The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-12-2012, 12:49 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Cousin relationships: how close is too close

This zombie thread on whether sex between adopted siblings is incest just popped up on my control panel, so I thought I'd start a someone-related thread. Here's the sitch:

For purposes of this discussion, assume you are unmarried and unattached. Let's say that you meet a person with whom you share an immediate and mutual attraction. You date long enough that both are you are willing to have sex. But before you do so, you discuss that you're some variety of cousin. How close is too close for your comfort--that is, so close that you'll have to end the romantic relationship?

And now I'll define some terms. You may also wish to consult this wikipedia page.

First cousins are persons whose nearest common ancestor is the grandparent of both. Full first cousins share a pair of grandparents (in other words, the linking parents of the FFCs were full sublings); half first cousins share only one grandparent (that is, the linking parents were half siblings.) Double first cousins are full first cousins who share all four grandparents. Second cousins are persons whose neaarest common ancestor is the great-grandparent of both; third cousins share a great-great-grandparent; and so on. First cousins once removed do not share a grandparent; rather, one of the child of the other's first cousin. Likewise, your second cousin once removed is the child of your second cousin, or the second cousin of your parent, and so on.

Here are some examples. Let's say my father, Stan, married a woman named Mary, and they had me, Robert; Stan also has a child from a previous marriage, Peg. Stan's brother Arthur married Mary's sister Delinda; they had Sam. Mary & Delinda's other sister, Gina, had a child named Tom. Sam and I are double first cousins; we have the same four grandparents. Tom and I are full first cousins; we share one pair of grandparents. Sam and Peg are half first cousins; they share only one grandparent. Sam's child Yvonnne is my first cousin once removed; we don't share any grandparents, but she is the child my first cousin (or, from her point of view, I am the first cousin of her parent). My daughter Raven is Yvonne's second cousin; their nearest common ancestor is a great-grandparent.

To reiterate: what degree of known consanguinity is too close for your comfort?

Please assume for purposes of this thread that we're talking only about biological relatives. Stepcousins and adopted cousins need not apply. People willing to do their siblings should open another thread on another board, preferably a board that requires posters to write in Mandarin or Sanskrit.
__________________
As my great-grandmother said just before they hanged her, "Never hit a man who has more friends in the room that you do. That's what revolvers are for."

Last edited by Skald the Rhymer; 12-12-2012 at 12:53 PM..
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 12-12-2012, 12:52 PM
Covered_In_Bees! Covered_In_Bees! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
I wouldn't care if they are a first cousin or not. What would be more weird to me is if we were raised together from a very young age in the same household.

If we grew up completely separate from each other and didn't meet until adulthood, bring on the lovin'!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-12-2012, 12:56 PM
StusBlues StusBlues is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Anything closer than third cousins (grandparents were first cousins, if I understand correctly) is off limits, and third cousins is kinda weird. I'm pretty sensitive to this, though. My first cousin started dating her dad's common-law-wife's nephew, eventually falling pregnant and marrying the dude. I get a little squiffed out thinking about it, but I'm in the minority, and I accept that.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-12-2012, 12:59 PM
Qadgop the Mercotan Qadgop the Mercotan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Slithering on the hull
Posts: 22,039
To close for reproductive procreation? Or recreational sex?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-12-2012, 12:59 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 22,173
Except for dealing with the fallout from family, a first cousin wouldn't bother me. It seems to happen a lot world wide throughout history.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:03 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by StusBlues View Post
Anything closer than third cousins (grandparents were first cousins, if I understand correctly) is off limits, and third cousins is kinda weird. I'm pretty sensitive to this, though. My first cousin started dating her dad's common-law-wife's nephew, eventually falling pregnant and marrying the dude. I get a little squiffed out thinking about it, but I'm in the minority, and I accept that.
You mentioned that in the linked thread, I think. Can I ask why that relationship bothers you? Your FC is not a blood relative to her husband, except in the sense that all humans are blood relatives to one another.

To your more general point: To me it's clearer to say that third cousins share at least one and possibly two great-great-grandparents. Assuming no previous crossovers, everyone has 16 great-great-grandparents, so full third cousins would have 2 of 16 great-grandparents in common, while half third cousins would have 1 of 16.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan View Post
To close for reproductive procreation? Or recreational sex?
People should feel free to answer either way, or both. Otherwise the gays and lesbians can't play, nor the infertile straights. I thought about doing a poll with all the possibilities but then I decided that was insane.

