Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I've looked around, and I've heard a lot of people as well as apparent experts saying incest causes crazy shit to happen to offspring, but has there ever even been a case?

I've never seen a case of it happening, I've searched google, but not found such a story or even the origin of this myth.

Does anyone know a case or can refer me to something that shows ****ing your sibling will result in children with three eyes and down syndrome?

Have a hot sister, do ya?

3 eyes? idk

but i have heard down syndrome

Look at the ratio of babies born with six toes/fingers: five toes/fingers in a normal population, and then look at the ratio in an amish population.

WINcest!

Originally posted by BackFire
Have a hot sister, do ya? Actually, I only have brothers, but if I did, I would.

probably not, its imo a form of social control, but in the long run if you have a hot sister like Backfire implied lol, use contraception or something, you dont have to create spawn fortunatley...

Were the Egyptions not incestuous, i mean they were one of the most powerful empires ever to excist and one of the most well known, if they had not been destroyed they would prob be one of the greater nations of today if they were on the same track.

Originally posted by BackFire
Have a hot sister, do ya?

No, but I understand that his mother was fond of his uncle.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, but I understand that his mother was found of his uncle. Don't you mean fond?

Originally posted by lord xyz
Don't you mean fond?

Thanks for helping me insult you correctly.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I've looked around, and I've heard a lot of people as well as apparent experts saying incest causes crazy shit to happen to offspring, but has there ever even been a case?

I've never seen a case of it happening, I've searched google, but not found such a story or even the origin of this myth.

Does anyone know a case or can refer me to something that shows ****ing your sibling will result in children with three eyes and down syndrome?

Originally posted by The Pict
There was a German professor in human genetics who said that out of a hundred children born from closely related adults almost half have some sort of disabilities.

He was commenting on a couple who were brother and sister but had four children together. Unsurprisingly two of the children were born disabled.

So if people are going to engage in incestuous relationships they should not have children.

When I said that I had watched a report on this German brother and sister who wouldn't stop f*cking each other even though they had disabled kids and he kept getting put in jail.

Originally posted by The Pict
When I said that I had watched a report on this German brother and sister who wouldn't stop f*cking each other even though they had disabled kids and he kept getting put in jail. Although I'm not the fan on statistics, I did just ask for a case.

So yeah, incest probably increases the chances of getting down syndrome kids.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Although I'm not the fan on statistics, I did just ask for a case.

So yeah, incest probably increases the chances of getting down syndrome kids.

No, it does not have anything to do with down syndrome. That is a genetic problem that can hit any pregnancy. Interbreeding can lead to insanity or Hemophilia.

genetics are an odd thing

Wasn't there a case in an Autria incident where a dad had many children with his daughter, all of them were in special need in some way.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, it does not have anything to do with down syndrome. That is a genetic problem that can hit any pregnancy. Interbreeding can lead to insanity or Hemophilia. Going to back that up?

Originally posted by Burning thought
probably not, its imo a form of social control, but in the long run if you have a hot sister like Backfire implied lol, use contraception or something, you dont have to create spawn fortunatley...

Were the Egyptions not incestuous, i mean they were one of the most powerful empires ever to excist and one of the most well known, if they had not been destroyed they would prob be one of the greater nations of today if they were on the same track.

I don't know how much stock I would put in the actual practice of incest in Egyptian (or many other royal circles, for that matter) culture. However, there is no shortage of mummified babies in the archaeological records. I would attribute this more to the over-all infant mortality rate than I would to any actual practice of incest. Many times they married their relatives as a symbolic gesture of power, rather than out of some desire to have sex with their sister.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Going to back that up?

Just goggle it. If you look at the role family, you will see a lot of both insanity and Hemophilia. For example, just look at two of King Henry VIII children.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Just goggle it. If you look at the role family, you will see a lot of both insanity and Hemophilia. For example, just look at two of King Henry VIII children. You mean Mary I, Elizabeth I or Edward VI?

I don't think they were insane...nor do I think they were haemophilics.

Originally posted by Devil King
I don't know how much stock I would put in the actual practice of incest in Egyptian (or many other royal circles, for that matter) culture. However, there is no shortage of mummified babies in the archaeological records. I would attribute this more to the over-all infant mortality rate than I would to any actual practice of incest. Many times they married their relatives as a symbolic gesture of power, rather than out of some desire to have sex with their sister.


well regardless of motives it worked, they are one of the most powerful and perhaps the most notificed nations ever to excist and likely ever to excist.

Incest just causes all of your bad genes, whether they're recessive or not, to be doubled upon in likelihood that they get passed onto your offspring.

