Talk:Incest/Archive 2

message: I am not so certain this is an appropriate external link. Although it may very well be documenting actual cases of "positive" incest, the writing style is very sensationalized and erotic. Moreover, there is more than just incest documented. It openly advocates promiscuity, zoophilia, sex with minors, and possibly other paraphilias that I may have missed in a cursory overview of the site. I certainly don't intend to be the morality police here, I am speaking more to the link's relevance to the scope of this article, as well as the ability to verify whether or not the true stories are, indeed, true.
I figured it would be more polite to voice my concern here than to delete the link outright. --cogpsy 03:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an erotica site, and inappropriate. --Orange Mike 04:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just as I had suspected, thanks. --cogpsy 23:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kelly's Diary 

message: Can anybody give me a citation to the Andrew Vachss quote about incest laws give privileged treatment to child rapists who grow their own victim? I would like to see what he has to say on this more specifically. --Cardigan 04:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrew Vachss Quote 

message: It's sick and the article should clearly state that, saying "incest is a sick act" somewhere in the first paragraph. This isn't opinion it's fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.168.185 (talk) 
*Can you cite that fact? If you can't and you made it up, then it's opinion. Psychade 15:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought Trampikey (talk to me)(contribs) 22:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's sick 

message: When the intro speaks of  "sexual activity between close family members", does that include situations where two brothers or two sisters are masturbating at the same time in their shared bedroom but no sexual contact occurs. I can't recall ever seeing such a situation being referred as incestuous. I think if the siblings where brother and sister then that would be considered different. When the intro uses word "between" that seems to clearly imply contact or interaction beyond simply being in the same room. --Cab88 15:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to sexual activity, it can be defined as any intimate act involving sexual gratification.  I'm sure one could argue that dirty talk could be a form of incest, if done for sexual gratification by at least one partner. Superwad 04:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  non-contact Sexual activities 

message: I think the article doesn't really explain covert vs overt incest very well. From a Google, it appears covert incest is e.g. when a parent relies on a child for emotional support that one would normally obtain from a partner. Whereas over incest I assume is sexual abuse? Someone with more understanding should improve it. How well accepted is the term covert incest? I've always thought of incest as involving sexual activity. Covert incest to me just doesn't sound like incest (I'm not saying it's not wrong, just that it doesn't fit my view of incest). Nil Einne 19:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An earlier version of this article had more on Covert Incest. A lot of it was removed and I presume this was because the information could not be properly sourced. Pendragon39 03:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The covert incest stuff seems generally dubious for inclusion here.  As I mentioned way back when whoever it was was all big on putting covert incest in this article, the most notable thing one can say about covert incest is that it encompasses acts which are not actually incestuous.  The term "Covert incest" seems to be used enough to warrant an article, but it shouldn't warrant more than a very brief mention in this article. john k 23:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: It was User:Anacapa who added content regarding covert incest.Pendragon39 02:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "covert incest" stuff should have never been allowed into the article in the first place. An encyclopedia article on such a topic as incest is not the place to advertise fringe theories from the areas of pop-psychology and the self-help community. Serpent-A 08:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nor should it be included for personal reasons, as the archives will attest.Pendragon39 10:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Check: Overt vs covert 

message: The article seems to be illiterate, poorly worded and ethnocentric.
Some time ago, I neutralised some of the language (removing the perp - victim speak from the 'parental' section under 'forms of incest'). Objectively, incest is a sexual interaction. A victimological model would have to be presented as a theory, not as the basis of the main text.
:A felony criminal offense which is what parent child incest is deserves the use of perpetrator so I would ask that you check your POV here. Anacapa 03:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It takes little effort to complain about an article. If you're willing to improve this article, then please do so. Regarding revulsion, do you believe the Westermarck effect is ethnocentric? Pendragon39 18:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do. I believe that it's brought on by social conditioning. 68.184.85.78 05:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lots of work to do and POV check 

message: Husbands and wives commit incest all the time, yet no one is charged. The Wookieepedian 06:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For a better example of my own point, try the following: take a piece of paper and draw two circles (Mom and Dad).  Color one blue and one green.  Now draw another circle (This is you).  Since every child recieves (roughly) half their genes from either parent, color this circle teal (blue-green).  Now draw three more circles in the same way for your hypothetical 'wife' and her parents (Color her 'parental circle, oh...(abitrary choice) black and white, which would make your 'wife's circle grey)  Now connect your wife's grey circle with your teal one, and draw a 'child' circle for them using the appropriate color.
Do you see what's happening?  Each time you go further down through the 'generations' of this tree, your genetic connection becomes weaker and weaker, until it ceases to connect at all.  Genetically, Shakespeare and I are about as related as a potato is to a mouse.
As for fractal shapes, fractals are a common mathematical occurance in almost everything (persisting, in some cases, to the molecular level), and are not reliable evidence of any kind of connection.  'Commonality of shape' is the result of evolutionary adaptation to a specific environment.  For example: a tall, thin creature in a high-gravity environment likely wouldn't be able to support itself due to the center of gravity. Thusly, evolution would accomodate for this by producing stouter, stronger beings (quoted from http://boards1.wizards.com/archive/index.php/t-198794.html).
I will end my diatribe here. :P  Sorry it's so long. 207.216.14.202 09:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Happens in every family on the planet 

message: I have created a covert incest article. I do not know much about it, but I saw something written on this talk page and created it in case anyone who knows about it wants to expand upon it.
:Great.  Where is it?  This seems to lead back to the main incest article. Anacapa 03:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covert Incest 

message: I have been looking throught the article yet this does not seem to be here.  In a single generation of offspring bred through incest, by how much does the chance of deformity rise?  This article did seem to be quite vague with this.
Krystel 17:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article deals primarily with the sexual act of incest. The information you inquire about belongs more on the inbreeding article. Anyway, deformity, defined as "a major difference in the shape of the body or a body part compared to the average shape for the area in question", would happen very little in the case of children born of incest. The danger lies more with inhereting negative recessive genes, resulting in reduced fertility, lower birth weight, slower growth rate, ect... And even then it's very much dependant on the consanguinity of the people involved and for how many generations the inbreeding has been going on. The kind of deformity you're probably thinking of - extra limbs sprouting all over the place, ect - is mainly the province of cheesy horror films and has little connection to reality. Serpent-A 01:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chance of deformity 

