Split from the Election Thread - Body Ethics

[Dominick Destruction]

We're all related if you trace it far enough. Complete non-story.

& some of us you don't have to trace it back that far at all haha... (I am from Norfolk)

I am technically inbred anyway so should prob shut up

[PaulX]

We're all related if you trace it far enough. Complete non-story.

& some of us you don't have to trace it back that far at all haha... (I am from Norfolk)

I am technically inbred anyway so should prob shut up

You're pretty and you don't have three heads or one eye in the middle of your forehead, so I find that hard to believe. Unless you have extra bits that you're keeping very quiet about.

[Dominick Destruction]

I think my inbred deformity consists of out of proportion large ass & 0 tits So think I got off lightly with that... On my mothers side of the family every 3rd female has toes instead of thumbs (I'm not joking)

Also I'm being serrious! My mother's maiden name is the same as it is now she's married
There's 3 (4?) lots of families in the area I live with that same sirname & if you follow them all back they all come from the same on lot from kent back in the day. So as my mother married into one of the other families of the same sirname I am indeed technically inbred.

I hate callign banks & such & answering the 'what is your mothers maiden name?' question... Everytime I answer they say 'No, Her miaden name' & I have to confirm that I gace the correct answer first time around...& then as they can see where I'm from & it's not a common sirname you know full well they are trying notto snicker at me down the line

[PaulX]

On my mothers side of the family every 3rd female has toes instead of thumbs (I'm not joking

So if you have a daughter, she'll have toes instead of thumbs? Or was that your mum?

[Dominick Destruction]

It's funny becuase you don't notice it at first but if it's pointed out you're all
It's like instead of a thumb it's all shorter & more chunky/square at top with a rectangle shape nail (like a toe)
My cousin has it & managed to hide the fact from her partner for months until one of us pointed it out when taking the piss haha... She wasn't pleased at all.

[laurennoodles]

as much as i love you dom, that is fucked upppppp! ahahaha

[Dominick Destruction]

as much as i love you dom, that is fucked upppppp! ahahaha

you're just jealous

anyway... I never claimed to not be fucked up, I think it's pretty apparent that I am

[baldmosher]

I am technically inbred anyway so should prob shut up

You're pretty and you don't have three heads or one eye in the middle of your forehead, so I find that hard to believe. Unless you have extra bits that you're keeping very quiet about.

Inbred genetics are equally likely to produce super-human as sub-human. (Neither, in fact, is likely anyway, without close and persistent interbreeding.)

You don't need a big gene pool to further a species, but you do need to breed some variety to prevent a gene line becoming poisoned by itself. The Windsors have hereditary haemophilia. Many deaf families pass on their genes. I'm sure Peaches Geldof will be a strong individual but with a tendency to self-destruction (she'll have to watch out for that).

I've got a fair chance of genetic baldness owing to skipping a generation, but my mum's dad and my dad both have a full head of hair.

Some 3rd and 4th generation Pakistani families in traditional "white towns" such as Stoke-on-Trent are producing seriously fucked up deformed kids now, because they have married their cousins for so long that the kids are often born with genetic deformities (poor jawlines, oversided foreheads, etc.) and hereditary illnesses. The fact that so many young Pakistanis see marrying your cousins as a good thing to do is very worrying; at least in Dominick's case the inbreeding is accidental. (Not that a Norfolk Destruktion marrying a Norfolk Destruktion should necessarily be seen as inbreeding, of course!)

[PaulX]

Dunno about "superhumans" and "subhumans" being "equally likely" from in-breeding. I would have thought the odds were more in favour of the latter, to be honest, but this isn't a subject I know much about admittedly (I didn't even do O-level biology).

Selective breeding probably works as well with humans as it does with animals and this is something the eugenicists attempted to put into practice in Nazi Germany. The town of Bremen had one of those 'Aryan' breeding camps nearby and is still populated by many of the descendants of that programme, which the locals understandably don't like to talk about. It's said to have a disproportionately high number of blonde, intelligent, athletic types for the size of town - but this could all be urban legend of course.

But plain in-breeding is more likely to bring out genetic defects, surely? There's the problems you mention among Pakistanis marrying cousins too often. It's even more of a problem among Hasidic Jews, who have a really tiny gene pool. I mean, I know what you're saying in that a mutation could lead to something that is benign rather than a defect - but nearly all the cases I've ever heard of have been negative in effect rather than positive.

It's pretty fucked-up that we've gone back to in-breeding in this thread anyway. For the benefit of anyone who's joined this late, it started with a post about a claim that Bush, Cheney and Obama are related.

[baldmosher]

It's pretty fucked-up

Ithankyou.

Dunno about "superhumans" and "subhumans" being "equally likely" from in-breeding.

Depends on your definition of "super" and "sub" really. It's not always physical either.

Non-fatal defects naturally tend to become more prevalent. Crooked (and missing) teeth and misshapen heads are common, obvious results of inbreeding. Seems that those traits aren't enough of a warning sign because inbred adults are still marrying other inbred adults and making doubly-inbred kids. Chances are that those kids will have other less-obvious genetic traits that are positive.