this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
652 points (98.2% liked)

Greentext

4639 readers
2173 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 74 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Isn't there some sort of biological thing where you're more likely to be sexually attracted to your relatives if you don't know they're you're relatives

[–] olosta@lemmy.world 102 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Second degree cousins is not that close though. If every generation has three children, that's 27 persons. I thinks that for most of human history excluding second degree cousins from the acceptable partners pool would have been impossible. Communities were not that big.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Second degree cousins

I can't stop laughing.

[–] Enkrod@feddit.org 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That's how it's phrased in many other languages, german for example.

[–] BruceLee@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 weeks ago
[–] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And if my maths is correct, you only share on average 12.5% of your DNA with them

[–] mEEGal@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

your math may be wrong, because we have very similar genomes, even compared to complete strangers. hell, even between some species.

[–] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago

Well, yes. I meant in the sense we share on average 50% with each parent/siblings, 25% with grandparents, etc. I should have said genetics instead of DNA.

[–] Knuschberkeks@leminal.space 12 points 2 weeks ago

iirc 90% of dna is the same even between humans and plants. (Don't quote me on that)

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Of the variable alleles, not all DNA

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

(an ever increasing number of as the reference is constantly revised)

[–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

Groups often came together to party and marry people.

There are even rules, like exogamy is common.

[–] Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 32 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

All I could find on this is something called "genetic sexual attraction" ^[1]^, though Wikipedia contains arguments that it's pseudoscience ^[1.1]^. Here's a Reddit post asking about this. ^[3]^.

Related to this, I also came across the "Westermarck effect" ^[2]^ which appears to suggest that people who grow up together are less likely to be romantically attracted to each other ^[2.1]^.

References

  1. "Genetic sexual attraction". Wikipedia. Published: 2024-10-14T18:46Z. Accessed: 2024-12-09T07:29Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_sexual_attraction.
    1. §"Criticism"

      Critics of the hypothesis have called it pseudoscience. In a Salon piece, Amanda Marcotte called the concept "half-baked pseudoscientific nonsense that people dreamed up to justify continuing unhealthy, abusive relationships".[8] The use of "GSA" as an initialism has also been criticized, since it gives the notion that the phenomenon is an actual diagnosable "condition".

      Many have noted the lack of research on the subject. While acknowledging the "phenomenon of genetic sexual attraction", Eric Anderson, a sociologist and sexologist, noted in a 2012 book that "[t]here is only one academic research article" on the subject, and he critiqued the paper for using "Freudian psycho-babble".

  2. "Westermarck effect". Wikipedia. Published: 2024-09-26T14:09Z. Accessed: 2024-12-09T07:33Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westermarck_effect.
    1. The Westermarck effect […] is a psychological hypothesis that states that people tend not to be attracted to peers with whom they lived like siblings before the age of six.

  3. "How does nature prevent us from feeling sexually attracted to relatives who are objectively sexually attractive? ". Author: "Morgentau7" (u/Morgentau7). "r/TooAfraidToAsk". Reddit. Published: 2024-09-25T17:50:08.227Z. Accessed: 2024-12-09T07:34Z. https://www.reddit.com/r/TooAfraidToAsk/comments/1fpaold/how_does_nature_prevent_us_from_feeling_sexually/.
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yeah, that's weird: genetically similiar people are more attractive (as long as it isn't too similiar)(people in stable relationships often look alike) but bigger genetical difference is better.

[–] june@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, one of the primary components of attraction is familiarity. Also proximity and similarity.

[–] Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

Well there was that movie, Code 46.