message: I believe fictional references in this section ought to be moved to Fiction. There is one instance of duplication that I can see, Song of Fire and Ice. Pendragon39 03:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adult incest 

message: I've removed [] some anime-related random trivia from the article. Though being an avid anime fan myself, I find this trivia to be redundant and not notable in the article's context.
Browsing through the article, I also have reservations against the "Incest in popular music" section. I believe it to be just a collection of random statements not adding into the article's quality or subject coverage. However, my proposed change would mean deleting a whole section. Being a new wikipedian, I'd like to ask the consensus for an opinion: does it really belong here?
nullie 09:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incest in music is, I believe, notable enough to warrant inclusion, but as per many other lists of songs, I think the proper place for this would be something like List of songs about incest. The move would also be a good opportunity to do some copy-editing, as some of the music section is very messy, difficult to read (because not in list format), doesn't include wikilinks and... shows no form of grammar I can recognize. I also think the Wagner character should be on this list; isn't Siegfried an opera? LeaHazel : talk : contribs 20:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved all popular culture references to a separate article. Feel free to contribute to it. nullie 23:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random trivia 

message: "Adult incest
Incest between adults occurs where there is no dependence on the adults as parent-child or sibling-sibling dependence precludes independent consent."
This doesnt make any sense. It seems to be saying that incest cant be consensual between adults due to power imbalances between the individuals concerned. A defendable hypothesis, perhaps, but POV, and I had to read it four times to work that out. Perhaps it should be replaced with something more matter of fact. e.g "Adult incest occurs between individuals who are close blood relations who have exceded their sociey's legal or cultural age of consent."
:I've added your sentence in place of the problematic one. Other editors can tweak it if they like. Serpent-A 11:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Age of consent doesn't apply to adults. I would finish the sentence with ...legal or cultural norm. Pendragon39 14:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this mean? 

message: :For the vast majority of child victimizers in State prison, the victim was someone they knew before the crime. 1/3 had committed their crime against their own child, about 1/2 had a relationship with the victim as a friend, acquaintance, or relative other than offspring, about 1 in 7 reported the victim to have been a stranger to them.
BJS Survey of State Prison Inmates, 1991. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.102.254.114 (talk) 03:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  unfortunately this says nothing about what percentage of incest cases are abuse. only about what percentage of abuse cases are incest. there is no correlation. 1Shaggy1 AKA Eli Bixby Portland Oregon 06:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statistics on child sex abusers who commit incestous abuse 

message: Survey by evolutionary psychologist. Shawnc 20:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey: Incest worse than bank robbery 

message: Am I going out of my mind or this article is an advertisement for incestuous activities?  
1st point.  Let the children be children.
2nd point.  Incestuous activities, in most cases if not all, start in childhood.
3rd point.  Incestuous activities, in most cases if not all, are initiated by adults, or older family members.  And, as two and two makes four, this is how we know it’s wrong.
4th point.  Don’t confuse people by including scientific terms such as endogamy, or alleles. Those terms belong in botany and zoology.
5th point.  According to whomever wrote this article, parental incest is inconclusive?? –meaning that it hasn’t been proven to be damaging to the child?? But “childhood sibling incest can cause serious psychological damage to the younger or less capable sibling according to researcher Richard Niolon.”
6th point.  Incestuous activities that result from abuses of power are called CHILD SEXUAL ABUSES -and it is DEVASTATING TO THE VICTIM.
The current article on incest needs to be replaced by a real one.
Anakaren1 23:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to refer to the topic above this one for a related discussion.  The short story is that some acts involve a victim and a perpetrator, but those that involve two consenting adults, while unsettling to many, may not.  Joie de Vivre 18:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: However, most incest between consenting adults remains a crime in most jurisdictions.  Incest between two consenting adults may or may not have consequences that affect other people such as inbred children who suffer deadly birth defects chosen in full knowledge by the adults.  I suggest we go beyond the easy direct level of consent to consider ALL the possible consequences here so we can make distinctions between what is merely unsettling and what is truly criminal. 128.111.95.240 04:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Going Crazy 

message: Content at issue:
:Many survivors of incest and others argue that a situation which does not involve physical, sexual contact should not be labeled incest.
:However, the concept has been criticized as trivializing the acts which are traditionally known as incest. It has also been criticized as demonizing parents who, while they may have some emotional issues in their relationship with their children, do not engage in any of the acts which most people would label "incest". Critics charge that "covert incest" is not a concept associated with serious academic research; rather, it is a creation of pop-psychology.
This content uses what appears to be original research to make claims that seem to have no NPOV sources.  This content closely resembles the personal opinions of a number of editors in controversial earlier discussions on this discussion page rather than well-sourced NPOV critics or controversies.  This content is unsourced original research as far as I can determine.  Therefore, I pulled it intact and clarified the remaining content.  
Before anyone gets too hot under the collar about this, please be nice enough to provide the NPOV basis for this content.  There might indeed by critics of and controversies about covert incest but we need to source them well otherwise this content merely reflects the personal prejudices of those editors who are uncomfortable with including covert incest in this article.  Please response with NPOV sources that we can use to replace weasel-worded statements like "many survivors and others argue",  please show us all where the concept is being criticized and who is doing the criticisms, and please show us who calls this a "creation of pop psychology"...that is other than editors on this discussion page.  I personally have seen no articles or books showing these so-called criticisms or controversies so I've got to wonder about this content.  Do those editors who feel so strongly about this content have NPOV sources to back this content with genuine research or is the usual wiki shoutout where Jimmy Wales' Maoist mob rules (see the lastest issue of Fast Company with Jimmy on the cover)?  128.111.95.138 01:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, all of that content is unsourced.  I've added the "unreferenced-section" template.  Joie de Vivre 17:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Similar content was present in this article last year until someone removed it. Looks like things have come full circle with regards to 'covert incest'. As I recall there was one psychologist who used this term. Pendragon39 04:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To all those editors who seem to have a perpetual problem with Covert Incest as a topic, there are now three books (Silently Seduced, Emotional Incest Syndrome and Married to his MOm) published on the topic from credible therapists.  These therapists are far from 'pop psychologists'.  They explain the topic using reasonable ideas in books that describe many aspects of the phenomenom. There may indeed be critics of Covert Incest but I have yet to see any other editors provide sources for the critical content on Covert Incest in the article so I am going to remove the unsourced critical content until someone offers sources.  This critical content looks like original research that closely matches unsourced editors' opinions about CI on this discussion page.  Where are the published sources that contain critical content about CI?  Please bring in good critical/'controversial' NPOV sources or please allow this section to stand alone minus original research about 'controversies', 'pop psychology' or whatever.  'Many survivors of incest' may indeed 'argue' about covert incest but we need to use NPOV sources that show these arguments before we make weasel-worded claims about 'many' incest survivors.128.111.95.240 02:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covert Incest content: Original research or sourced content? 

