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.
Removed by mod
How did you get access to my pornhub viewing stats?
Removed by mod
So only she can have the funny ideas?
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
“Too late” And then play it off as a joke but not really.
Poor poor baby anon gonna have Hapsburger looks
Ah, greentext screen grabs, you are an endless supply of disconcerting Internet entertainment.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
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.
The aversion often didn’t work for royalty, since they weren’t raised with their siblings.
/>hypothesis
/>Therefore not proven
deleted by creator
No, that’s step-siblings. Doesn’t count.
deleted by creator
that business with the step siblings doesn’t, doesn’t count
You even had the extra doesn’t in there. Perfection.
Removed by mod
I believe you.
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!
We get it, your relatives are all uggos.
Woops wrong greentext
