Forum - View topicAttraction between cousins in anime
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
abunai
Old Regular
 Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||
Okaaayy.... you're a bit vague on the meaning of the word "taboo", I can tell. It's not the first time I've said this in recent memory -- but that word doesn't mean what you think it means. To be "taboo" means to be "forbidden by custom/religion/public morals", but not necessarily by law. An example of a taboo that does not have the force of law is the vow of celibacy imposed on Catholic priests. Mind you, this is a pretty weak taboo, these days, but there you go. In fact, the story you relate demonstrates the split between "forbidden-by-law" and "taboo". The relationship you describe was (so far as I understand it) not illegal, yet you remark that it "creeped you out", and imply that it would "creep out" most other people, as well. Well, retty, that's what a taboo is, don't you see? That's how it works. As for the back-and-forth between Moomintroll and dormcat, let me just head off an incipient flamewar and get a few facts straight: 1. Moomintroll, you need to understand that dormcat does know what he is talking about, as regards heredity. That's his professional business, and unless you are a geneticist yourself, he is probably very far ahead of you in terms of knowledge on this topic. I know his knowledge in this matter far outstrips my own, and that is not something I say lightly. 2. There appears to be a small misunderstanding being bandied about in the discussion of cousin-marriage, as it is handled in these threads, and in the links provided by Moomintroll. Two separate concepts of cousin-marriage are being conflated. To clarify, there is a massive difference in terms of statistical probability of negative reinforcement of recessive genes between a single case of cousin-marriage (where the probability is only marginally higher than in a "random" general-population marriage); and a case of traditional multi-generation reinforced culturally based cousin-marriage. The examples given in your links, Moomintroll, referred in many cases to cultural groups where repeated multi-generational inbreeding had produced a limited genetic spectrum with a resulting high probability of negative recessive gene reinforcement. This is almost painfully obvious, but the two concepts are not the same. Finally, a lot of the points being raised here have already been discussed in those threads that dormcat linked to. I don't wish to be an ogre, but I despise intellectual laziness, and I will come down like a ton of bricks on posters who start rehashing that discussion, showing that they haven't bothered to read the references before posting. We have a strong policy on orienting oneself in the relevant thread(s) before posting, to avoid posters saying the same things over and over, and I aim to enforce that policy. - abunai |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Brendan Behan
Posts: 19 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Are you kidding me? Two topics in 2005 that touched on this issue, and you act like this is some serious affront to your intellect because this topic was brought up years later? Give me a break guy... (and your irritating pompous tone too).
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||||||||
Can I just weigh in and say something? Well, I'm going to anyway. Please please PLEASE edit your post before abunai comes back. I am not telling you, I am not even asking you (despite my earlier "pleas"). I am informing you as to your options. It is in your best interest to just swallow your pride (and your arrogance) and edit it out. I know I must not backseat moderate (this has been made quite clear to me several times). So, I am just saying......as a concerned citizen......that though you do not have to clean up your post, it might be advisable. To preserve the peace of the forum at the moment. That's all I can (and therefore will) say. On a more agreeable note, I have remembered the news story of a town in Italy (or nearby) where 95% of the inhabitants have the same surname (therefore being inbred, so the logic correctly goes). The report focused on the beneficial aspects of generations of inbreeding, namely the marked absence of several modern diseases and affictions (moreso than the normal Italian town). I'll try and hunt down a link. Edit: Found it. Here is the Wikipedia article. Now, inbreeding does not exactly imply cousin-marriage (the focus of this thread). In fact, it clearly states that more distant cousin marriages are preferred. But still, I thought it would be an interesting read nonetheless. Last edited by dtm42 on Wed May 21, 2008 8:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Brendan Behan
Posts: 19 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Thanks for the concern brother but it'll stay the way it is. There is a whole lot of pride here but no arrogance. If someone wants to share knowledge then cool, I'm all for it. I don't know everything or really even much, but I'm not about to let a man I neither know nor respect lecture me like a child. Just because he has a large number of posts and is a moderator doesn't change that.
I'm also not about to get into some silly flame war with him either, and if the tone of this forum was different I would've been even more blunt with how I feel and then be done with it. If he wants to dish it out but not take it and decides to ban me, then oh well, life goes on. I don't know (or care) if he has a lot of friends here, but the 'peace of this forum' is not at stake. If he wants to respond he can say his bit or take action, otherwise we can just continue to talk about anime. Last edited by Brendan Behan on Wed May 21, 2008 6:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Moomintroll
 Posts: 1600 Location: Nottingham (UK) |
|
|||||||||||
Tsk. Anybody would think Dormcat and I shared a propensity for irritability... 
Given what you've said, I'm quite sure his knowledge of genetics does, indeed, vastly outstrip my own. I hereby promise to refrain from teaching grandmothers to suck eggs.
