How many generations apart is okay for breeding? - Just bored and shitposting tbh

Solid Snek said:
In that case, you should be focusing more on your mom than on your cousin.

Is your mom hot? Or are you? If neither of you are, this is going to get even more complicated.
Click to expand...
Mom was hot in her younger years, but she's in her late 50's these days.
As for myself, I can't objectively say. I'll do a face reveal for $50 though.
 
For breeding purposes you're probably going to want to find somebody of a completely different ethnic background just to be on the safe side. Incest is fine for a purely sexual relationship, but to prevent unwanted pregnancies, stick with either men, prepubescent females, or corpses. Obviously pets are also an option.
 
Penis Drager said:
Let me start with a quick lecture on why incest is bad:

These genetic deformaties don't just pop into existence because you fucked your sister. They are the result of rare recessive alleles which are probably lurking in your DNA right now. When you select a partner pseudo-randomly, the chances of a homozygous (having the same two alleles) offspring for any particular genetic disease is next to nothing and so these diseases are rare. A brother and sister breeding, however, creates a genetic bottleneck. Observe the following:
View attachment 2127848
Let's say "tall" (T) is the normal variant and "short" (t) is some terrible genetic disease. If just one parent has the "t" allele hiding in their genes, none of their children will inherit the disorder. But half will be carriers. Now, if two carriers decide to breed (which is not very unlikely in the case of brother/sister incest), then there is a 25% chance any given child born from them will have this disorder. It's a bit more complicated than that, but we're at least at 7th grade genetics at this point. From here, we can do some extrapolation:
I've had a few and don't want to break down all possibilities for first cousins, but most civilized countries have decided first cousins is a no-go despite the much lower risk. Are second cousins okay, though? How far do we go? Technically all life on Earth is "nth" cousins so we have to draw the boundary somewhere.

Where's a good boundary in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Farmsperging:

The reason humans need strict incest taboos is because we don’t treat ourselves like a herd. If I’m managing a flock of sheep, I cull hard and often, I might turn my top 30% of rams in with my top 80% of ewes and repeat with each generation. Modern breeding has moved in the direction of controlled crosses, but IMO it isn’t as beneficial to pick your absolute top ram or whatever. You just need to cull the worst ones so you’re continually removing the worst gene combinations from the herd. In that context, a lot of mob breeders wouldn’t really worry about inbreeding. The original Beefmaster herd in Texas has been a closed herd since like 1935 or something. They produce top beeves because they cull aggressively, not because they’re carefully avoiding inbreeding.

But of course, humans generally don’t cull. So then I think the reality of the gene flow really does make it undesirable to mix genetics that are too closely related. One generation of first cousins mating is unlikely to be a problem, but if you breed cousin to cousin for multiple generations, you wind up with weird genetic problem clusters like the Amish or the Ashkenazi. I think the issue is less a one time or occasional closely related mating and more that you create stagnant gene pools where you’re transferring the same genetic problems over and over.

So I don’t think you can really answer your original question in a satisfactory way. Since humans don’t really cull, it’s probably a good idea to have a taboo on cousin marriage. Both first and second cousins share enough genes that it makes sense to me to avoid them. After that, it’s probably not a big problem unless you get a lot of repeated crosses within an extended family.

(Edit, because the above probably makes me sound like a psycho, obviously incest is undesirable for many other human reasons... I just meant on a purely genetic level.)
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Hongourable Madisha
Afaik you can fuck your parents' cousins' kids and the risk of having reddit kids is already low
 
The incest taboo's also useful for safeguarding against paedophiles and groomers. If two people have lived together since childhood, say, an older and younger sibling, or a child and parent, it's abuse if they have sex, even when they're adults. You get the odd case where long-lost relatives unknowingly hook up and they've never met until adulthood, those could be dealt with case by case, but a blanket rule and a social norm that it's gross can help stop abuse. Victims are more likely to realise that it's not normal or healthy, and it's easier to deal with the perpetrator than if the courts had to wrangle all the specifics of the relationship and argue whether or not there was grooming. It also helps cracked down on forced marriages since it's harder for parents to marry their kids off to close relatives to keep inheritance money in the family.
The genetic factors are only important if it produces offspring, so you get creeps advocating the "right" to commit incest if you're sterile, or homosexual incest, but those are still abusive. So the limit would be whatever the genetic limit is found to be, and the distance needed to avoid it being sexual abuse, whichever of the two is higher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alkaline Cab
Let's thought experiment on this. I've heard the Minimum Viable Population size for a population of humans (to avoid inbreeding so hard that population ends up incesting itself to death with megadownies or some shit before it can get off the ground) is anywhere from 80 to 4169 individuals, according to the google. this is kind of an arbitrary decision on my end, let's go for the bigger number, then breed generations down where there is absolutely 0 incest until we get to below the smaller number (lets view this as the point of no return, when incest becomes neccesary to keep the population numbers alive.) Let's just see how long no-incest can withstand, if scientists say that 4169 is viable for creating a stable population, lets enforce chinese one child laws and see how long it can last.

assume every pair makes 1 child (because i dont wanna do complex math), and that magically we've fixed the sperm cells in this experiment to have every generation have a perfect 50-50 sex ratio. Decimals get rounded down bc lol miscarriages. Aaaand no inter-generational couplings, because pedophilia is worse than 3rd-cousinfucking.

1st gen: 4169
2nd gen: 2084
3rd gen: 1042
4th gen: 521
5th gen: 260
6th gen: 130 — last viable generation via size
7th gen: 65 — extinction vortex can begin here

so...
based off this, ethically you're good to fuck someone if you're related only by great-great grandparents. in other words, this mean two Millenials can fuck scientifically guilt-free if they're only related by having a shared ancestor of The Greatest Generation.

but of course, Amish people have existed for quite a while and look vaguely uncanny, so, we all know that if you never import any new blood, these populations' genepools will stagnate worse than a mosquito-filled puddle in june, so there's limitations.

works cited:
trust me
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hongourable Madisha
Hongourable Madisha said:
The incest taboo's also useful for safeguarding against paedophiles and groomers. If two people have lived together since childhood, say, an older and younger sibling, or a child and parent, it's abuse if they have sex, even when they're adults. You get the odd case where long-lost relatives unknowingly hook up and they've never met until adulthood, those could be dealt with case by case, but a blanket rule and a social norm that it's gross can help stop abuse. Victims are more likely to realise that it's not normal or healthy, and it's easier to deal with the perpetrator than if the courts had to wrangle all the specifics of the relationship and argue whether or not there was grooming. It also helps cracked down on forced marriages since it's harder for parents to marry their kids off to close relatives to keep inheritance money in the family.
The genetic factors are only important if it produces offspring, so you get creeps advocating the "right" to commit incest if you're sterile, or homosexual incest, but those are still abusive. So the limit would be whatever the genetic limit is found to be, and the distance needed to avoid it being sexual abuse, whichever of the two is higher.
Click to expand...

Yes, for sure. My post made me sound like a psychopath so I added a note. Incest in humans is very harmful even if it doesn’t lead to reproduction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hongourable Madisha
Penis Drager said:
Mom was hot in her younger years, but she's in her late 50's these days.
Click to expand...
Younger years is what counts.

Hot mom means you're likely to have a hot sister. Your mom might be too old to get pregnant now, but if you ever want that sister-wife, you're going to have put your chin up and push through the pain. You know your mission. Godspeed.

-edit- I suppose you could also convince your dad to knock up Taylor Swift and/or Ariana Grande. Whichever way is more convenient for you, I guess!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back