message: Okay, is this supposed to be in the category of 'medical emergencies', or is this somebody's idea of vandalism? Thomasiscool 01:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just looked under the page list of medical emergencies and incest is not listed there, and there is no mention of it in the Wiktionary definition. Can somebody just clarify that this is indeed a mistake or vandalism. Thomasiscool 01:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect that (with the exception of incest as forcible rape where violence occurs) that the incest survivor suffers severe psychological traumas that are unrelated to standard physiological emergencies and thus are not medical emergencies as such.  Incest-related trauma often takes decades to surface because the betrayals of dependent children by adult caregivers are rarely reported during the time of the crime.  Hope that helps but you might ask an ER doctor for a more authoritative take on this.128.111.95.240 03:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical Emergency 

message: There's a twincest article on Wikipedia. Should it be merged with this one? Nargrakhan 16:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge - Not under that name; but, yeah. The separate article looks a little fetishistic to me, but of course we must assume good faith. --Orange Mike 17:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't merge - Twincest is a fetishist term, which is why it should have its own article. Anchoress 01:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It should be merged to Incest in popular culture (formerly Incest in fiction) if anything, which is already a long list of these examples. By the way Twincest has been moved to Incest between twins and rewritten so that in has a similar format, so that merger would probably be a good idea. I added tags for it. The way, the truth, and the light 01:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twincest 

message: This entire section is unsourced.  I have added the "unreferenced-section" template.  The section should be removed if attributable sources are not found.  Joie de Vivre 17:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From http://www.covertincest.org/index.html it appears that covert incest is a new term not yet widely known. The site does list three books. Pendragon39 04:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added all the known sources.  These are credible and attributal professional sources.  I know of no known 'controversy' within the counseling community or elsewhere in NPOV pubs about this topic or I would have pulled it in. 'New but not yet widely known' seems to be a good and reasonable preamble to this section but there is no justification to delete this content out of hand. 128.111.95.240 03:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: What is completely unsourced is the critical content about CI in article.  I pulled that out for discussion as shown above.  Please source that critical content from NPOV sources before you pull it back in.  thanks 128.111.95.240 03:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covert incest and emotional incest - section is unsourced 

message: Parent-child incest is widely considered to be one of the cruelest forms of child abuse if not the cruelest form of child abuse known.  There are many credible sources that show how incest causes terrible damage to children.  However, content from psychologists and others who deal with the survivors of incest first-hand seems to be being censored from this article for unknown reasons in favor of long abstractions about the science of incest and or inbreeding (which belongs in 'inbreeding' instead).  To be NPOV, this article needs to reflect the ongoing research being done on incest by psychologists, sexologists, and even say Ev. Psych. biologists.  I added the POV template to reflect this blatant bias against the science of how real PEOPLE relate to incest.  Please consider content that brings the human story to this article so that NPOV balance is in fact the standard here.  We need to show all aspects of incest in this article and especially those that have direct relationships to human beings because incest is first and foremost SOCIAL, CULTURAL, and LEGAL in nature.  It is also an vile violation of the human rights of those who suffer of the crime.  This needs to shown here to make this article NPOV and representative.  To those editors who believe in an anything goes worldview about incest, I 'say fine show your stuff/sources but please refrain from censoring well-known sources that show the terrible sides of incest in the name of 'tolerance' for those who believe 'consenting' people (however immature) can do anything they damn well please' to or 'with' someone else.  Please allow the facts about incest room to breathe here so all sides are presented in some sort of proportional (like global warming where no naysayer gets 50/50 space now) fashion that reflects known realities about incest now. 
I took a moment and did some updating to the Parent-child section as a for instance.  These sources show how much is missing on the human, and moral issues related to incest in this article.  I ask all NPOV editors to take a look at this section and assist us to build a balanced article that represents the known research well. 128.111.95.240 05:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Incest perpetrated by parents of either sex against children of either sex is a crime as well as being considered a horror by most people in Western nations.  Although rarely reported or acknowleged as a common crime, parent-child incest is considered one of the cruelest forms of child abuse by therapists who work with children ,.  While father-daughter incest is well-known in nations where women's rights are respected, father-son , mother-son and mother-daughter  incest is rarely researched or reported.  However, research is beginning to be done on these forms of incest which were heretofore seen as unthinkable, impossible or unbelieveable by most people. 128.111.95.240 06:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV issues: Censoring content about incest as a crime against children 

message: User:69.138.226.246 continues to add an inappropriate citation to the sentence about Warren Farrell's research. That link is to a self-published web site whose sole purpose is to attack the men's rights movement, including Warren Farrell. I don't consider this an acceptable source. I question whether the sentence should even be in this article, unless it is neutrally expanded on to make it clear that the purpose of its inclusion is not to disparage Farrell. The way, the truth, and the light 20:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I dropped 69.138.226.246 a note about their number reverts today.  About that source, The way, the truth, and the light is right about that webiste - it isn't allowed under the external link policy becuase it is partisan.  But the reference for the info is: , "Incest: The Last Taboo" Warren Farrel Interviewed by Philip Nobile in Penthouse, December 1977, Volume 9, Number 4.  The sentence needs to be expanded because it seems to be misrepresenting the article and is selective of Farrell's points--Cailil  talk 22:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The sentence is now gone. The way, the truth, and the light 11:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warren Farrell 

