Translate

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Consanguinamory and Reproduction

One of the most common reasons given to object to the right to consanguineous relationships is what I call the "mutant baby" argument. Even some people who support the right to consanguinamory and have even engaged in consanguineous sex themselves join with bigots in being strongly against close relatives having children together because of prejudiced backlash or the increased risk of birth defects.

In regards to the prejudiced backlash, the answer is not to let bigots have their way. It is for bigots to lose their power to bully, prosecute, and break up homes. Don't want children of consanguineous parents to have a hard time? Do not give them a hard time.

In regards to the increased risk of birth defects, scientific understanding is often lacking.

Most sexual encounters do not result in a birth. Many people who have relationships or marry never have genetic children together; some people in consanguinamorous relationships choose not to. So, we must recognize the differences between sex, marriage, parenting, and reproduction, and not ban the first three because of concerns about the last one.

But let's deal with that last one.

Most births to consanguineous parents do not produce children with significant birth defects or other genetic problems; while births to other parents do sometimes have birth defects. There are happy, healthy, bright, attractive people born to close relatives who are productive members of society. We all know some, whether we know it or not, and whether they know it or not. It is that common. (Sometimes, they were conceived by an abuser, but often, not by an abuser but by mutual lovers.) We don’t prevent other people from marrying or deny them their reproductive rights based on increased odds of passing along a genetic problem or inherited disease. For example, it is entirely legal in the US and most other places for someone with Huntington's Disease to date, have sex, marry, and have genetic children. How can such rights be denied to people who are genetically healthy, simply because they are close relatives?

It is true that in general, children born to consanguineous parents have an increased chance of genetic problems than those born to nonconsanguineous parents, but the odds are still minimal. (UPDATE: Please see this wonky elaboration written by a Friend of FME.) There are US states and there are countries where consanguinamory is not illegal or at least it isn't prosecuted. Sweden will legally marry half-siblings in some circumstances. A comparison of the rate of genetic problems in these places to places that criminalize and actively prosecute consanguinamory reveals no discernible increase in genetic problems in the places that embrace this relationship right.

If a natural talent or gift runs in the family, the children born to consanguineous parents will be more likely to inherit and manifest that beneficial result as well; a birth benefit. But there are increased odds of problem with births to older parents, too. There's no stigma assigned to that, and it isn't illegal for older people to date, have sex, marry, and have genetic children together.

Anyone concerned about these things should have genetic testing and counseling. People who are not close relatives can pass along health problems, too.

The "birth defects" argument also implies that people with disabilities or some other birth defect are living lives so terrible that they should never have been born at all. Yet, there are many such people who are leading happy, fulfilling, productive lives.

But a current problem, in some (not all) cases, is that in giving birth, consanguineous parents will be outing themselves to someone who is prejudiced, and there will now be evidence of their (in some places) illegal love that can be used against them.

There are consanguinamorous parents happily raising their healthy children together. But some consanguinamorous relationships face very real threats. Again, the answer is to stop the persecution and prosecution. There is no good reason to deny consenting adults their equal protection of having their relationship and reproductive rights.

Consanguinamorous or not, anyone engaging in heterosexual intercourse should be aware of the possibility of pregnancy, the various forms of birth control and other options available, and the realities if pregnancy, birth, and raising children.

UPDATE: Jane has a great essay on these topics here.

With all of that in mind, let's look at this thread on a consensual incest discussion board. (The discussion is explicit, so if you have a problem with that, you are warned.)

carebear82 wrote…



I have been sexually active with my brother for 3 years now. We have sex whenever we get the chance which unfortunately is only about once a month as we live a bit of a distance apart but whenever i am home visiting family once a month we always make a point to hook up at least once and we have always been careful to use condoms but i am seriously considering letting him go "bareback" . Sex without condoms is so much better. I know the risk but i am really considering it.

Girls out there in incestland? What do you thinik? Condoms? or no condoms?

Janel responded…

Carebear...as long as you are both disease and drug free...then ditch the condoms. But, if you are fertile, then just remember that you could get pregnant...not sure if you want that or not. If you know when you ovulate, then you just don't have sex during those 36 hours......

carebear82 added…

forsure. we both know the risks but i really want him to cum inside me. i think im going to do it. i tell you the first time i took off my clothes in front of him and he slowly gently slid his cock inside me it was heaven. what an amazing feeling.

horny guy questioned…

Is 36 hours going to be a safe enough timescale to ensure 'safe' sex with your brother? I've heard of many instances where a female has concieved in the middle of her cycle, which for you could be a disaster (unless you want to have a baby with your brother)?

Maybe you could try another form of contraception-spermicidal foam, for instance?

Hope all goes well, but be careful!

Hank5 was nostalgic…

My sister and I were lovers for 3 years whilst sharing an apartment attending the same out of town university. We made love almost daily, but neither of us like condoms and from the start we did it "bareback". The first time we did it, she went to the university health clinic the following morning to get the "morning after" pill. Thereafter she went on the contraceptive pill.