Originally posted by lord xyz
You mean Mary I, Elizabeth I or Edward VI?

I don't think they were insane...nor do I think they were haemophilics.
Csar Nicholas the 2nd's son was hemophiliac because of interbreeding.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Going to back that up? Down's syndrome is most commonly a trisomy condition caused by nondisjunction of chromosome 21 during meiotic division of germ cells usually maternally, which increases in likelihood with age of the mother. It has little to do with incest, and I'm unaware of if there would be a reason why incest would increase it's incidence.

Is incest having sexual realtions with a relative?

or perhaps simply having intercourse?

Originally posted by Burning thought
Is incest having sexual realtions with a relative?

or perhaps simply having intercourse?

Both would fall under the category, I would think.

hmm, so you dont actually have to have sex?, simply affections is incestuous?

I notice the Egyptians are being mentioned.

Lemme put it this way...There is a reason King Tut had an egg shaped head.

Originally posted by lord xyz
You mean Mary I, Elizabeth I or Edward VI?

I don't think they were insane...nor do I think they were haemophilics.

I was getting Edward VII confused with Edward VI.

http://www.sciencecases.org/hemo/hemo.asp

Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
I notice the Egyptians are being mentioned.

Lemme put it this way...There is a reason King Tut had an egg shaped head.

Which had nothing to do with incest.

Originally posted by Burning thought
well regardless of motives it worked, they are one of the most powerful and perhaps the most notificed nations ever to excist and likely ever to excist.

I don't understand what you just said.

Originally posted by Devil King
I don't understand what you just said.

He's attributing the power the ancient Egyptians had at one time(s) to their (claimed) incestous culture, odd.

Or in laymen terms, ****ing your sister = military and economic might.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Actually, I only have brothers, but if I did, I would.
actually most likly if you did you wouldn't think of her as hott

its just it ussally is

Originally posted by Robtard
He's attributing the power the ancient Egyptians had at one time(s) to their (claimed) incestous culture, odd.

Or in laymen terms, ****ing your sister = military and economic might.

Also see: Europe

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Also see: Europe

European incestuous unions to consolidate power were quit a bit different than the Pharaohs marrying their sisters. The former generally consolidated power and made treaties between separate existing powers/nations. The later was generally used to keep the bloodline "pure".

Originally posted by Robtard
European incestuous unions to consolidate power were quit a bit different than the Pharaohs marrying their sisters. The former generally consolidated power and made treaties between separate existing powers/nations. The later was generally used to keep the bloodline "pure".

But they were still banging their sisters and gaining power, albeit indirectly, because of it.

I'm actually interested to see evidence of the Egyptians actually partaking in incest. Not just symbolically, but actually.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
But they were still banging their sisters and gaining power, albeit indirectly, because of it.

Generally not the case, their wasn't much gain in banging your sister when you were already Pharaoh or in-line to becoming, except for possible genetic defeats in your heirs apparent.

Originally posted by Devil King
I'm actually interested to see evidence of the Egyptians actually partaking in incest. Not just symbolically, but actually.

There's conflicting evidence through the dynasties, it seems to be accepted that it happened at times during the early dynasties and then dwindled down, and it's accepted by many in the field that they rarely were full siblings when it happened.

Edit: there were also Pharoahs who took their own daugthers as 2nd+ wives.

Originally posted by Robtard
There's conflicting evidence through the dynasties, it seems to be accepted that it happened at times during the early dynasties and then dwindled down, and it's accepted by many in the field that they rarely were full siblings when it happened.

I've read a lot about it, but I've yet to see any actual evidence that it happened in anything other than name only. Definitive, that is.

Originally posted by Robtard
Generally not the case, their wasn't much gain in banging your sister when you were already Pharaoh or in-line to becoming, except for possible genetic defeats in your heirs apparent.

Supposedly you had to marry (and probably have kids with) a princess in order to take the throne. Generations of power consolidation made it so that it was inevitably your sister or half sister.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/sexuality.htm

http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/womneg.htm

srug I don't know if either is backed up by more recent work.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Supposedly you had to marry (and probably have kids with) a princess in order to take the throne. Generations of power consolidation made it so that it was inevitably your sister or half sister.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/sexuality.htm

http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/womneg.htm

srug I don't know if either is backed up by more recent work.

Considering that is the case as fact, that still doesn't equate to Egytian's having a mighty empire because of incest. While the cousin marrying of the Euros for purposes of alliances does.