Last edited by Skald the Rhymer; 12-12-2012 at 01:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:05 PM
Covered_In_Bees! Covered_In_Bees! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
I don't think you'll be getting anything resembling a rational response, considering how his explanations are not based in anything particularly factual.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:42 PM
StusBlues StusBlues is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skald the Rhymer View Post
You mentioned that in the linked thread, I think. Can I ask why that relationship bothers you? Your FC is not a blood relative to her husband, except in the sense that all humans are blood relatives to one another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covered_In_Bees! View Post
I don't think you'll be getting anything resembling a rational response, considering how his explanations are not based in anything particularly factual.
Covered_In_Bees is right here. It's a gut-level response, and not a standard I wish to impose on anyone else. I don't really factor in genetics; the inbreeding arguments are hard to sustain empirically, and I don't have any interest in drawing phenotypal or genotypal lines.

If you'd like a more detailed explaination as to why my cousin's choice squicks me out, I guess I tend to think of the (admittedly idealized) family as an unconditionally safe place where one can seek refuge from the various perils of sexual relationships, specifically breakups, which I historically haven't handled all that well. (I've been married twice with no kids; as of right now, I have no idea where either spouse lives.) My cousin and her husband have gotten on all right, but a messy breakup could really drive a wedge through through the family. That, and I find it easier to envision the kind of solid, last-through-anything that I feel constitute good family relations when sexual tension between cousins and what not is removed. In other words, my feelings are based on the admittedly intutitive notion that hitting on one's cousins tends to destabilize the important social structure of the family. Call me crazy, but I really think it's a good idea to go outside the family unit to seek a mate, regardless of genetics and such.

Note, again, that I would not ever deign to extend this view of mine beyond my own conduct and perceptions. Several states allow first-cousin marriage, and I can abide by that. Live like you want to live as long as it harms no one and makes you happy; grossing Stu out should be the least of your concerns.

Last edited by StusBlues; 12-12-2012 at 01:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:43 PM
phouka phouka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
I think it would have to be second cousins. Not because I find the idea of first cousins in general particularly squicky, but because I just can't think of any of my own first cousins without twitching. (They're all Very Nice People, but the youngest is at least 15 years older than me, and our culture/socio-economic statuses are widely divergent.)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:47 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by phouka View Post
I think it would have to be second cousins. Not because I find the idea of first cousins in general particularly squicky, but because I just can't think of any of my own first cousins without twitching. (They're all Very Nice People, but the youngest is at least 15 years older than me, and our culture/socio-economic statuses are widely divergent.)
Well, sure. The only thing is that the person described in the hypothetical clearly isn't one of the first cousins you already know, because you only recently met then and weren't aware of the shared ancestry at the time. They're ruled out by the terms of the question.

StusBlues, of course you're entitled to your opinion, and I hope I don't come off as condescending; if I have, I should have phrased things more artfully, and I apologize. That said, doesn't any breakup have the potential to cause problems in the extended family? When a divorce is bitter, it always divides friends and family. One of my sisters had a particularly acrimonious divorce, and as a result I and my brothers found it needful to break off friendships with her ex-husband; this causes strain for me in particular. No known consanguinity was needed for that.

Last edited by Skald the Rhymer; 12-12-2012 at 01:50 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:49 PM
Anaamika Anaamika is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
2nd cousins, for similar reasons to phouka. I know my first cousins, and none of them are really the type to do that with. Let's see:

Children of eldest uncle: both boys are drug addicts, wife beaters, and parent beaters. Not good people.
Children of next uncle: One is severely developmentally disabled. The other one is a very nice guy but there is just no attraction there at all.
Neither of the two aunts have kids. Then there is me, the child of the youngest sister, and I have two half-brothers, and that is just super squicky.

So it's really because I know them too well. On the other hand, when I was a teen, I had a very intense crush on a second cousin, and he reciprocated. We were far too well supervised for anything to happen (otherwise who knows? We were young and full of hormones and innocent.) So the thought of second never bothered me.

ETA: Ok, it's a first cousin I didn't already know of? Like, if my aunt should suddenly turn up a child we never knew about? I wouldn't have a problem with it strictly, but I've already burned enough bridges in my family - not willing to burn that one.