message: I modified the statement in the 'Sibling incest between children' section to reflect what I recall from that and other studies, even though I don't have the actual reference (there wasn't one before either). The way, the truth, and the light 11:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sibling incest studies 

message: From a quick review of the literature it looks like father-daughter PSYCHIC incest has been a fairly hot topic in some circles.  What seems to be missing, as usual, are non-sexist treatments of the topic.  Here is Robert Bly's take in Iron John:
:"Our culture has paid attention in recent years, and rightly so, to men's physical incest with their daughters, which is hideous and revolting in it's range and damage.  And we have paid some attention to psychic incest as well between father and daughter.  We are aware of a disturbing rise in the number of sons who report sexual abuse by mothers, as well as fathers, uncles, and older brothers; but the culture still does not take very seriously the damage caused by psychic incest between mother and son."
:"Mari Sandoz in These Were the Souix mentions that the young Sioux boy never--after the age of seven or so--looked his mother in the eyes.  All requests were passed through his sister.  'Would you ask Mother to repair these sandals?'  'Dumbo wants his sandals fixed', and so on.  When the task was finished, the mother did not hand the sandals to the son, saying 'Here are your sandals', but again, the object went around a circuitous route.  Much sexual energy can be exchanged when a mother looks a son directly in the eyes and says, 'Here is your new T-shirt, all washed'."
:"Such precautions between mother and son seem absurd to us, unheard of, ridiculous, inhuman.  And yet the Souix men, once grown, were famous for their lack of fear when with women, their uninhibited conversations in the teepees, their ease of sexual talk with their wives.  We recognize that the Souix women were more aware of the possibilities of pyschic incest between mother and son than we are."
:"I've mentioned that American mothers sometimes confide details of their private lives to their small sons, details that might better go to adults their own age.  Frank disclosure is often better than silence, but it becomes harmful if the son feels he has to do something about it.  The boy in many a kitchen gets drawn to his mother's side, and he says in some form those terrible words: 'Mamma, when I'm grown up, I am going to have a big house for you, and you'll never have to work again.'"
Bly goes on to show how American mothers often  use their sons for 'fulfillment', for emotional satisfaction and for soul companionship. In short, she hopes he will become "a better lover to 'his woman' than his father was or is."  "Who could 'his woman' be?" Bly asks.
Because psychic incest shows up in many sources, I added this term to complete the Covert section. 128.111.95.138 03:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  added Psychic incest to Covert section 

message: I have strong doubt about the validity of the reference to "Hon Vong Phu" in Vietnamese folklore. I'm a Vietnamese, born and raised in Vietnam and the only legend related to "Hon Vong Phu" (at least the most well-known one) is about a lady whose husband is a soldier. The husband is killed in action and never comes home but the wife waits for him with his newborn until she turns into stone. The legend is all about the loyalty of a wife to her husband and nothing to do with incest. This legend is very popular amongst Vietnamese as well as a number of songs written about it. 210.49.191.145 10:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: incest in folklore 

message: I moved this to its own article. If it is notable enough to be in Wikipedia it can certainly be expanded. Since it's not a type of incest, it really doesn't need to be here. The way, the truth, and the light 22:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Covert incest]] 

message: It's often heard, that the appearance of incest and inbreading is extremely high in circles of Asian and African immigrants in (Northern-)European countries. One of the, if not the, reason for this is, that the racial and cultural gap between Europeans and these immigrants is unnaturally big. In case other users know (scientifical) sources concerning this matter, after mentioning them, this item might be added to the article. James Blond 10:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Asians and africans are not exotic! How are they exotic you racist bastard! Punkymonkey987 18:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exotics and inbreed 

message: In this article the conclusion is mentioned, that with animals inbreed only occurs in extremely unnatural situations, such as having to live together in the same cage for years. 
This can be regarded as an indication, that it's about the same thing, that brings people to inbreeding incest. If they would live their natural live, which implicates, that they would stay in their own kind of biotope and use only natural food, they wouldn't come to such a perversion; on the contrary, they would be as averse of it, as (other) animals are in principle. .
Here as well goes, that if there are more scientific sources known, this item might be added to the article. James Blond 14:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause(s) of incest/inbreed 

message: Checked all the references. Removed three: one dead link, one link to an essay without author/source information, one link to an unpublished and very short essay on a therapist's website. Reformatted the remaining references, including four published articles and a statistical study. ZeroZ 07:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: I don't see the relevance of listing the infamous German siblings in this part.  It is repetitive because it also appears in the adult section.  If I understand correctly they did not even meet until they were adults and genetic sexual attraction is the likely cause for their relationship.
:You're right, they don't need to be in that section. The way, the truth, and the light 01:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sibling incest between children 

message: There's nothing about the incident with Lot and his daughters that suggests that God "condoned," what happened except for his inaction. I don't think that "silence gives consent" is an argument style fitting for an encyclopedia and would strongly reccomend removing the statement from the article. Abyssal leviathin 05:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Condoned Bible Incest 

message: The first two paragraphs as they currently are appear to contradict each other. Are we defining incest as a general concept (as in the first) or as purely a cultural one (as in the second)? The way, the truth, and the light 23:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: "When Julius Caesar invaded Britain for the second time in 54 BC, he noted the customs of the Britons, remarking, 'Wives are shared between groups of ten or twelve men, especially between brothers and between fathers and sons; but the offspring of these unions are counted as the children of the man with whom a particular woman cohabited first."
As far as I'm aware when Caesar made this assertion he was speaking specifically of the men of Kent, not all of Briton. 70.187.156.140 09:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the same thing as incest, anyway. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 11:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Of Briton 