Originally posted by Robtard
Considering that is the case as fact, that still doesn't equate to Egytian's having a mighty empire because of incest. While the cousin marrying of the Euros for purposes of alliances does.

I know, I was just being a dick. Wouldn't it be cool if that were true though?

But both of those offer contradiction to the actual implementation of their practices. As the first points out, Ra created subsequent gods by masturbating them into existence. But the pharaohs did not assume such capabilites, so to claim that the average Egyptian claimed that capability because the gods had it is unclear. Also, I do not agree with the second's proposition that inheritence was a matter of maternal relationship. Certainly the kings had primary wives, and the mantle of kingship was supposed to pass to the children of that union, but such was not always the case. Tut had no children, which may be the result of a possible incestious relationship where the children did not survive, to which the throne could be passed. In that case, his Viceroy married Tut's teenage wife to consolidate his claim to the throne...not long after which she vanished from official records. I can't recall who the throne was passed to after his death, but I doubt it was the offspring of any relationship between the true queen and the Viceroy. But, Tut was likely a member of the Akhenaten bloodline, which we all know did not go over very well with the establishment in Egypt of the time.

Originally posted by Robtard
Considering that is the case as fact, that still doesn't equate to Egytian's having a mighty empire because of incest. While the cousin marrying of the Euros for purposes of alliances does.

That's kind of what I'm saying. There's no concrete evidence that incest was actually practiced, over being simply symbolic. Genetic testing of the royal mummies might clear this up, but up to this point there are so many missing bodies that it's impractical; especially given the number of wives a Pharaoh might have. Also, the possible damage to the bodies must be considered.

All of that, to me at least, has to be weighed against the benefit of solving the mysteries and gaining the knowledge v. disrupting their burials. If I had my druthers, the bodies would be placed back in their tombs and left alone. But the evidence they provide (and tourist dollars they generate) contradict that desire.

back to the actual topic at hand......

ofcourse incest increased to odds of deformed offspring. You inherit half of your chromosomes from your mother, half from your father. Of those you will have 1 dominnant and 1 recessive for every pair.

if both of your parents inheretid their genes from the same gene pool, it is likely they both inherited a defective gene, even if recessive in both. If both parents recessive gene get's passed to the offspring.......it can't be recessive anymore. One has to be dominant. If that gene causes 6 toes or 3 arms, guess how many toes the child is going to have. It's no longer a crap shoot that you inherit it as a recessive gene and it shows up generations down the line if at all before it is bred out.

Let's say gene 2 causes a mutation. If your mom has a 1 & 2, your dad has a 3 & 4. You will get one of those from each so you may end up with any combination of one from each and even if 2 is inherited from your mom it may be recessive. If both your mom and dad have 1&2, it's a much greater likelihood that you will inherit the 2 gene. It's very possible that you will inherit 2 and 2, meaning you're screwed.

I read a study conducted about this very subject a few years back. The conclusion was that no species, based on empirical evidence, could produce healthy viable offspring after 6 continuous generations of inbreeding. It's all a numbers game. Every generation you're doubling your chances of inheriting a harmful gene. After 6 generations, any and all defects will be pronounced.

okay......you can get back to discussing if Egyptians did infact inbreed.

I wanst saying the Egyptions were successful "because" of Incest, i said incest did not destroy their society, damaged them little and overall tehir Empire has still been one of the most powerful and perhaps the most iconic the world has/will ever see.

What two people do in the comfort of their own homes is none of my concern, just don't have children. That is all I ask.

Its wrong, no real debate about it and for the love of everything do not have children.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
Csar Nicholas the 2nd's son was hemophiliac because of interbreeding. Because of interbreeding? Lol, then how do we get haemophiliacs that didn't have incestual parents?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was getting Edward VII confused with Edward VI.

http://www.sciencecases.org/hemo/hemo.asp According to that tree, the only people close to being bred from incest are Princes Charles, Edward and Andrew, and Princess Ann, all of which do not carry the haemophilia gene.

On another note, did FDR's children have haemophilia?

Now if soceity didnt frown on eating your own young, incest would both have its merits.

I think the reason incest is looked down upon is to do with the coding of the genes, and has the same reason as to why we are sexual, rather than asexual.

If we continue to reproduce with the same genes, there's no variaty, no alterations and hardly a chance of bettering the species, therefore it's better to look for a mate (preferably an attractive one (as they have the better material)) to better the species, or rather, your genes.

Incest doesn't actually cause diseases, but if there is a disease in a family and both a mother and father have a recessive gene for that disease (which is likely to happen if they have the same parents or grandparents), the child is more likely to have that disease than if the parents are unrelated.

