Nostr

fucking and marrying your sister should not be wrong considering all the options we have like adoption, artificial insemination and surrogate mothers ...

and frankly even inbreeding is not as bad as people make it out to be. yes the children have a high probability of being sick but some children dying is necessary for bad genes to be eliminated from the gene pool. by not inbreeding you're just kicking the can down the road allowing bad genes to remain hidden, rather than flushing them out.

ideally you would fuck your sister and get her pregnant then the fetus would be tested for any abnormalities and aborted if positive. a child would likewise be tested and euthanized if sick.

after a few hundred years of such culling the average genetic quality of population would increase 10 fold, so much so that inbred kids in that society would not be any sicker than normal kids are today.

with all the tools we have available there is no reason for any man to fuck anybody but his sister ( or daughter ).

"incest" is at this point a primitive superstition similar to circumcision or Muslims refusing to eat Pork and so on.

most men would be far happier married to their sister than anybody else.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Layerjack (Onion Knight) 1y ago

It's such a big taboo that there's no direct evidence of those genetic disorders for humans.

On Galapagos islands brother and sister goats escaped and turned into 250,000 goats within a few years.

If the inputs are good, the copies are generally good too, and vice versa.

Low Information Voter 1y ago

Its the alliance-building you miss out on. Villages that didn't trade women didn't make it.

Humans are most avarious, jealous, backstabbing gits; but we hesitate to do that to a probable nephew.

Layerjack (Onion Knight) 1y ago

If those villages didn't have records (usually church), how would you know?

There was a woman who used a murder for hire honeypot on some forum, for her parents. And babies are sold in Afghanistan.

I'd say it's an arbitrary restriction until disproved in practice. And now I have to play Sweet Home Alabama

Dissident Sound 1y ago

well no, recessive genes are a thing. which means that you typically need two copies of a bad gene for the genetic defect to manifest itself. usually you only get two copies of the same bad gene if your parents are siblings.

but inbreeding itself doesn't produce bad genes - it simply produces bad gene PAIRS. this is bad for the parents and the child in the short term but actually good for humanity in the long term because it speeds up the elimination of bad genes from the gene pool.

these bad genes can only be eliminated if their effects manifest themselves which will only happen when they form a pair so actually inbreeding is a good thing from that perspective.

also since you and your sister both carry two copies of genes not all your kids will end up sick. some of your kids will die and you will simply make extra ones and the ones that made it will have higher genetic quality than if you married normally and simply MASKED genetic defects rather than flushing them out.

of course i wouldn't risk it personally. that is i would rather have healthy kids of poor genetic quality than unhealthy kids of high genetic quality. but that's where surrogate mothers and so on can come in.

if you and your sister ( or daughter ) get along well there is no reason to not also be fucking ( except that of course you will be turned into pariahs )

Layerjack (Onion Knight) 1y ago

OK, then how about cloning the sis then? If she's hot, she gives birth to another hottie.

Dissident Sound 1y ago

the problem with cloning is it will never produce anything better than what you are starting with. best case scenario it will produce the same thing, but probably with some defects.

the idea is to randomize combinations so that there will be some really bad combinations and some really good and you discard the bad ones and multiply the good ones.

but there is a limit to how much you can randomize things. like race-mixing is the ultimate in randomization but you can only race-mix maybe 2 or 3 times before everybody is of the same milk chocolate race and you can't "race-mix" anymore.

so it should be fine to in-breed 90% of the time so long as you also occasionally breed outside of your own genetic pool.

Layerjack (Onion Knight) 1y ago

You just described modern cattle breeding. That's why good hamburgers are so juicy.

Dissident Sound 1y ago

if the sis is really high quality there should be no harm in cloning her a few times and fucking also the 12 year old versions ...

eventually though you have to mix things up - can't clone forever ...

Layerjack (Onion Knight) 1y ago

%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3De5f50ed29c5a5f2f0dbe9aebda6a79a760a186c7&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=90763252a08cdfa40f20194cae02aee56a94e834aaa43f865f0a54050b6e1a9f&ipo=images

Prince Aleph 1y ago

In my case, not sister, but first cousin. I couldn't have married my sister, our relationship was too up and down. But cousin marriage should work if sibling marriage does not. This is very common among the Bedouins. There were at least 2 of them I could've married, or more if I'd been willing to also consider 2nd/3rd cousins. And this would've also kept the family property together rather than splitting it all up and mostly losing it as my idiot uncles and aunts caused to happen because they are selfish, short-sighted boomer trash. It's hard to overstate what a disaster of civilization they caused.

Dissident Sound 1y ago

you're right - i was just rationalizing incest porn. i have a hot cousin but i only seen her a few times in my life, so i don't even think of her as family except biologically. the idea is to marry somebody you are already invested into rather than investing in a complete stranger. my cousin has a great ass but i was never close with her.