Last edited by Anaamika; 12-12-2012 at 01:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:49 PM
Qadgop the Mercotan Qadgop the Mercotan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Slithering on the hull
Posts: 22,039
Genetically, first cousins are low risk. But double reinforced first cousins are almost like brother and sister from the heredity standpoint.

But if noone's fertile, well heck, game on!!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:50 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 22,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by phouka View Post
I think it would have to be second cousins. Not because I find the idea of first cousins in general particularly squicky, but because I just can't think of any of my own first cousins without twitching. (They're all Very Nice People, but the youngest is at least 15 years older than me, and our culture/socio-economic statuses are widely divergent.)
In my own case, I have only one first cousin, and she's like a stuck up, annoying little sister to me. But my wife has a busload of first cousins, and some she never met. If it was a first cousin I didn't really have a family relationship with, and it wouldn't cause a lot of blow back from the rest of the family, I wouldn't be bothered by the genetics (although I'd insist on some testing before having children).
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:51 PM
Moonlitherial Moonlitherial is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Honestly I think Covered in Bees! has the key, it's how closely you were raised. I can't imagine having sex with anyone that I was raised with and that includes first and second cousins with and without once removed notations who would be in the right age group.

However if I already had developed a relationship with someone and discovered later they were a first cousin I wouldn't be bothered by that. Undiscovered sibling is apparently where my squick level lies.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:55 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan View Post
Genetically, first cousins are low risk. But double reinforced first cousins are almost like brother and sister from the heredity standpoint.

But if noone's fertile, well heck, game on!!
Particularly in my family's case, since the brothers in question are (were, I should say) identical twins. I think my double first cousins and I are genetically more like half-siblings.

Last edited by Skald the Rhymer; 12-12-2012 at 01:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:58 PM
StusBlues StusBlues is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skald the Rhymer View Post
Well, sure. The only thing is that the person described in the hypothetical clearly isn't one of the first cousins you already know, because you only recently met then and weren't aware of the shared ancestry at the time. They're ruled out by the terms of the question.

StusBlues, of course you're entitled to your opinion, and I hope I don't come off as condescending; if I have, I should have phrased things more artfully, and I apologize. That said, doesn't any breakup have the potential to cause problems in the extended family? When a divorce is bitter, it always divides friends and family. One of my sisters had a particularly acrimonious divorce, and as a result I and my brothers found it needful to break off friendships with her ex-husband; this causes strain for me in particular. No known consanguinity was needed for that.
Logically you're probably right, though I'd wager that breaking up with your stepmom's neice would probably be apt to cause more problems than breaking up with some chick you met on vacation in San Marino. Honestly, it's more of a visceral thing than a logical thing. Kinda like eating bugs, protein and what not be damned.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-12-2012, 02:59 PM
Ferret Herder Ferret Herder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by StusBlues View Post
Logically you're probably right, though I'd wager that breaking up with your stepmom's neice would probably be apt to cause more problems than breaking up with some chick you met on vacation in San Marino. Honestly, it's more of a visceral thing than a logical thing. Kinda like eating bugs, protein and what not be damned.
No, I get this. I have a male and female cousin who were friends with two opposite-sex siblings from childhood. When they got to adulthood, they each fell for the opposite-sex person from the other family, and got married in a double wedding. So there is absolutely no incest involved, but their sibling's inlaws are their own inlaws, their best friend is married to their sibling, their spouse's sibling is their best friend... that is a lot of ways to spread drama in one part of your life throughout many other facets of it.

Thus for me, closeness of the family in question would be a huge factor. I'd have to go with second cousin at least, just because I rarely see them.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:39 PM
bup bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
In a previous thread, someone put it thus, and it captures my feeling:

You write down your descendants, your siblings, and their direct descendants, and you write down your parents and grandparents.

The person in question does the same. If any of the names match, you just hug.

But if no names match, penis may ensue.

Last edited by bup; 12-12-2012 at 03:43 PM.. Reason: your own descendants are off-limits
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:48 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup View Post
In a previous thread, someone put it thus, and it captures my feeling:

You write down your siblings, and their direct descendants, and you write down your parents and grandparents.

The person in question does the same. If any of the names match, you just hug.

But if no names match, penis may ensue.
What if your grandfather's name is John Smith or something?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:49 PM
Icarus Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 2,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup View Post
In a previous thread, someone put it thus, and it captures my feeling:

You write down your descendants, your siblings, and their direct descendants, and you write down your parents and grandparents.