message: shouldn't something be mentioned about how royal families used to have to marry within their family they still kinda do but it's not considered family anymore but i mean back when they would marry their cousins i have no idea where to put it though  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlieh7337 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal/noble incest 

message: I have removed the following paragraph from said subsection:
"Contemporary newspapers (March of 2008) report that in the downwash of the Constitutional Court decision lawyers claim penalization a reminder to antiquated eugenics tradition of past centuries. With the bad experience of dispute on eugenics by lawyers in legislation during the Nazi regime just lawyers should keep their minds out of revision of such traditions. Noteworthy, a ratio of 2:2 of severe genetic deficiencies with offsprings in the reported case of 2007/2008 does not advocate for neglecting the eugenics aspect. Which society shall take the burden from such misleading legal evolution."
This is blatant POV and in no way encyclopedic, not mentioning the fact that no sources whatsoever were provided. In case this paragraph was a direct quotation of a notable personality (either the judges of the BVG or a spokesperson for a lawyers organisation, or a politician or religious leader etc.), please provide references and rephrase it accordingly. For now, it will stay out. Vargher (talk) 16:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal situation of incest in Germany 

message: There are several problems with the following statement that had been removed and was then restored with
this diff:
::Sigmund Freud believed that incestuous desires were an innate part of the human psychological makeup, and that the social taboo was based in a desire to conceal subconscious desires. He stated that
::Groups only prohibit what individuals really desire. Behind the laws that structure human society is the horror of incest, and behind that horror are the desire for incest and the murderous capacity to act on that desire.
* The text presented as a quote from Freud is not a direct quotation.  It is a paraphrased interpretation from someone at the Library of Congress who wrote the description for their web page.  The LOC in general is a reliable source, but to use the interpretation, the text would need to be rewritten to show it's not a quote from Freud, rather the interpretation of an unindentified Museum curator.
* A Google search on the phrases of the quote brings up only one other web page besides the LOC page: THROUGH SILENCE WE SPEAK: APPROAHCES TO COUNSELLING AND PSYCHOTHERAPY WITH CANADIAN FIRST NATION CLIENTS.  That page has a copyright notice and named authors, Arthur W. Blue,  Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Brandon University, et al - showing what appears to be the source of the text that was used on the LOC page, as follows: 
::In Totem and Taboo, Freud (1912) set out to give an account of taboos and of prohibitions in general. He was guided by the idea that groups only prohibit what individuals really desire. Behind the laws that structure human society, he said, is the horror, and behind the horror is desire and the murderous capacity to act on desire.
However, the word incest does not appear on this page by Dr. Arthur Blue, therefore the connection of the idea of incest to Dr. Blue's intepretation of Freud's comments was added by the unnamed author of the other web page.
* Dr. Blue also gives us the original reference to Freud that generated the paraphrase in question: Totem and Taboo, Freud (1912) The link here is to Google Books, that has the full text of Freud's book.
The focus of the book is not incest, but rather "taboo".  That's what Dr. Blue's paraphrase is addressing, such as for example, the text  on pages 53-55, where Freud discusses the desire to transgress taboos - but in general - not specifically about incest.  Incest taboo  is discussed in the book in depth, but not the action of "incest" itself, but rather the taboo and its effects specifically in what Freud calls "savage" societies.  
It's possible that there might be some information about incest in Fred's 1912 book that could be useful in this article, but to find it would require further study of the book. The paraphrase listed above is an inaccurate interpretation by an unknown author, of the work of a second author who did not mention incest in his paraphrase of the Freud material, so it does not provide reliable information about Freud's comments on incest.
And, aside from all that, the topic of Freud's book is not incest, it's about the phenomenon of "taboo" and generally off-topic for this article. It may be of use in the incest taboo article. If a specific quote is found in the book that clearly applies to actual incest, the topic of this article, then that quote could be used here; but so far, we don't have that.
Based on the above, I've removed the statement misattributed to Freud. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 05:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freud reference 

message: This article is probably going to get pretty long. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to create a separate article for the Incest laws section and provide a paragraph with a "see main article" here? The Quiet Man (talk) 21:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say go for it, there certainly is enough meat there to fill an entire article. Just be sure to leave a short (referenced) summary of the laws before removing the entire section to another article. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 18:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay will do eventually. For now I think I'll leave it here so we can work on improving all of it, then as the article becomes huge I'll move it. The Quiet Man (talk) 17:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incest laws 

message: This text moved here from the article for discussion:
*"Incestuous desire is a very old phenomenon, as is the societal taboo that surrounds it."
*- based on this reference:   
I question the use of this text for the following reasons:
*The source is unreliable and imprecise for scientific use.  It's a newspaper article about a legal controversy.  The author states:  "The phenomenon of incestuous desire is ages old, as is the taboo surrounding it." - however: we do not know the qualifications of the author and the author supports his statement with no footnotes or references, so it appears to be simply his opinion or his understanding, but he's not a recognized authority so the source is not reliable for this use.  It would be reliable to use for reporting about the legal debate in Germany, in that section of the topic page.
*Lack of clarity - there is no context for what is meant by "very old".  It's a vague unscientific statement that's not of much value to the article, and not supported by scientific references.
*relation to consensual/non-consensual incest: though the article is worded imprecisely, it can be seen that the sentence quoted is referring to consensual incest because the author stated that point following a section in his article with the heading "consensual Incest", he wrapped up his paragraph with this sentence: "It's impossible, or at least very hard to prove that consensual incest does such damage."; and, the entire article is about legal issues regarding consensual incest, not about child abuse or forced incest.  The only mention in the reference of non-consensual incest is to state that such incest is treated legally under sexual abuse laws, not under incest laws, thereby emphasizing that the reference is specifically exploring only consensual incest.
Since the source is unreliable for scientific use, it should be used only for reporting on the news issue, the German laws. If it's used at all, it should only be used with regard to consensual incest, since that is what the news article is about.  --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 00:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly disagree with this analysis. The statement is not vague: it is what it is and I've applied it accurately as it appeared in the periodical. We don't require hard numbers in each and every case and in this particular case, nobody can possibly know how long incestuous desire and the related societal taboo have been around, so the sentence is truthful. Der Spiegel clearly fulfills the requirements of WP:RS. It's one of the most widely distributed and well-known periodicals in all of Europe. Reliable Sources don't have to be from scholarly sources. The introduction is currently heavily POV in favor of the non-consensual variation of the topic and it must be balanced to provide a correct overview of the article, which covers two very distinct forms of incest. This sentence is a small step towards that NPOV goal. The Quiet Man (talk) 01:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the periodical it was used regarding consensual incest only.  That much is clear, so even if the reference is used, that needs to be reflected in the text. The rest is vague though - what does "old" mean?  Does it mean a couple hundred years, or does it mean thousands of years?  The periodical is reliable, as regards reporting events.  But as an interpreter of science, would need references to support.  Since your concern is that the intro is not balanced, that it is tilted towards non-consensual incest, why insist on using a passing statement by a newspaper reporter?  Surely there must be many scientific sources you can bring.  --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 04:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (Note: when I moved the reference here for discussion, I didn't see that it was also used in other sections of the article.  I've restored the reference for those other statements, regarding laws and the court cases, for which the reference is reliable as noted above). --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 05:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Jack, reliable sources don't require additional verification... good journalists do their homework and if something is considered a reliable source it just is. As stated, old means old. Nobody knows how long it has been around so that's the hardest figure anyone can come up with. For now, I'm going to bed though. The Quiet Man (talk) 08:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  reference moved from article for discussion 

