this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2026
82 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
872 readers
444 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nearly doubling the risk is pretty serious tbh. Definitely worth considering and, although first cousin marriages are legal in way more places than people seem to believe, I do actually think that, combined with the high risk of grooming/problematic dynamics, it's serious enough to outlaw the practice over.
I would like to see a source on the 50% claim! Seems higher than I would expect. 3-7% is about what I recall for first cousins but I don't recall the risk for siblings being that high, and those figures (pretty low for cousins, much, much higher for siblings) just don't feel consistent with one another to me (admittedly based largely on vibes and just an itsy bit of genetics knowledge).
relative increases aren't serious if the initial chance is extremely low. this is statistics pedantry not an opinion on the topic at hand.