The person in question does the same. If any of the names match, you just hug.

But if no names match, penis may ensue.
I can tell, yer not from 'round these parts, are ye'?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:20 PM
robert_columbia robert_columbia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
My only female first cousin is much younger than me. Emotionally, she is still a little girl to me and I could never go to bed with her, even though she is legally an adult now.

Last edited by robert_columbia; 12-12-2012 at 04:21 PM.. Reason: qualify "cousin" with "first"
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:26 PM
Covered_In_Bees! Covered_In_Bees! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_columbia View Post
My only female first cousin is much younger than me. Emotionally, she is still a little girl to me and I could never go to bed with her, even though she is legally an adult now.
That wasn't the question.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:27 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_columbia View Post
My only female first cousin is much younger than me. Emotionally, she is still a little girl to me and I could never go to bed with her, even though she is legally an adult now.
I'll quote this in service of reminding y'all that the question is about a previously unknown cousin, not about people you already know as a relative.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:35 PM
Fretful Porpentine Fretful Porpentine is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Bohemia. A seacoast.
Posts: 5,692
First cousins would be entirely too weird, but then, I've known all of my first cousins since they were born and there is absolutely no chance any new ones will turn up. Second cousins, meh, I don't know who most of them are and some of them live in Poland, so I don't suppose it would be any different from dating any other stranger.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:43 PM
chiroptera chiroptera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
I married (for a while) my father's sister's husband's brother's son.

Which is some sort of familial cousin, although not a shred of shared genetics. Completely legal. Also if it makes a difference, I never even met the guy until we were both in our 20s, and penis (although no offspring) ensued.

Frankly, that is as close as I'd want to get. I could not imagine EVER feeling OK about boinking someone even very remotely blood-related to me. It was hard enough to have to explain when we had a couple of shared aunts and uncles, and always stressing that there was NO shared genetic material involved.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:43 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fretful Porpentine View Post
First cousins would be entirely too weird, but then, I've known all of my first cousins since they were born and there is absolutely no chance any new ones will turn up. Second cousins, meh, I don't know who most of them are and some of them live in Poland, so I don't suppose it would be any different from dating any other stranger.
I agree that it's very unlikely that full first cousins will be discovered as an adult, but halfs are possible. Bastardy and all that.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:49 PM
lisacurl lisacurl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
I'm the oldest cousin in my family [via maternal grandparents], and once you've changed someone's diaper, it's difficult to think of them as a viable sexual prospect.

I've never met most of my biological father's family, so I could be a Lifetime movie in the making if I met a cousin on that side and didn't make a mental connection with the names.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:02 PM
Skald the Rhymer Skald the Rhymer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,462
It occurs to me that I never answered the question, so I will now; my too-close cutoff point is first cousin once removed. That is, 2nd+ cousins are fine, but not any of the first cousin not-removed varieties (though I suspect that genetically a full second cousin shares as much ancestry as a half first cousin--I'd have to draw a chart to be sure, though.)

That said...

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiroptera View Post
I married (for a while) my father's sister's husband's brother's son.

Which is some sort of familial cousin, although not a shred of shared genetics. Completely legal. Also if it makes a difference, I never even met the guy until we were both in our 20s, and penis (although no offspring) ensued.

Frankly, that is as close as I'd want to get. I could not imagine EVER feeling OK about boinking someone even very remotely blood-related to me. It was hard enough to have to explain when we had a couple of shared aunts and uncles, and always stressing that there was NO shared genetic material involved.
But everyone is blood related to you in some way, unless one of you is a replicant or a Vulcan. It's just how much you're aware of. I seem to recall that Dick Cheney and Barack Obama are 8th cousins, which means share either or or two great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents. Are you saying that knowing of that sort of connection -- 1 out of 512 or 1 out of 256 -- would be a deal-breaker?