Ignoring taboos, marriage between second cousins and even first cousins is usually harmless. (and often legal).

Originally posted by cococryspies
Incest doesn't actually cause diseases, but if there is a disease in a family and both a mother and father have a recessive gene for that disease (which is likely to happen if they have the same parents or grandparents), the child is more likely to have that disease than if the parents are unrelated.

Ignoring taboos, marriage between second cousins and even first cousins is usually harmless. (and often legal). What difference would there be if the parents are related or not? In both scenarios, both parents have the recessive gene and you have yet to show any indication incest would have any affect on changing the offspring.

Originally posted by lord xyz
What difference would there be if the parents are related or not? In both scenarios, both parents have the recessive gene and you have yet to show any indication incest would have any affect on changing the offspring.

I meant that parents are more likely to share genes for the same disease if they are related. Two people who unrelated could share a few genes by chance but siblings or cousins most likely would.

Originally posted by cococryspies
I meant that parents are more likely to share genes for the same disease if they are related. Two people who unrelated could share a few genes by chance but siblings or cousins most likely would. And they most likely wouldn't share a gene.

Besides, I don't remember it being amoral to reproduce if your offspring would be haemopliciacs.

Originally posted by lord xyz
And they most likely wouldn't share a gene.

Besides, I don't remember it being amoral to reproduce if your offspring would be haemopliciacs.

Just about all reproduction is amoral

On the other hand one could probably argue that it's immoral to have a child with a heightened chance of having to live with hemophilia.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Just about all reproduction is amoral

On the other hand one could probably argue that it's immoral to have a child with a heightened chance of having to live with hemophilia. *immoral.

But, that argument is a violation of the right to free choice.

Stillbirth, perinatal, infant and juvenile mortality rates are all increased significantly with consanguinity of the order of first-cousins; presumably rising even further with even closer relation. See: lethal equivalent alleles.

Its not immoral, but can cause health problems. The same way having children with someone with a family history of cancer can cause your child health problems. It shouldn't stop you from having children with who you want, but be aware of it so you can give that child the best care.

Something I found interesting, we are naturally not attracted to our immediate relatives. Our brains tell us not to like the way our mothers/fathers/siblings smell.

Virginia Andrews obviously had a fascination with incest, considering she wrote a series of novels about it...

Originally posted by cococryspies


Something I found interesting, we are naturally not attracted to our immediate relatives. Our brains tell us not to like the way our mothers/fathers/siblings smell.
Are first cousins immediate releatives?

Originally posted by Burning thought
Are first cousins immediate releatives?

Presumably not, legally at least, considering you can **** them...

the thing is that if you become incestuous you increase the possibilities of giving a hereditary decease to your offspring, because both of you have the same parents the genes that may be heterozygous and recessive (which are in most important illnesses) may now be given to the offsprings. the thing is that when you do that you are not bound to have freaks as children you just increase the probabilities into giving then some hereditary diseases.

the truth is that , at the old times incest wasn't a taboo but it was even promoted in order to keep the bloodlines

the myth is probably manufactured in order to keep the society stable and have the idea of the family strong. also they may do it in order to avoid the deceases

Bill Bryson, "The Stuff of Life":

"If you go back sixty-four generations, to the time of the Romans, your total number of forebears has risen to approximately 1,000,000,000,000,000,000, which is several thousand times the total number of people who've ever lived... Remember, these aren't cousins and aunts and other incidental relatives, but only parents and parents of parents in a line leading ineluctably to you... Clearly Something has gone wrong with our math here. The answer, may interest you to learn, is that your line is not pure. You couldn't be here without a little incest - actually quite a lot of incest...In fact, if you are in a partnership now with someone from your own race and country, the chances are excellent that you are at some level related. Indeed if you look around you on a bus or in a park or cafe or any crowded place, most of the people you see are very probably relatives. When someone boasts to you that he is descended from William the Conqueror or the Mayflower Pilgrims, you should answer at once: 'Me too!'. In the most literal and fundamental sense we are all family."

Originally posted by lord xyz
I've looked around, and I've heard a lot of people as well as apparent experts saying incest causes crazy shit to happen to offspring, but has there ever even been a case?

I've never seen a case of it happening, I've searched google, but not found such a story or even the origin of this myth.

Does anyone know a case or can refer me to something that shows ****ing your sibling will result in children with three eyes and down syndrome?



Please do the human race a favor and go straight to Hell, where you belong.

Originally posted by UKR
Please do the human race a favor and go straight to Hell, where you belong. I would, if it existed.

