U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-01-2019, 10:23 AM
 
Location: Baker City, Oregon
3,730 posts, read 5,879,510 times
Reputation: 5956

Advertisements

In Jewish Kibbutzim, communal communities where unrelated children were raised together from birth, it was noted by observers that the children, when they grew up, very seldom married each other, even though it was never discouraged in any way. Apparently, they subconsciously thought of themselves as brothers and sisters and were seldom attracted to each other in that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-01-2019, 10:51 AM
 
9,479 posts, read 6,327,478 times
Reputation: 17898
I am attracted to a family member....My wife
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 12:11 PM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
8,642 posts, read 6,193,392 times
Reputation: 8655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowan123 View Post
It's at least part (mostly ?) biological.

Look at the ancient Egyptian monarchy. A lot of them married a sibling and it caused health issues. Some of King Tut's health problems were attributed to the fact he was the product of a brother/sister marriage. https://www.ancient-origins.net/news...-003045http://

Inbreeding caused the Royal Hapsburg dynasty in Spain to die out. Inbreeding & the downfall of the Spanish Hapsburgs - Gene Expression


I've personally never been attracted to a relative.
Those effects/results, if true and accurate, don't make any so-called "repulsion" biological. But rather knowledge of them is what generates the cultural restraint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
12,397 posts, read 12,603,785 times
Reputation: 19695
This has been studied, and there is some empirical evidence for reverse sexual imprinting. It's learned behavior, but might be based on instinctive tendencies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westermarck_effect
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 12:45 PM
 
8,218 posts, read 6,068,821 times
Reputation: 5841
Quote:
Originally Posted by celticseas View Post
I've wondered whether people are not attracted to parents and siblings (because cousin incest is actually accepted in many parts of the world and less genetically "harmful") due to mostly biological ingraining or social ones.

The Westermarck Effect would point to it being mostly cultural i.e. the people you grow up with and live with cause your brain to desensitize any sexual feelings. This might explain why adopted children of women who are very young and attractive still don't find them arousing even though there's no basis for incest repulsion.

Similarly, genetic brothers/sisters who are separated at birth in foster homes sometimes meet later and fall in love (there was a case about that).

But what do you think? Are you attracted to any family members?
I'm not attracted to any of my family members. It may be a social construct, but given the biological risks, I'd be inclined to say that biology plays a large part in it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 01:16 PM
 
4,133 posts, read 2,677,996 times
Reputation: 8991
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Those effects/results, if true and accurate, don't make any so-called "repulsion" biological. But rather knowledge of them is what generates the cultural restraint.
Both of those examples seem to be pretty well documented so I'm not sure why they wouldn't be true. But you're right in that those effects are biological so it's probably more accurate to say that the awareness of the biological effects create the repulsion or restraint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 01:36 PM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
8,642 posts, read 6,193,392 times
Reputation: 8655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowan123 View Post
Both of those examples seem to be pretty well documented so I'm not sure why they wouldn't be true. But you're right in that those effects are biological so it's probably more accurate to say that the awareness of the biological effects create the repulsion or restraint.
That's the explanation I lean heavily toward, especially considering that lots of people are or have been attracted to family members. Most don't act on it because of the taboo.

And then there's the question of how exactly would a biological or instinctive "repulsion" be put in place - scientifically, technically. I don't think there is one. I've never felt a repulsion....and I don't know why I would be so different in that respect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Canada
5,783 posts, read 4,212,092 times
Reputation: 15557
I can't imagine being attracted to any of my brothers. That is just not something I'd ever think about because it repulses me.

If I was attracted to a cousin I didn't know well when I was younger, maybe once I was older. It didn't happen but I don't see why it would be taboo if you don't have children together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2019, 05:39 PM
 
375 posts, read 148,595 times
Reputation: 1360
I wonder which eagle-eyed tribe member started keeping track of offspring between close relatives and noticed that very close relatives children manifested more birth defects, and then the tribe adopted taboos/laws against sibling/cousin/parental liasons.

Having healthy children was important to tribe strength and survival.

Now here's the Bible question that always starts fights: Cain obviously must have had children with his sister(s) and those children must have had children with each other. At what point was this declared against God's law? In non-Eve and Adam reality when did proto-humans stop incestuous breeding? Do animals breed with siblings? Seems like it in my observations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 01:20 AM
 
Location: Tucson Arizona
3,975 posts, read 1,691,282 times
Reputation: 10412
Yes, animals other than humans breed with siblings and/or parents.

I think that makes a strong case for the taboo to be cultural rather than biological.

It was acceptable for first cousins to marry through at least the Victorian era, so that's a relatively recent taboo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top