Last edited by Skald the Rhymer; 12-12-2012 at 05:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:02 PM
Scumpup Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
I have an unknown number of cousins from my mother's side of the family whom I've never met at all or haven't seen since we were little kids. such an occurance, therefore, is possible. I don't think even first cousin would bother me. We have little or no shared family history and the common relatives are decades in their graves. They aren't family in any sense of the word that would matter to me now. It would have mattered even less, if that is possible, during my promiscuous days.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:14 PM
robert_columbia robert_columbia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skald the Rhymer View Post
I'll quote this in service of reminding y'all that the question is about a previously unknown cousin, not about people you already know as a relative.
It's hard to answer the question though, because I'm considering the question from the perspective of real life. Certainly, given my current known relations and the history of our (first cousin) relationship, a romantic relationship would never work between us and our parents would most likely not approve (if we somehow ended up there) and they do, in fact, treat us as a sweet big brother/little sister pairing. This fact feels like it does bias me against first cousin relationships in general as I never found any first cousins as adults and had to deal with romantic tension issues.

I don't know any second cousins personally at all, so perhaps I might be ok with it. I also didn't really get to meet my great-grandparents or my grandparents' siblings, so there's the aspect of non-familiarity with parents who are observing a long-term familial relationship that suddenly turns romantic. There hasn't been an elder watching my development over the years as I visit my second cousin Suzie every year and making judgements on how it's going.

I do know that I am a descendant of a famous person who lived in the 1600's, but the fact that someone else is also descended from them wouldn't be a big issue.

Last edited by robert_columbia; 12-12-2012 at 05:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:17 PM
chiroptera chiroptera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skald the Rhymer View Post
It occurs to me that I never answered the question, so I will now; my too-close cutoff point is first cousin once removed. That is, 2nd+ cousins are fine, but not any of the first cousin not-removed varieties (though I suspect that genetically a full second cousin shares as much ancestry as a half first cousin--I'd have to draw a chart to be sure, though.)

That said...



But everyone is blood related to you in some way, unless one of you is a replicant or a Vulcan. It's just how much you're aware of. I seem to recall that Dick Cheney and Barack Obama are 8th cousins, which means share either or or two great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents. Are you saying that knowing of that sort of connection -- 1 out of 512 or 1 out of 256 -- would be a deal-breaker?
Ah. OK - no. Otherwise I'd never boink anyone, ever, again. Which would be sad. Even a chimp or bonobo. Not that I want to, you understand.

I guess I mean - people within my known family genetic pool, with whom I share a direct, known blood-relative - would not be boinkable. Other humans with whom I may or may not share some extremely attenuated genetic material with simply because I am human? Bring it.

Unless you are Dick Cheney. Then, ewww. No.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:44 PM
Becky2844 Becky2844 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Early on in high school, a 13-year-old gf of mine married her 23-year-old 2nd cousin. It was perfectly legal. Later in high school, a gf married her 1st cousin and it required some kind of dispensation. Something legal. Blood tests were involved.

Anything past 1st (blood) cousin is fair game.

I first married at 19 and narrowly averted being considered an old maid.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:52 PM
Der Trihs Der Trihs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 35,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan View Post
To close for reproductive procreation? Or recreational sex?
This. I don't have any moral/emotional problems with sex with a cousin; but I'd worry a little about having children within them (assuming I wanted children). It's my understanding that worries over cousin/cousin reproduction are exaggerated though, at least if it's only an occasional thing and not something that becomes a common practice.

And I agree with the people who say it's about how closely you were raised with them.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-12-2012, 06:08 PM
Martin Hyde Martin Hyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Based on my understanding, having children with a first cousin is not really a significant reproductive concern over unrelated persons. At my current age and place in life, it's very unlikely I'll have children intentionally (I think there are serious moral failings to have a child when you're almost 60 years old, I think children are best raised by fathers much younger and will grow up more emotionally healthy without a senile 75 year old man as their father figure) so the reproductive issue isn't a concern.

So in a scenario where somehow I meet and start having regular sex with a first cousin, who I did not know to be a first cousin, I wouldn't stop once I found out.

Now, younger me it'd be different. More of my family was alive when I was younger, and I think the societal "ick" factor extends to fully encompass any type of second cousin / cousin once removed. That could be enough of a problem it'd terminate the relationship.

I wouldn't pursue a known cousin or cousin-once-removed, but if I was attracted to any of my second cousins I might.

In all honesty I don't think there is a real good reason to be squicked out by first cousin relationships. Historically they made great sense, in small communities a first cousin is someone you'll be in contact with and genetically different enough from to safely have offspring with. As long as this just happens sometimes and isn't the norm, there isn't a big concern for the offspring. Plus, most people historically had a lot of kids anyway so it's still extremely likely you'll have a few healthy kids even if your unique genetic condition predisposes your offspring to having a problem.

