Have you personally known someone born as a result of r@pe or incest? Did people treat them with compassion or scorn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Literally, who would treat someone born from r/I WITH SCORN?? In the year of our lord 2025, or even 50 years ago?

Uh, the mom who didn't want the kid. The grandparents who didn't want their daughter's life destroyed.

Are you stupid?

My mom didn't have me by rape but literally told me she only wanted a son. She treated me badly my entire life, especially since she had her son 18 months later. I was essentially neglected, and severely emotionally neglected. I can only imagine if I was born to her by a rapist. I spent most of my life wondering why she didn't kill me when my brother was born. I wish she had.

It sounds like you were not treated well as a child. Please don't repeat the cycle by being unnecessarily nasty to others who did no harm to you.

Empathetic much?

You're mean on an anonymous board and expect others to be different?

How was I mean?

PP called another poster "stupid." I just asked pp not to be nasty to someone who did nothing to her.

[Anonymous]

I’ve seen people especially on anonymous boards like this say how these people should not exist. What are you supposed to do about something you had no control over?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

My understanding is that the number of incestuous and closely related cousins on the nearest branches of family tree increases the likelihood of genetic issues. We all have tree collapses in our backgrounds. Marrying cousins isn’t as culturally acceptable as it once was even 100 years ago. I’ve helped people with their genealogical research and it is shocking how many Europeans back then married first and second cousins. It isn’t everybody obviously but it is way more than you’d expect.

Brother/sister is much closer, genetically and emotionally, than 1st or 2nd cousins but I hear what you're saying and have read similar. The pervasiveness of the incest across generations of a family has a much bigger impact than a one off every 100 years, which is why you see those pervasive issues crop up with groups like the FLDS or the Whitakkers of West Virginia where it's basically standard practice and less so when some second cousins who met twice and dont have a cluster pattern of this have kids. Some level of inbreeding was extremely common for centuries amongst many cultures so it seems like there is some kind of threshold before it becomes a real issue. At least genetically.

FWIW my understanding of incestuous means relations between siblings, or parent and child, or grandparent and child. All others like first and second cousins I understand to be close relations but not incestuous though plenty of scrutinize first cousin relationships more presumably with blood tests or some other ways of determining that there are too many close shared ancestors.

So, we agree.

As an aside, it was hard, particularly in remote places, to find people not related to each other. And I don’t mean Alaskan tundra region remote. So many people in rural European villages / parishes are almost all related.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

My understanding is that the number of incestuous and closely related cousins on the nearest branches of family tree increases the likelihood of genetic issues. We all have tree collapses in our backgrounds. Marrying cousins isn’t as culturally acceptable as it once was even 100 years ago. I’ve helped people with their genealogical research and it is shocking how many Europeans back then married first and second cousins. It isn’t everybody obviously but it is way more than you’d expect.

Brother/sister is much closer, genetically and emotionally, than 1st or 2nd cousins but I hear what you're saying and have read similar. The pervasiveness of the incest across generations of a family has a much bigger impact than a one off every 100 years, which is why you see those pervasive issues crop up with groups like the FLDS or the Whitakkers of West Virginia where it's basically standard practice and less so when some second cousins who met twice and dont have a cluster pattern of this have kids. Some level of inbreeding was extremely common for centuries amongst many cultures so it seems like there is some kind of threshold before it becomes a real issue. At least genetically.

OMG no learn genetics before spewing.

Those FLDS and Whitakkers like their children dumb it's called a cult.

The pro life crowd is stupid for a reason. Control of women and children.

There is going to be way more of this moving forward you can thank MAGA for all the privatizing of maternity homes and orphanages that are coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Following the fall of Berlin in 1945, the area was occupied by the Russian army.

Researches estimate the incidence of rape of women in the occupied are was upwards of 75% by Red Army soldiers.

Obviously there were numerous resulting pregnancies, and likely very few terminations in that resource-deprived area in that era immediately following the end of the war.