message: I have moved the rape statistics back to the introduction.  If anyone removes it, I will move it back.  If anybody doesn't like it, tough.
SeattleJoe (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with ErgoSum88. As stated about a billion times now, WP articles must follow the guidelines. It's not a billboard for advocacy groups or a public service announcement and nobody anywhere with any decency thinks that this article is advocating sex with children. The Quiet Man (talk) 15:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rape statistics returned to introduction 

message: I have changed "Consensual Incest" to "Incest between consenting adults" throughout.  If anyone changes this, I will change it back.  If anyone doesn't like it, tough.
SeattleJoe (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Joe, as stated above you are violating WP:OWN and you are probably also violating WP:SOAP. There is no consensus for that change and it's going back. Nobody here is advocating for sex with minors and your insistence that we are is absurd. The Quiet Man (talk) 15:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: While the original at the time before SeattleJoe's edit (if I recall correctly) felt a bit misleading, I think the current revision, namely "Consensual incest is sexual behavior between adult blood relatives" is acceptable. Legitimus (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, I do too, children cannot consent, obviously, so incest between an adult and a child is per se child sexual abuse. Thanks, SqueakBox 15:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

text: The more precise statement is "Incest between consenting adults" and I see no reason not to use that.  "Consensual" or "consenting" is of no matter, either is OK with me.  But it is necessary to include "between adults" in the phrase to be clear that no child is involved.  The reason this is important is that most people, and in fact, most professionals working in the field, when the word "incest" is used assume that it describes abusive incest between an adult and a child or  young adolescent.  That's the crux of the problem we've been discussing about the article; there is no match in prevalence between abusive incest and non-abusive adult consensual incest.  One is prevalent and the other is rare, so the terminology needs to be very precise to avoid confusing the two. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As I posted on Jack's talk page, I'm completely fine with that heading change and it can stay. The entire section is meant to made a clear distinction between child abuse and behavior between consenting adults, as anyone reading the section should be able to determine. What I wasn't fine with were the other section moves and assorted sneaks that Joe had stuck in there that kept getting put back wholesale and made the article look terrible. The Quiet Man (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your agreement on this.  I haven't review those other changes yet so don't have comments on those at this time. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 16:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As usual, usage should follow sources.  While I personally agree that children in my own country are not capable of consent, this is not a universally held view.  Also, people in different societies disagree as to when childhood ends and when adulthood begins.  Also, people in different societies (just to finish out the point) disagree as to the boundaries that define appropriate sexual behavior, and "sex" period.  In each of these areas there are likely to be more than one view.  As always we need to distinguish between mainstream, majority, minority, and fringe views, and attribute the view to the person or group of people holding the view. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 18:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That might be getting beyond the point of that section.  We say "between adults" and leave it at that, so that the reader can formulate in their own mind what an adult is, based on their background.  We also don't bother defining "sexual behavior" for this purpose, as a definition outright would be difficult to agree on. Legitimus (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally don't have a problem with going into greater detail about individual societies laws (if we can find references), but I actually think it's better in this case to have a more general lead. We may have to change the wording somehow, but it's best to let individuals determine what constitutes a legal adult in their jurisdiction (seriously, we could write an entire article on individual jurisdictional legal consent/adulthood that would be many times the size of this article). The Quiet Man (talk) 22:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Consensual incest' changed to "Incest between consenting adults" 

message: I've seen some harsh words start to appear on this talk page today by several people.  This is a general comment, not to any one person.
Please keep the discussion calm and collaborative.  
This appears to be a difficult and charged topic. We all need to be extra careful to work with mutual respect so this page does not become a battleground like some of the other pages related to child sexual abuse have become. 
If you disagree with someone, certainly, express your arguments and your debate points.  But please re-read posts before hitting the save button and choose to omit any comments that could be seen as antagonistic.
Thanks.  --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 16:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please stay calm in collaboration 

message: I heard a suggestion that there be a separate article specifically for the legal aspect of incest.  It seems like an OK idea, and I'm willing to do the job of getting it started.  Is this appropriate based on other articles on wikipedia?  Is there a precedent?  Legitimus (talk) 17:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure this is done all the time. Look at some of the articles about major countries, like the UK, USA, etc. and you'll have all kinds of subarticles about law, culture, etc. I was going to do it myself eventually, but as most can see, I'm not here especially often lately (busy at work). So go for it. Maybe keep a small section here with a summary and then a "main article" interlink. The Quiet Man (talk) 18:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal fork 

