at 2:10 PM on April 5, 2012 [2 favorites]
When you're discussing the so-called incest taboo, it's important to remember that different societies have very different ideas about what constitutes incest; even in the United States, the states have very different laws regarding first-cousin marriage.
One of the more plausible explanations for the taboo (however it's defined in a particular place) is that it's based around the Westermarck Effect, which postulates that it's not really about who you're related to by blood or marriage, it's about who you grow up with, and specifically who you grow up with from birth to about the age of six. This can also apply to people that you're totally unrelated to but are raised with in a communal setting, like a kibbutz. The flip side of that is something called genetic sexual attraction, in which two people that are closely related (parent-child or sibling) that are separated, say by adoption, at birth and are reunited as adults experience intense sexual attraction if/when they're reunited, despite being fully aware of their consanguinity, because the Westermarck Effect doesn't apply. I don't know if there's any relationship between just how much time you spend with someone as a kid and how strong the Westermarck Effect is, but as someone with a lot of cousins, I know that the ones that caught my eye (at least when I was first in the grip of the throes of puberty; later, I mostly just felt guilty around them) were the ones that I didn't see very often due to distance or circumstance.
None of which really addresses your personal sexual preferences, which your moms should respect.
posted by Halloween Jack at 2:13 PM on April 5, 2012
One of the more plausible explanations for the taboo (however it's defined in a particular place) is that it's based around the Westermarck Effect, which postulates that it's not really about who you're related to by blood or marriage, it's about who you grow up with, and specifically who you grow up with from birth to about the age of six. This can also apply to people that you're totally unrelated to but are raised with in a communal setting, like a kibbutz. The flip side of that is something called genetic sexual attraction, in which two people that are closely related (parent-child or sibling) that are separated, say by adoption, at birth and are reunited as adults experience intense sexual attraction if/when they're reunited, despite being fully aware of their consanguinity, because the Westermarck Effect doesn't apply. I don't know if there's any relationship between just how much time you spend with someone as a kid and how strong the Westermarck Effect is, but as someone with a lot of cousins, I know that the ones that caught my eye (at least when I was first in the grip of the throes of puberty; later, I mostly just felt guilty around them) were the ones that I didn't see very often due to distance or circumstance.
None of which really addresses your personal sexual preferences, which your moms should respect.
posted by Halloween Jack at 2:13 PM on April 5, 2012
Am I crazy for feeling like this? I have ZERO desire to hook up with a cousin. She thinks I'm crazy. What's wrong with this picture?
I was so geeking out on the genetics/culture question, I failed to address the most important bit; I'm sorry. What's wrong with this picture is that no one gets to call you crazy for your sexual preferences, especially for not being attracted to what is presumably a finite set of specific people. I don't know what the context of your conversation with your mother was, but it sounds like it could range into really upsetting boundary-pushing, and you have the right to set limits.
posted by endless_forms at 5:04 PM on April 5, 2012
I was so geeking out on the genetics/culture question, I failed to address the most important bit; I'm sorry. What's wrong with this picture is that no one gets to call you crazy for your sexual preferences, especially for not being attracted to what is presumably a finite set of specific people. I don't know what the context of your conversation with your mother was, but it sounds like it could range into really upsetting boundary-pushing, and you have the right to set limits.
posted by endless_forms at 5:04 PM on April 5, 2012
Hmmm, I didn't read the question as referring to marriage. . . Does your mother want you to marry your cousin?
If you're just talking about cousins hooking up, I think this is somewhat common. I've known several people that made out with their cousins when they were pre/early teens. Not ones they grew up with really, just that kind of experimental, summer vacation visit type of thing. I don't find that repulsive- kind of weird maybe, but whatever.
posted by abirdinthehand at 8:02 PM on April 5, 2012
If you're just talking about cousins hooking up, I think this is somewhat common. I've known several people that made out with their cousins when they were pre/early teens. Not ones they grew up with really, just that kind of experimental, summer vacation visit type of thing. I don't find that repulsive- kind of weird maybe, but whatever.
posted by abirdinthehand at 8:02 PM on April 5, 2012
Kissing cousins are not uncommon in either fiction or real life.
For instance, I watch/read a lot of romance anime/manga. I've no idea the actual prevalence of cousin relationships in Japan. But it's acceptable enough in pop culture that introducing a character as "Hero/ine's cousin" = really easy (lazy) shorthand for "potential love interest for Hero/ine," to the point that I'm surprised when two characters are identified as cousins but DON'T try to hook up.
posted by nicebookrack at 5:38 PM on April 7, 2012
For instance, I watch/read a lot of romance anime/manga. I've no idea the actual prevalence of cousin relationships in Japan. But it's acceptable enough in pop culture that introducing a character as "Hero/ine's cousin" = really easy (lazy) shorthand for "potential love interest for Hero/ine," to the point that I'm surprised when two characters are identified as cousins but DON'T try to hook up.
posted by nicebookrack at 5:38 PM on April 7, 2012
What's wrong with it is that the degree to which the incest taboo is applied to cousins varies widely by culture. If you look in mainstream Western society there's a very strong history of second cousins marrying, including (especially?) among the upper classes.
Good comment.
It sounds like your question might not be telling the whole story here. Do cousins of various kinds sometimes "hook up"? Sure. Are you nonetheless welcome to decline to hook up with your cousins? Yes!
Is your mom trying to set you up with a cousin? You have the right to say no for any reason. Making this about "incest" may allow you to easily take a hard line against it. But it might be better for you overall if you don't lean on the incest argument, and instead tell your mom that when you tell her you're not interested in someone, you mean it, and she should not be harassing you about it.
posted by grobstein at 12:29 PM on April 9, 2012
Good comment.
It sounds like your question might not be telling the whole story here. Do cousins of various kinds sometimes "hook up"? Sure. Are you nonetheless welcome to decline to hook up with your cousins? Yes!
Is your mom trying to set you up with a cousin? You have the right to say no for any reason. Making this about "incest" may allow you to easily take a hard line against it. But it might be better for you overall if you don't lean on the incest argument, and instead tell your mom that when you tell her you're not interested in someone, you mean it, and she should not be harassing you about it.
posted by grobstein at 12:29 PM on April 9, 2012
This thread is closed to new comments.
At some point, we're all related - you're my, I dunno, six-hundredth cousin, or something like that. The question is, at what point do you draw the line? When is someone not "family" enough for it to be weird? This is a question that different cultures answer differnetly.
posted by Tomorrowful at 8:52 AM on April 5, 2012 [3 favorites]