Well, that certainly answers OP's question.

Lol (not at the topic, obviously)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

My understanding is that the number of incestuous and closely related cousins on the nearest branches of family tree increases the likelihood of genetic issues. We all have tree collapses in our backgrounds. Marrying cousins isn’t as culturally acceptable as it once was even 100 years ago. I’ve helped people with their genealogical research and it is shocking how many Europeans back then married first and second cousins. It isn’t everybody obviously but it is way more than you’d expect.

Brother/sister is much closer, genetically and emotionally, than 1st or 2nd cousins but I hear what you're saying and have read similar. The pervasiveness of the incest across generations of a family has a much bigger impact than a one off every 100 years, which is why you see those pervasive issues crop up with groups like the FLDS or the Whitakkers of West Virginia where it's basically standard practice and less so when some second cousins who met twice and dont have a cluster pattern of this have kids. Some level of inbreeding was extremely common for centuries amongst many cultures so it seems like there is some kind of threshold before it becomes a real issue. At least genetically.

FWIW my understanding of incestuous means relations between siblings, or parent and child, or grandparent and child. All others like first and second cousins I understand to be close relations but not incestuous though plenty of scrutinize first cousin relationships more presumably with blood tests or some other ways of determining that there are too many close shared ancestors.

So, we agree.

As an aside, it was hard, particularly in remote places, to find people not related to each other. And I don’t mean Alaskan tundra region remote. So many people in rural European villages / parishes are almost all related.

Exactly, you can marry your 1st cousin legally in half the states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

My understanding is that the number of incestuous and closely related cousins on the nearest branches of family tree increases the likelihood of genetic issues. We all have tree collapses in our backgrounds. Marrying cousins isn’t as culturally acceptable as it once was even 100 years ago. I’ve helped people with their genealogical research and it is shocking how many Europeans back then married first and second cousins. It isn’t everybody obviously but it is way more than you’d expect.

Brother/sister is much closer, genetically and emotionally, than 1st or 2nd cousins but I hear what you're saying and have read similar. The pervasiveness of the incest across generations of a family has a much bigger impact than a one off every 100 years, which is why you see those pervasive issues crop up with groups like the FLDS or the Whitakkers of West Virginia where it's basically standard practice and less so when some second cousins who met twice and dont have a cluster pattern of this have kids. Some level of inbreeding was extremely common for centuries amongst many cultures so it seems like there is some kind of threshold before it becomes a real issue. At least genetically.

FWIW my understanding of incestuous means relations between siblings, or parent and child, or grandparent and child. All others like first and second cousins I understand to be close relations but not incestuous though plenty of scrutinize first cousin relationships more presumably with blood tests or some other ways of determining that there are too many close shared ancestors.

So, we agree.

As an aside, it was hard, particularly in remote places, to find people not related to each other. And I don’t mean Alaskan tundra region remote. So many people in rural European villages / parishes are almost all related.

Yes, we totally agree, apologies if it sounded otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title says it all.

You are sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

How did you guess? Did they tell you?

[Anonymous]

The pro life crowd is stupid for a reason. Control of women and children.

The Catholic Church's rules for marrying relatives are far stricter than any US state. You can't marry anyone who is a 4th cousin or closer.

[Anonymous]

Yes. He was actually a terrible person and ended up being poisoned by his wife's grandmother.

[Anonymous]

33% of rapes are perpetrated by partners or former partners. So I would say we all know or could be people born from rape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

How did you guess? Did they tell you?

I was told. Beyond knowing general family dysfunction, it wasn't something one could guess. Yes, I was floored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title says it all.

except, why are you asking ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know someone born from brother/sister incest. I think very, very few people know. Contrary to what you (or at least I) would think, they're high IQ, Ivy educated and very attractive. Obviously a crap ton of stuff under the family hood and lots of secrets but on the surface very rich and successful and basically living the DCUM dream (not in DC). Would have never guessed.

Real life Flowers in the Attic