Originally posted by BackFire
Have a hot sister, do ya?

anyone who has been to the Norwich area of the UK can see what inbreeding does, Ive never seen so many ugly people in my life as there.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
anyone who has been to the Norwich area of the UK can see what inbreeding does, Ive never seen so many ugly people in my life as there. I thought it was Norfolk.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I would, if it existed.


It does, for sick people like you.

sorry i missposted

Originally posted by UKR
It does, for sick people like you. lol lol lol ok.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I thought it was Norfolk.

So the whole county is inbred then or what.

Real case scenario:

Brother and sister had a child while father is screwing around with youngest daughter of his and has a child. The brother and sisters child was born with both genitalia.

How do you make a family tree? Social workers would like to know..

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Real case scenario:

Brother and sister had a child while father is screwing around with youngest daughter of his and has a child. The brother and sisters child was born with both genitalia.

How do you make a family tree? Social workers would like to know.. Provide proof of real case scenario?

Originally posted by lord xyz
Provide proof of real case scenario? Sorry, this was told to me by my social worker friend.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Real case scenario:

Brother and sister had a child while father is screwing around with youngest daughter of his and has a child. The brother and sisters child was born with both genitalia.

How do you make a family tree? Social workers would like to know..

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7739/blahwl6.gif

Sure is weird though. My friend quit the field. She couldn't take it anymore.

Originally posted by inimalist
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7739/blahwl6.gif

That incest-herm and incest-child need to mate, that would complete the circle. Might also produce the supreme human being, the Kwisatz Haderach.

Originally posted by Robtard
That incest-herm and incest-child need to mate, that would complete the circle. Might also produce the supreme human being, the Kwisatz Haderach.

if he was the 7th born

Originally posted by Bicnarok
if he was the 7th born

It might just work out that way

1) Son
2) Daughter 1
3) Daugther 2
4) Daughter 3
5) Incest-Herm
6) Incest-child
7) Kwisatz Haderach (?)

I see nothing wrong with it. If I had any relatives I actually loved in such a manner, I'd do it.

Originally posted by Luminatus
I see nothing wrong with it. If I had any relatives I actually loved in such a manner, I'd do it.

Pervert.

Why yes I am.

oh man, i can't believe this thread popped up. I just watched that movie, Savage Grace. With Julianne Moore. She does her son in that movie and i was like, "wow, i would so do my mom if she were Julianne Moore". Hey man, if the Greeks and Romans did it, it has to be good. Right?

i wish i had a sister growing up who looked like or was jessica simpson, jessica alba or Missy Peregrym..bawling

Wincest.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i wish i had a sister growing up who looked like or was jessica simpson, jessica alba or Missy Peregrym..bawling

I wish I had a sister with less arm strength . . .

I know that the ottoman emperors had a high rate of genetic mutation. The problem with incest is that it doesn't offer enough genetic variation.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I wish I had a sister with less arm strength . . .


so she is too strong and is able to physically push you away with ur sexual advancements?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
so she is too strong and is able to physically push you away with ur sexual advancements?

Keep snapping the ropes

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Keep snapping the ropes hmm... what?


anyways anyone who says they wouldnt do their sister if she was jessica simpson, jess. alba, jennifer love hewitt is just straight out lying......

Apparently King Tut's parents were siblings.

Incest is the best, put your sister to the test.

Sorry, had to be said. I'm done here.

Twincest the best incest of all.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/a/a8/Lol_narcissism25.JPG

that's just sick.... only good twincest is lesbian ones.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i wish i had a sister growing up who looked like or was jessica simpson, jessica alba or Missy Peregrym..bawling
I see some members have incestuous tendencies.
You creep me out a bit honestly...

But I have to admit, I do fap to wincest hentai.

Incest is the best, put your sister to the test.

Originally posted by Mindset
Incest is the best, put your sister to the test.

What?! I already said that.

But you're ugly and you stink.

got a story of a brother and a sister who didn't meet until old age

they got perfectly healthy children

Originally posted by overlord
got a story of a brother and a sister who didn't meet until old age

they got perfectly healthy children
Blasphemy

This thread reminded me of a good quote from Hot Shots, I couldn't resist!

Topper Harley: 'My father used to say that not playing to win is like sleeping with your sister. Sure she's a great piece of tail, with a blouse full of goodies, but... it's just illegal. Then you get into that whole inbred thing. Kids with no teeth who do nothing but play the banjo... eat apple sauce through a straw... pork farm animals.'

KHRnQ0iwYh4


jQp0KowG67A&feature=related