Woops wrong greentext
Ah, greentext screen grabs, you are an endless supply of disconcerting Internet entertainment.
I like the implication that this nerd immediately whipped out his phone to post to 4chan when she said this.
I like the implication that it actually happened.
I like the implication that it’s straight
sus implications of curved banana
Anon’s sister sounds hilarious.
Depending on their relationship that’s either super uncomfortable or funny af. And to Anon’s question on what to respond “ok daddy” is a pretty good candidate imo.
“Ewww” is a much better response.
Pornhub statistics show that was a lie.
How did you get access to my pornhub viewing stats?
The same way everyone else does, I purchased all your private information from a data broker. Your mother is ashamed, but your sister says “how YOU doin’?”
So only she can have the funny ideas?
“Too late” And then play it off as a joke but not really.
Poor poor baby anon gonna have Hapsburger looks
It’s biologically ingrained into us to avoid incest. Revulsion for the act is built directly into our brains due to the severity of the act. I can’t even joke about incest without a pit forming in my belly and my shoulders slumping. Anon was the more neurotypical of the two.
It’s ingrained to avoid attraction to siblings we grow up alongside, though anecdotally there have been many cases of siblings who grew up apart discovering they were siblings after meeting as strangers and feeling mutual attraction, so the biological instinct may just have evolved around the most common case.
Oh, like that one Weird Al song!
Not even a little bit. That is only present cultural norms and is entirely arbitrary. Incest is historically common and even considered preferential and a right in the past.
Take it up with three separate professors at my uni and several scholarly sources. Though I warn you, they are either dead or capable of screaming far louder and more eloquently than you. Here’s a Wikipedia article
That article doesn’t support your argument. The effect isn’t based on relation but on being raised together before the age of 6.
Well yeah, but that is still “biologically ingrained to avoid incest”, since being raised separately and then reintroduced as adults is an edge case. The effect is biological even if what it’s directly testing for isn’t genetics.
No, your arguments about cultural and learned behavior not biologically ingrained Behavior.
From the above linked article:
In the case of the Israeli kibbutzim (collective farms), children were reared somewhat communally in peer groups, based on age, not biological relations. A study of the marriage patterns of these children later in life revealed that out of the nearly 3,000 marriages that occurred across the kibbutz system, only 14 were between children from the same peer group. Of those 14, none had been reared together during the first six years of life.
And lots of other examples across different cultures that would be consistent with this being an instinctual reaction of humans, rather than a cultural thing that is taught.
That quoted paragraph is a pretty clear indication that the “instinctual reaction” only happens with people you’ve lived with up to the age 6, which isn’t exclusive to people you’re related by blood. Hell, the following wiki paragraph makes that clear:
In Shim-pua marriages, a girl would be adopted into a family as the future wife of a son, often an infant at that time. These marriages often failed, as would be expected according to the Westermarck hypothesis.
So, if you don’t grow up with your siblings during those formative years, or see them only on occasion, it is expected to be attracted to them, as per that hypothesis. It’s also important to note that marriages aren’t a simple matter of choosing whoever you like most, there are social and economic considerations to be accounted for.
How on Earth do you think that reflects a biological imperative? If anything doesn’t it suggest the opposite? A biological connection resulting in an aversion to coupling would mean the absence of a biological connection should not result in aversion. Yet your example showed that the biological connection was not a factor at all.
The aversion often didn’t work for royalty, since they weren’t raised with their siblings.
/>hypothesis
/>Therefore not proven
It’s biologically ingrained into us to avoid incest.
Tell me you’ve never been on PornHub without telling me you’ve never been on PornHub.
No, that’s step-siblings. Doesn’t count.
Lol. Trap sprung, etc.
that business with the step siblings doesn’t, doesn’t count
You even had the extra doesn’t in there. Perfection.
That’s the closest I’ve gotten to a compliment all week
I believe you.
We get it, your relatives are all uggos.