message: There were a lot of changes to the lead at once today.  It's hard to tell how much of the changes were appropriate, but there was at least one that mischaracterized a reference and needed to be reverted: .  The edit stated this:  "The majority of non-consensual incest cases reported in the mainstream media are between adults and prepubescent or adolescent children, and particularly between fathers or other male relatives, and girls. " - however, the reference is about scientific reports, not media reports, so the text needs to follow the content of the reference.  
There has been much study of incestual child abuse; it is a prevalent and significant problem.  There has been very little study of incest between consenting adults, because, it hardly ever happens.   As others have stated here on the talk page, in some societies, perhaps mothers rub their infant child's genitals as part of child rearing; whether or not that would be considered incest is unknown at this time and needs to be sourced to solid references.  By the definition of incest that includes " that it is either illegal or socially taboo." - it would not be incest if it's not taboo and is part of child rearing, so it would not apply in this article; maybe that definition needs further adjustment.
Since there appears to be differences among editors on this page about how to present the information, we're going to need to carefully follow WP:V and WP:NPOV - including WP:UNDUE - and in particular that means that controversial statements will need to have reliable sources to remain in the article.
In developed nations sexual use of children by adults is defined legally-medically-socially as child abuse.  This is easily sourced.  Countless scientific references show that the most common forms of incest are  child sexual abuse, and that most child sexual abuse occurs within the family, making it incest.  The two topics overlap.  
While we will - of course - follow NPOV and include information in this article about forms of incest that are not child abuse, and incest in non-developed nations or tribal areas, the article must not give a false impression of balance between different forms of incest that is not supported by references. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 18:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  lots of lead changes at once 

message: Can anyone corroborate the edit added about Muslim countries and incest not being taboo if they are married?  I know Pakistan has something like that, where some marry their first cousins by tradition (hence that area holds the world record for microcephaly) but I have no idea if this has anything to do with being Muslim.Legitimus (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muslim values 

message: I have the news that a father imprisoned his daughter in a cellar for 24 years and had 7 children through her.  This is a repeat of Oedipus Rex and it's considered incest.  And it happened in Austria.  You should add that to the article, because here's the story: Man imprisoned daughter, fathered her 7 kids --Angeldeb82 (talk) 18:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's incest, yes. It's also kidnapping, false imprisonment, rape, child abuse, neglect, and unfathomable mental illness.  I don't think it is of much use here.  This almost belongs under serial killers and related, or even it's own article.Legitimus (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incest in Austria 

message: Most of the recent changes were good. I reverted two short parts for accuracy.ResearchEditor (talk) 14:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  minor accuracy revert 

message: I've removed the claim that abusive incest is the most common kind reported in scientific studies. A quote from p. 9 of "Effects of Child Sexual Abuse," a 2007 master's thesis by: "The most discussed type of incest is between father and daughter (Herman & Hirschman, 1981). In actuality, the most frequently occuring type of incest is between brother and sister." --AnotherSolipsist (talk) 17:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced claim removed 

message: I have deleted a phase from the intro that was recently added that is unnecessary and OR, as it duplicates info in the next line. ResearchEditor (talk) 03:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  delete OR 

message: I have changed the section on cousin "incest" as it was misleading and US-centric, equating practice in the US with "Western culture" in general. As far as I am aware,  marriage between cousins is legal and not considered incest in most Western countries other than the United States. I am not sure my rewrite is ideal but it's at least a start.Clerval (talk) 13:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cousins 

message: What if one man marries a women and has a child with her and then later on divorce then maybe two years
later this same man gets married to another woman and has a child with his 2nd wife but the thing is 
that his 2nd wife turns out to be the sister of his ex-wife now how are this two children related to each other because of this????  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 22:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on the society.  In the US they would be half-sisters as well as cousins. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 23:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  One Man marries two sisters 

message: What if two 2nd cousins one male 2nd cousin and one female 2nd cousin the male 2nd cousin marries a women and has a child with her and then the womens brother later on gets married and has three children
with his own wife and it turns out that the brothers wife is the 2nd cousin of his sisters husband now
how are the children of these two couples related to each other because of this????
:In which country did this happen? Slrubenstein   |  Talk 22:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In what country?  Different societies have different kinship terminologies, there is no one correct answer.  Also, if it didn't happen, what is its relevance to this article?  Talk pages are for improving articles.  Do you see a way to improve this article?  Slrubenstein   |  Talk 14:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two second cousins marry two siblings and the children of these two cpouples 

message: What if One Person has a step-father meaning a man who married the persons mother which also means the mothers second marriage and this step-father has a second cousin and it turns out that this second cousin of the persons step-father marries a half-first cousin of the persons mother because they would share the same grandmother but two different grandfathers and the second cousin of the step-father and the half-first cousin of the mother both have children of there own what would the relation be between 
this person and the children????  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 23:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation on both sides 

message: Should it be mentioned that the Bible implies that the first relationships on Earth happened between faily members? Adam and Eve, then Cain and Abel. Cain had to have relations with some of his kin, and the children of Adam and Eve had to engage in incest. Sephiroth storm (talk) 19:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds like original research.  Who makes this claim?  If this is a notable POV from a reliable source maybe it belongs in some article, I would suggest maybe the article on Genesis if you can find a notable source (I know Speiser is famous for an essay on the sister-wife complex in Mesopotamia) ... but I do not see how it fits in here, I know of no notable researcher on incest who has drawn on or addressed the Bible. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 20:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Meh.  It gives a lot of weight to the Bible, which is the holy text of only a portion of the world and therefore gives bias towards Christianity.  It would be original research without a source.  It's an essentially fictional book about a myth.  It sounds kinda listy.  It'll probably piss off a fair number of readers and editors.  It's only an implication, they can always pull out the God/miracle card.  But mostly it'd be unsourced.  Without a pressing reason from a reliable source, there's not a whole lot of merit to it that I can see, but a lot of reasons why it's not necessarily a good idea.  WLU (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

text: No, it doesn't make any sense to me.  And I do not think it gives any weight to the Bible - in fact, it seems to give no weight to the Bible says nothing about incest in the first generations of humankind (and the Bible is not shy about depicting incest on other occasions) Slrubenstein   |  Talk 15:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Yup, thanks for clarifying it, it is clear cut violation of NOR.  This is your interpretation.  The narrator of Genesis does not make the claim, you are insertain several of your own assumptions into the text. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 15:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christians? 

