When exactly did incest become immoral?
>>85673990I think leviticus 18 contains the earliest extant written laws against incest. It's oddly ambiguous about daughters
>>85673990When old hoes got angry that men would rather have their sis than their roastie.
>>85673990In ancient egypt an estimated 15% of marriages were between siblings
Since prehistory, when the guys who didn't have hot sisters had time to get into politics.
>>85673990Muslims have never cared, and jews incest is so common they actually destroyed their entire genetic bloodline. Ashkenazi have far greater risks of mental disorders like schizophrenia because of it. The west made it immoral because they looked at the sandjews and said "yeah, no more of that shit."
>>85673990Probably very early on minimum pre-history 10000 years ago, I doubt it took long for people to realize that incest babies were retarded. societies that didnt regulate it to some extent probably promoted dysgenic freaks.
>>85674014https://biblehub.com/bsb/leviticus/18.htm
Roasties hussies getting mad that all the good men were already spoken for.
>>85673990This may surprise you, but most people have actual instincts against breeding with their family members.It's not that people want to do it but restrain themselves for some reason; They have no interest in fucking their siblings at all.
>>85674017>>85674207I can sort of see it.>Chad exists>Chad literally only cares about his cute little sister>seething roasties say it's unfair that she's monopolising chad just because she's his sister>roasties get the tribe together and make them forbid incest or they'll make your life hell>sister still angry that she lost access to her chad brother but she accepts in the face of social pressure>chad is forced to fuck roasties and listen to other men with his sister
>>85674225I have no interest in my own family but find the conceptual idea of incest hot.
>>85673990It's biologically incompatible. There's a trigger in our biology to seek out novelty in our mark and theres scientific studies on step siblings or siblings not related by blood will also not desire each other to have an incestuous relationship.It's because the human mind finds familiar people to be less sexually desirable than fresh novel partners.Further evidence of this can be seen among hookup culture with participants getting more sex from new partners compared to married couples and people in long term relationships.The recent taboo and incest kink was first pushed by the Porn industry tapping into novelty and degenerate fantasies (which porn caters to) as it offered novelty from traditional sexual pairings that is common among porn consumers even though no actual incest was taking place.Note: look up the early life of the founders, board of directors, and owners of these prominent porn industries and you can see why such taboos were pushed as mainstream.
>>85674283Does it explain GSA?
>>85674014>oddlylol, men are pedos and it's a patriarchy.
>>85674354no, it's not really that, the line doesn't actually specify daughter specifically:>You must not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. which covers both a man's daughter and any other children the woman has.It's just unusual that it doesn't directly specify his daughter
>>85674279Because you're addicted to pornography.
>>85674395That doesn't follow, incest has always held a fixation over humans.
Because we gave hussies control and they ruined everything.
>>85674452HAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH reddit is so funny kek
>>85674452american's remind me is new jersey one of the regions where incest is legal in america?
>>85674469After a quick google search, it is.
when the first waterheaded baby spawned out of the ether
>>85674479......That redditor (if his testimony is accurate) is going to have a lot of sex with his sister, like for real a lot of sex.
>>85674387they said it that way so that you don't pipe some lomely milf and her hot daughter too
>>85674488Doesn't work like that, it would have taken a long time for notable genetic issues to arise and they probably just blamed it on curses or the difavour of god for not sacrificing a bull the right way.
>>85674488Birth defects after one generation is actually fairly rare anon.
>>85673990>It's oddly ambiguous about daughtersthey must serve daddy, it's the safest way to learn to please her future husband!
>>85674515Is she trying to convince her parents to let her fuck her little brother?
>>85674497>>85674515right and when one showed up they finally said "no more of that"
>>85674547yeah, they sacrificed two bulls instead of one, or a bull and a sheep
>>85674140this. I don't have a sister. Never did. Don't care if incest is censored and banned.
Incest has never been "immoral."
We don't have a truly hard barrier against incest because inbreeding is your failsafe get out of extinction option. But some sort of westermark like effect exists that reduces the attraction between close relatives likely to lower the risk of inbreeding depression.Family raised apart sometimes seem to have sort of instinctual attraction to each other which relies on a degree of genetic similarity attraction, suggesting the westermark effects are at least partly a socialisation driven mechanism.