I only posted one (fairly non-controversial) link to the BBC Newsnight item. And I made the point about the difference in dangers between generational and non-generational incest myself so I'm certainly not disagreeing with you. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
indrik
 Posts: 365 Location: yonder |
|
|||||||||||
|
I was under the impression that part of this was a translation problem, that the word that is translated as "cousin" doesn't necessarily mean "grandchildren with a common grandparent" etc. but implied a broader family relationship, and could include the kid that grew up next door and spent his whole life at your house, but wasn't really related. As a clumsy example. But that while we in the English speaking world tend to think first cousins, it's more likely that a "cousin" in Japan would be a more distant relative.
Is there anything to that, or am I misinformed? Side note: I got in trouble at work for using the word "conflate". Well, it got taken out of a report because my boss didn't know it, and didn't think his boss would know it, and here it is on the internet, and being used by a person who I believe is not a native speaker of English. I am addled by the irony. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Zoe
 Posts: 898 Location: Austin |
|
|||||||||||
Sorry, but cousin = first cousin. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Animastryfe
 Posts: 152 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||||||||
It could sometimes be, but this thread is specifically talking about first cousins.
You're talking to Abunai, correct? He's not annoyed (I think) about the thread being brought up, he's annoyed that many people are talking about things that were already linked to in this thread, without adding anything new. ANN has a rule that says you should read through the thread before replying. That rule is there precisely to avoid people bringing up points that have already been brought up in that particular thread without adding anything new. Dormcat linked Abunai's posts in like the 4th post here, so it's not like Dormcat's links were simply lost in a vast see of posts. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
selenta
 Subscriber Posts: 1774 Location: Seattle, WA |
|
|||||||||||
|
I don't really want to debate the issue, as everything I need to say is already written down; but if anything, for me the issue doesn't lie in the fact that a newcomer hasn't read some threads written like three years ago, but in the very lack of basic biology that allows people to jump to such conclusions with such confidence.
Moderators can't ban people, but even if we could, none of us would ever use our moderating ability over a personal slight. We don't use it when selecting which threads to lock, and we wouldn't do it if we could ban people (ok, so abunai would probably ban GATSU, but aside from that...  ). We don't exactly keep the boards clean because we enjoy making others suffer, it requires effort to come here and do anything we agreed to do as mods.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
suna_suna
 Posts: 550 Location: Ohio |
|
|||||||||||
while it is true that several pair in Fruits Basket are in the same family, it does not hold true that they are all expressed 1st cousins. with such a large family, it would be much easier to say "cousin" than "7th cousing, twice removed on my mother's side". speaking of which, where is the line drawn in the US about legal marriages between family? is it second cousin or further? |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Furudanuki
 Posts: 1874 |
|
|||||||||||
Marriage between second cousins is legal in all 50 states. The laws regarding first cousins vary from state to state. http://marriage.about.com/cs/marriagelicenses/a/cousin.htm Last edited by Furudanuki on Thu May 22, 2008 9:07 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||
It isn't possible for you to offer a serious affront to my intellect. But it is possible to fail to get informed before posting, as several people in this thread did. If you'd bothered to read the thread carefully, you would have seen that the issue wasn't that they hadn't read the previous threads, as such, but rather that they had failed to do so after it had been pointed out that these were threads that had already dealt with significant aspects of the issue at hand, including a number of the questions that were asked again in this thread. In other words, they were violating a cardinal rule of this forum, one that is posted in a sticky thread at the head of the forum -- don't waste people's time by posting in a thread without knowing what has already been said in it. There is a certain degree of reasonable proportion in this. Nobody expects you to read a 200-page thread before posting. But read the first page (which often sets the theme for the thread) and the last 3-4 pages, at least... and if someone points you to a thread with a notice that it is expressly relevant, do the same for that thread. It's the least you can do. Now, I'm not going to respond to your little tirade by going all mediaeval on you -- although I am sure you were halfway hoping for that. As pugnaciously as you might have behaved, you at least expressed yourself steadily and with good English. One would hope that, in the future, you would turn your efforts to actually contributing to the thread, rather than carping about the moderators' efforts to keep the damn thing on an even keel.
I like to keep my reactants in separate containers, if you know what I mean.
There's nothing wrong with a little (politely) oppositional debate, even if one part in the debate is vastly more well-informed on the subject. You never know when you might still have a valid point. But it does require a great deal more dedicated effort, and a fair-minded recognition that, in all probability, the most well-informed party knows what he's talking about.
Actually, I wouldn't automatically ban GATSU, as matters currently stand. He's made some surprising efforts to behave himself, lately, and I generally give people credit for effort. There is one particular user I'd ban in a second, though -- a person whose efforts, when evident, are entirely of a negative nature. - abunai |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
boarishman
Posts: 3 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Ones who reach the taboo have been facing the risk of natural selection , so oppressing them is a little unhuman
I think.... |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Kruszer
 Posts: 7988 Location: Minnesota, USA |
|
|||||||||||
Speaking of, what exactly is all that First Cousin, Second Cousin, X Removed mumbo jumbo anyway? May be stupid questions but that's not something I've ever come accross definitions for. First cousin I'm guessing is fairly obvious, a child of either my father or mother's siblings correct? |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||
From Wikipedia: Family tree with degrees of consanguinity. - abunai |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group