I think a lot of this squick factor comes from public perceptions of what inbreeding did to European royalty. However, European royalty was very different from the rest of society. They both practiced first-cousin marriage, but commoners had more than enough genetic diversity with men and women from neighboring villages marrying and etc that it wasn't a big problem. The royals intentionally kept their pool of acceptable mates very, very small. Many of the first cousin marriages among European royals thus were of the "double reinforced" variety, and when that line had certain genetic disorders introduced you started seeing it in a lot of the children.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-12-2012, 06:33 PM
jackdavinci jackdavinci is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Depends on if I grew up with them around all the time so that they feel like a close family member. Actual genetic closeness isn't that important until it gets closer than cousin.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-13-2012, 02:37 AM
TokyoBayer TokyoBayer is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
When I was in school, my girlfriend at the time and I found out we were either third or fourth cousins from a rather large Mormon polygamous ancestors. From different wives, though. That wasn't weird at all, and we talked about getting married.

Almost all of my cousins are still Mormon, so that would be a no go for me, even if I could get past the eek, cousins factor.

I don't really know any relatives past that, so second cousins would probably be fine, but I'd be really weirded out if I somehow met a relative walking around Tokyo, no matter how distant.

Last edited by TokyoBayer; 12-13-2012 at 02:39 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-13-2012, 02:50 AM
Blackberry Blackberry is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
If you were raised thinking of each other as "cousins" then it seems really gross.

I don't know though, I have no actual experience with this. Everyone I consider a relative who is anywhere near my age is both female and wouldn't be my type even if male. It's a situation I find kind of intriguing. Whenever I hear about it on something mainstream (a Friends episode and a Cosmo article come to mind) I am recreationally shocked.

(Also I would never normally choose to read Cosmo, but that didn't used to stop those assholes from sending it to me for a couple years unsolicited, so once I did come across such an article.)
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-13-2012, 02:55 AM
HazelNutCoffee HazelNutCoffee is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: land of soju & kimchii
Posts: 9,204
In Korea, it's illegal to marry your first or second cousins. You'd have to get to third cousins before it's legal.

At this age (assuming I were single) I dunno if I'd bother dating someone without at least the potential for marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-13-2012, 04:59 AM
Seanette Seanette is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by StusBlues View Post
Anything closer than third cousins (grandparents were first cousins, if I understand correctly) is off limits, and third cousins is kinda weird. I'm pretty sensitive to this, though. My first cousin started dating her dad's common-law-wife's nephew, eventually falling pregnant and marrying the dude. I get a little squiffed out thinking about it, but I'm in the minority, and I accept that.
I'm not sure I get what's a problem here, but that's me. Your cousin and her husband are not genetically related (so far as I can tell from the description) and did not grow up together (I assume), so I'm not sure how this differs from any random two people meeting and eventually marrying.

I honestly can't think of any male cousin I have I'd find even remotely attractive (my gene pool is rather toxic, IMO) if I were single.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-13-2012, 08:48 AM
billfish678 billfish678 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
I think there is a law in the south where you must have someone in your family that meets these criteria. Smokin hot and totally doable. Too closely related to actually do due to social and or legal pressures. And probably close enough to genetically be a bad idea if the kissin gets moving into the procreating area.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 12-13-2012, 09:14 AM
ctnguy ctnguy is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
As I see it, a previously-unknown cousin would be functionally a stranger to me. As I'm gay there's no procreation issue. The only possible issue is if the previously-unknown cousin becomes part of the family there might be some weirdness. I think, then, that I would only cut off an existing relationship if it were close enough to get in trouble with the law. Here (South Africa) that means sibling, uncle or nephew; first cousins are OK. (And in fact, same-sex incest wasn't illegal at all until 2007.)
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-13-2012, 12:23 PM
Mississippienne Mississippienne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
I've told this story before, but my mother had a pair of cousins who eloped with each other, only for their mothers to threaten to disown them. They got divorced, but neither ever remarried or even dated anyone else. They'd been in love with each other since they were children. What a waste -- as if one set of first cousins getting married is gonna bring about the downfall of western civilization.

If my hottie cousin is CM Punk, my panties are coming off so fast they'll break the sound barrier
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.