>>85674245Where do you think the mythos of witches came from? Old bitter women have been ruining the happiness of men and women for a very long time. I think the cabal of Feminist Elites might be even more powerful than the Globalists, The Jews, and Illuminati. Imagine how much of a GIFT being a man would be if you could just go and adopt a pretty young wife. It would be like getting a hamster from the Pet Store. Deep down, men want this, women want this, but nobody can have it because they've instilled it as being immoral and LE WOMEN'S RIGHTS
>>85673990Biologically speaking the most optimal relativenes degree for both avoiding inbreeding risks and maximizing survival of specific gene sets is 3rd cousin. Anything closer and over generations you will get more and more problems, anything more and over generations genes will get dilluted. Historically most people lived in tribes and villages of dozens to like few hundred people so they were naturally balancing around that degree. Cities with thousands of people popped up within last few centuries when homo-sapiens are at least 300 centuries old. Cities with millions of people are even younger.Arabs and pajeets have much more common problems because they keep marrying like 1st cousins over generations to keep wealth within family.>>85674283Partners sharing same genetically heritable traits on average tend to stay together longer, conceive easier and have more children. Doesn't matter whether it's nose shape, hair color or temperament, though I'm assuming shared temperament and tendency towards same behaviors or political leanings have more impact.There is mechanism based on pheromones that makes most related family non-sexual to us on average iirc. And it's not the only thing regulated by it. Girls with more brothers or father present in their lives hit puberty later compared to girls without familiar male pheromones because organism adapted to living in the wild assumes no familiar males means more risks so you should become fertile, get knocked up and give birth sooner than later because you might not live long enough to pass on genes.Hookup culture you mention is meaningless because at the same time fertility nosedives.
>>85673990It becomes immoral if kids come out of it. No kids, no harm.
>>85674839>Biologically speaking the most optimal relativenes degree for both avoiding inbreeding risks and maximizing survival of specific gene sets is 3rd cousin.If you're referring to the icelandic paper I think you are then that's not strictly correct.they used a graph charting total number of grandchildren and found the peak at the equivalent of 3rd-4th cousin range approx 0.8-0.1% relatedness, the destinction is important because it accounts for multiple lines of relatedness not strictly 3rd cousin.The underlying figure will be percent similar genes but obviously relatedness acts as a good proxy.I found some papers that pointed to the mechanism being pretty low level since it seemed to relate to cellular compatibility at least in plants where there was an effect from relatedness influencing the number of pollen tubes generated that found an egg to fertilise.similar fertility patterns have been observed in various species so it's pretty fundamental.There was a study I found referenced that compared wild animal population size vs growth rate I think the author was called sibly or sibley.But what's important is that they found the smaller the population size the higher the birth rate, the larger the population the lower the birth rate.Logic would suggest this relatedness mechanism is directly influencing population size.The consequences of current mating patterns seem destructively at odds with our biology.
>>85675025>If you're referring to the icelandic paper I think you are then that's not strictly correct.I'm referencing Biology 101 lectures from MIT
>>85675042Who are probably referencing the helgason 2008 paper on icelandic birth and marriage recordsWas it from their opencourseware?
>>85675061Who knows. Don't remember professor in lecture giving source. I did read about some corelation between fertility and relativeness but that was years ago so I don't remember what paper it was. 3rd cousin part was from lecture.
>>85675083Ah so you were an in person student?One person I followed for a while on this suggested that much of our current fertility crisis is because we aren't marrying our various cousins and your effective relatedness is super low.the helgason charts are really interesting to look at and the paper is only a few pages long, I'll try and find it.>An association between the kinship and fertility of human coupleshttps://hbdchick.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2008-iceland-an-association-between-the-kinship-and-fertility-of-human-couples.pdf
>>85673990fembots how many of you want to actually fuck one of your relatives?
>>85674492Uhh it was over a year ago, redditbro has probably already done that
>>85675395True, if he was ever going to he would have done it within a month maybe a week of making that post just running off the sexual tension.
>>85673990Dunno but I want an Ashley-fag gf something fierce. I never get the weird pick-me alt-culture chicks though.
>>85675385My younger brother is literally what 4chan would consider a chad just by his appearance alone and ngl i've fantasized about him but I wouldn't go further at all even if he were into me.My dad and older brother are fat and balding though so no interest there.
>>85675598Is it to the point that you'll get wet when he touches you or hugs you?
>>85674958T. Eugenicist
I think it was the Romans largely responsible, since they were trying to break up clan loyalties they made it taboo up until like 5th cousins
>>856756976th degree of relatedness not cousins
>>85675635no not really just on occasion I masturbate with him in mind
>>85675708Oh I guess that's a little less fun then.
>>85674245you people genuinely think this is way the world works
>>85675796No it was very obviously a joke
>>85675786it's like 3rd cousin.
>>85673990In the past, there were all kinds of different attitudes about sex. A lot of current sexual norms aren't more than 100 or 150 years old.Like for example, back when houses were much smaller and families were much bigger, there often wasn't a requirement for privacy while having sex. Back then, a lot of dwellings didn't even have bedrooms -- there were just one or two rooms total for a whole family. So people would have sex while other family members could see and hear them, and they didn't consider it a big deal.And if you needed to jerk off, you wouldn't have been able to get any privacy indoors -- but that wouldn't have bothered you because you would have been used to seeing your siblings jerk off all your life. They would just ignore your jerking off, and they would have said that you were just "doing your necessary hygiene" or some phrase like that.
>>85674014Christcucks ruined 4chan