For both of us making love skin-on-skin, and me pouring my semen into her uterus, was the apex of sexual enjoyment.

Just make sure that you practice safe sex so as to avoid an unwanted pregnancy.

Carebear82 updated the situation with what you could probably guess would happen…

I just wanted to let everyone know that my stupid plan to ditch the condoms has now ended in disaster as i am now pregnant with my brothers baby.on my doctors advice i did not go on the pill because of a few of the risks of the pill involved so we were practicing the "pull out" and he usually cums on my tummy or back depending what position we are in. well one stupid time he didnt pull out in time and now its gonna be pretty hard to explain to the family.

Even if he had pulled out each time, that isn’t contraception. Sperm can leave the penis well before any orgasm.


That particular discussion board, like many others was suffering from much spam and gibberish posting. I recommend instead visiting Kindred Spirits forum, registering/joining for free. But be sure to immediately read all of the rules.
— — —

27 comments:

  1. Also, soon the birth defect argument, could become less of an issue if a 3rd parent's genes are added to the mix. See http://www.health24.com/Parenting/Pregnancy/News/UK-plans-worlds-first-3-parent-IVF-babies-20130701

    ReplyDelete
  2. The main argument against a consanguineous being parents, is not necessarily their own first generation of children, but the continued lineage of incest which WILL lead to severe defects.
    That, of course, will never be a popular form of living (leading a lineage of incest); there are many mental devices which work upon the individual outside of environmental-influence which causes oneself to shape into what s/he is, this controlled eugenics is not really necessary in order to maintain a society, but a culture (just like drug prohibition, which is more economical than cultural).

    I want to sign this comment off with a plea: If you know your partner (whether s/he is your sibling or not) or yourself has any severe or intensely undesirable hereditary disease or quality, don't give birth. Children are not a symbolic image of a couple's love, they're corporeal people; To consider children as a macguffin of the family-state and subjugate them with strife is seriously not how a parent should think; it is as closed-minded as the ones this article preaches against.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you, and that's something I do try to impress upon people; first generation incest isn't troublesome by itself, but prolonged incest over many generations is where you get most of the 'mutant baby' hype from. If people live their lives the 'right' way, both parents stay together, the child gets raised by the parent, GSA is likely not to happen (which is really the top way that these relationships happen, I've found).
      It would be good for people to think of their possible children, and we can only hope that they would have some consideration for how it all turns out. Not just consanguinamorous couples, but everyone.

      Delete
  3. I am in a relationship with my brother. My story is available on this blog here. My brother and I have a daughter together. She is perfectly healthy and happy, and we do plan to have more children. I've chatted with many people who had or who were incest children and they turned out fine. I believe that the risks are simply not as bad as we have been led to believe.

    -Liz Smith
    blond_one89@ymail.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can I email you? I would love to speak with you. I also have a healthy 3 year old boy with my brother. We've been together 5 years. It would just be nice to have a friend like me. :)

      -Deborah

      Delete
    2. Deborah, it would be great to hear from you at Fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

      Delete
    3. Deborah, of course you can contact me. I would love to hear from you and anyone else like me out there.

      Liz Smith
      blond_one89@ymail.com

      Delete
  4. Hey, Keith, you might want to change that link from my "wonky elaboration" on your tumblr, to the more approachable version I wrote later: http://thefinalmanifesto.tumblr.com/post/75086550566/the-key-to-healthy-children-for-incestuous-couples

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hah! I noticed you kept the descriptor "wonky." I guess it is still kind of wonky. :P

      Delete
  5. I also authorize you to reprint it in any way on your blog, if you'd prefer to have direct access.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It can work and I'm sure of that, enough said. It should be the informed choice of the couple.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi hon. As a mother involved with her son for the last 6 yrs. and a mother to her son's 5 yr old child THANK YOU VERY MUCH! Our daughter was born without birth defects of abnormalities of any kind. We look forward to the day when we can marry each other legally. <3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, congratulations on your love and your child. Thanks for commenting. If you haven't don't so already, please write me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com ...I'd like to hear more about your relationship.

      Delete
  8. Thumbs up to you. Well written and well described.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hello, dear all.

    It's really possible a mother and a son have a baby together, without any health problems? Do you have more examples on this subject? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Anonymous, it is possible and I know of examples. The concern in such cases is two-fold: 1) Age of he mother. Pregnancies to women 35 and older carry more risks. 2) A genetic problem that exists in the mother's family. However, most children born to mother & son are healthy.

      Delete
    2. Nice to hear that. Are there any medical exams that mother and son could perform to discover any genetic problem on them?

      Or even any other health problem at all? It's a life to begin and all care is important on this situation. On this blog ( or even other places ) can you point some cases about pregnancy between mother / son?

      It will be nice to hear experiences, any problems during the process, the positive and negative sides on this, how to seek proper help,etc.