message: Why is this article under the jurisdiction of this WikiProject? This article has little to do with pedophilia, or child sexuality. Sephiroth storm 23:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The tag was here before I ever saw this article, but I believe it falls under this jurisdiction due to the majority of modern day incest being child sexual abuse.  A child, after all, has not matured sufficiently to understand social taboos or laws, and make easy targets.Legitimus (talk) 18:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:PAW]]? 

message: I removed a short section for two reasons: first, it provided one hypothesis out of context for a complex set of issues already covered in the article on the incest taboo.  Second, it relies on a paper publicized by a university, not a peer-reviewed journal i.e. it just wasn't established science. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 16:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incest avoidance 

message: I was reading the article looking for the research into the actual biological effects of incest on humans yet found nothing here! I know that there are articles all over Wikipedia that discuss this in bits and pieces (like the pedigree collapse article and the inbreeding and inbreeding depression and its related articles on the Vadoma and Ulas family) yet it appears that a comprehensive (for Wikipedia at least) review of the biological consequences of inbreeding is absent from this article. I know that the topic of biological consequences is large enough to break off into its own article to match the size of this one, and the fact we can make a small stub of that major article to outline some of the major biological causes. the need for such an article is simple: many of the studies on the ethical, religious and legal views on ethics are based on an understanding of the consequences of incest. now, i also know that some folks may object on the grounds that this would better fit under inbreeding rather than incest because incest is usually a culturally defined activity as opposed to inbreeding which is its biological similar... ok, i still believe some biological background on this article in the way of a section would be useful, and a similar background in the inbreeding article (both articles could then point to a main article on the biology of it) would help provide valuable information in this topic
I would gladly start the article myself, but am in the middle of my midterm reviews and don't expect to contribute in a meaningful way until late December, but in case anyone else has something they can throw in regarding this, i think it would make a fantastic contribution to the article. Of course, failing that, i shall strive to contribute around the stated time...
some notable studies on it may include: Cavalli-Sforza and Walter Bodmer (1971) "The Genetics of Human Populations" where he discusses the incidence of lethal gene equivalents in human populations. W.H. Durham elaborated on Cavalli-Sforza's data by showing rates of lethal genes anywhere from 20% to 45%. 
another is Lander and Botstein's 1987 Science article titled "Homozygosity mapping: a way to map human recessive traits with the DNA of inbred children" not so much for its procedure but for the background it provides (it has some good articles i haven't yet finished reading, but hope to). 
there are more articles which can help outline the biological consequences of incest and as i said, if someone has the time, it would definitely help.
--Skaaii (talk) 08:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I put in something basic. It would be good to add more but we need to be careful about NOR - we need to add material related to incest and explain the relationship.  This is important because there are many societies in which what people consider incest is not really inbreeding, and in which what we would consider inbreding occurs and it is not considered incest.  My guess is most research abount inbreeding that is directly concerned with incest is linked to Western definitions of incest.  Nothing wrong with this, but we shouldn't write from a Eurocentric perspective that assumes that research in the US or Germany is directly applicable or relavant to all other societies. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 00:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biological Consequences of Incest? 

message: ".but some of Islam sheikh argued that a man is allowed to Marry if the woman in question was for example his illegitimate child Quoting the opinion expressed by Dr. Mohamed Almaser, a seniorat Al-Azhar and Professor at the Faculty of Theology and advocacy: its legal for a man to marry his illegitimate daughter's, and for the illegitimate son to marry his illegitimate sister"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.177.173 (talk) 14:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islam section: Editing & cleanup needed 

message: I think that there should be some frank discussion on the relationship between Incest and Abortion. Many bishops in the Catholic Church, not all but many, consider Incest to be not as bas as Abortion. In recent times, this has raised controversy, see for example José Cardoso Sobrinho. ADM (talk) 17:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose brief mention is alright for Christianity, in that "incest" is sociopolitical and cultural in nature, rather than scientific (such as consanguinity and inbreeding).  But any more than that is straying off-topic.Legitimus (talk) 19:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incest and Abortion 

message: There is a popular belief that Gay adoption will increase the chances of incest, but this has been dismissed by many people who are in charge of this right now. Anyways, it would be a good idea if we could find solid evidence and statistics on this. ADM (talk) 17:47, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of those concerns were based on misinterpretation of both popular cases and the nature of child sexual abuse offenders.  Groth and Birnbaum (1978) and numerous subsequent studies discredited the idea that homosexuals are more prone to be offenders in that they found that nearly all child sex offenders with same-sex victims were heterosexual in their adult relationships and self-identification (many were married to adult women).  Regarding popular opinion, the US is still rather homophobic, and so news media tends to strongly fixate on same-sex offenders despite them being such a small population.  The vast majority of offenders are adult men with young girls.Legitimus (talk) 19:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay adoption and Incest/Pedophilia 

message: Both soulwork.net and ethicaltreatment.org, I think, fall short of RS. The Squicks (talk) 17:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: I added some more info about the German siblings. They are from Sachsen, a federal state of Germany, not from Austria as mentioned before - probably a mix-up with the (in)famous Fritzl case in Austria that emerged in the same time frame.85.177.108.176 (talk) 14:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch with that.  I'd not noticed it.  I looked into that case further and added more details, including that the man was technically separated from his family for 20 years since age 3.  The sister wasn't even born, and they'd never met their whole lives nor formed any familial identification.  This is the case the vast majority of the time with adult sibling relations.  I noted in the article that the sister is also somewhat mentally handicapped, not sure if it should be mentioned.Legitimus (talk) 15:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  German Siblings 

message: What about half sibling incest which can also link to child abuse? Why is there no mention of this? Is it cause it is "rare"?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marylandcookie133 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would thing it was largely implied by the wording in this article.Legitimus (talk) 13:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Half sibling incest?