      It's a delicate and hard subject to talk about: incest pregnancies.

      It's because HOW to explain to the rest of the family the truth about it? Mother and son can have sex and love each other. But, how to tell
      that to the grandmother, grandfather, siblings and others? If mother become pregnant, they will ask to her who is the father. Mother is divorced, on this case. If she tell them that she became pregnant by
      her own son, probably it will cause many problems. How a mother can tell her parents that she want to have a baby from his son and even live like a husband and wife with him?

      I don't know any case that mother and son are encouraged by grandparents to live like partners.

      Thanks for the advices.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous, if you're facing this situation it would be good to contact me privately at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com or on Facebook.com/fullmarriageequality

      Genetic tests can be performed on anyone, and people can seek guidance about their risks of having children, including having children with someone who has the same "problematic" gene.

      There are various posts here tagged as mother-son and also many tagged as taking about children.

      In case of pregnancy, family and friends may already suspect something is going on between mother and son. However, in many cases, even if they outright say they know, it is better not to confirm their suspicions. The mother can say she spent time in social situations with men and she's not sure the identity of the father, if for no other reason than it was a one night stand. Of course it is up to her what she wants to reveal to others, but I advise against self-incrimination where mother-son sex is still criminalized.

      Delete
  10. Hi. And about concerning Genetic tests to find any problem between mother and son, how can do that keeping all privacy? I mean: how do that without the doctors do not "suspect" the son and mother true
    relation? If the doctors need to study both woman and man genetics and after that the possible "combination" between them to find some possible "problems", how to keep secret about the true consanguinity? If they discover the truth will not cause any problems? Legal problems too? I do not not if this is considered crime or something around the world. I will look on this site more cases about that: reproduction between very close people and positive and negative effects on that. It will be nice to see what other people say about it. If they succeed or had some problems about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Laws vary from place to place. The safest way is for each person to get individual testing, which could reveal problem genes. Ask what the risks are if you have a child with someone who has the same problem genes.

      Delete
  11. Hello. What exactly is GSA? How does it happen to some people? Was there any particular physical components or genetic predisposition between two very close people to experience the GSA? When searching for some cases of GSA, I realize that some of them get very strong physical, sexual and emotional attraction to each other. I've heard cases where the sexual desire between mother and son are very strong, greater than any other regular relationships with other people. Are
    there any "genetic component" which naturally facilitates bringing these people together? Concerning about sex, I can tell that some people who has GSA have a great pleasure with his/ her partner. Even better or stronger in comparison to non-GSA relationships. And the desire to have a baby with his/her GSA partner in some cases is very strong too! Both of the sides feeling the same!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An overview of GSA is here: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/genetic-sexual-attraction.html

      I don't think there is definitive evidence of how the phenomenon operates. One hypothesis is that it is at least partially prompted by pheromones.

      Delete
  12. Pheromones. Yes, I have heard this word before. Not only bewtween people who have GSA, but all others. Or most of them. It's a natural thing, physical or something like that, which works as attractive between individuals, right?. Who has GSA possesses some kind of pheromone "specific" for this kind of phenomenon? Something "directed" to someone very close, like father, mother, daughter, etc? I can say that in some cases, the body of a mother seems to have natural "charms" to attract his son. And vice versa. Of course this is not for all people, but some specific cases, such as those with GSA.

    Particularly, I think those who have GSA has a very strong sexual and emotional attraction with some close family member.

    And I find it a very pleasant idea, although the society condemn and do not accept or understand such stuff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Studies show most people are attracted to people who look like them. Who looks more like you than your close genetic relative? It may also be so for the smell of pheremones. However, something described as the Westermarck Effect often suppresses attraction in people raised together (whether they are actually related or not). Westermarck could be the result of socialization. It could also be a result of a biological variation that allowed humans who had that variation to survive due to having more extensive immunities. Whatever the case, not everyone raised together experiences Westermarck. And people who were not raised together or by one another do not have he Westermarck Effect in the mix.

      Delete
  13. The solution to the problem of to reproduce or not would be made much easier with decriminalization because then couples could freely seek advice from genetic experts and be fully informed about the risk. Consaguious relationships have always existed and will continue to do so why not be concerned about the safety of all involved if they are really concerned about children

    ReplyDelete
  14. In the medium term, technology (like CRISPR-cas9 and beyond) will resolve the higher probability of abnormal offspring but until then, for individuals in a society where close relatives rarely produce offspring, it isn't much of a problem. But in cultures where it is common, it can get to be a problem. For example, Saudi Arabia has gotten to the point where it is a problem: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/01/world/saudi-arabia-awakes-to-the-perils-of-inbreeding.html . I can't wait for the day that the precious diverse features of humanity, created by geographic isolation, can be preserved forever before they are lost (~20% reduction in .genetic redheads per generation)

    ReplyDelete

To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE.