Rowan Williams, who suggested some aspects of Islamic Sharia law could be allowed in Britain

the Sun's four-inch flare, "What a burka," was instantly recognizable to Londoners as an unflattering Cockney-slang likening of Archbishop Williams to female genitalia.

Any how, Mr Saunders tells us that Archbishop Williams, acting as the direct spokesman of she who is appointed by God and is the ruler of England in her mortal shell, was in truth arguing for a greater civic authority for churches. the sharia diversion seems to have put paid to that movement.

Keep in mind that it's misleading to discuss the "risk" of first-cousin marriage without attention to the baseline of how often it's gone on in the family in the past--i.e., as a "one-off" event it's not especially dangerous, but if practiced over generations it gets increasingly risky.

I can only imagine what the reasons for bringing this topic up right now are, but it certainly shouldn't, in the abstract, be any kind of taboo topic. Especially not if you're in a welfare state like the UK, where the (economic) costs of birth defects are borne by the society rather than just the birth-family.

as a first year medical student, I was surprised by all the genetic studies where Pakistanis through inbreeding, were the reason for genetic breakthroughs as they allowed investigators to see what pathways were adulterated in these offspring causing medical defects. One was the hormonal regulation of hunger where these two siblings, had voracious appetites caused by a genetic disorder via inbreeding. What caused the hunger, was identified because of these brother/sisters.

I agree with you "future". Finally, Pakistanis have a chance to make a positive difference in the world, lets not dash their hopes.

/sarcasam

Anyone seen Razib? :) Someone page him. He HAS to chime in on this…

the problem is worst than just first-cousin marriages. the problem is pedigree collapse. clans with breed with each other over generations start to get really inbred to a far greater extent than a plain "first-cousin marriage" would imply.

another thing, the risk in any given first-cousin marriage for a deleterious recessive is low (ignore the fact that pakistanis might have really inbred lineages going back generations). but, most deleterious recessives (or an enormous number) may be due to first cousin marriages. that means that though on the individual level it might not rise to the threshold of concern, when it comes to publish health cousin-marriages are going to be a major cost you can easily calculate because of the statistics.

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/cousin-be-perty-part-n.php:
Condition - % of affected children whose parents were first cousins
Total color blindness - 15
Albinism - 21
Xeroderma Pigmentosum - 23
Ichthyosis Congenita - 35
Tay Sachs - 40

(for the USA)

so, a common assertion is that the risk of birth defects is 2-3% assuming no relation. and 4-6% assuming first cousins. now, if your first cousin is HHHHOOOOTTTTTTT perhaps you're willing to take the extra risk. but if 1/2 of the marriages are between first cousins, well, you can do the math in terms of how much more medical expenditure will ensue.....

7 · razib now, if your first cousin is HHHHOOOOTTTTTTT perhaps you're willing to take the extra risk. but if 1/2 of the marriages are between first cousins, well, you can do the math in terms of how much more medical expenditure will ensue.....

Who cares--gov't will pay--yes, we can!
;-)

btw, the common number i see is that first cousin offspring are 5 points dumber in IQ than they would be otherwise. so is this a thread where it's cool to point out that these practices are turning pakistani muslims into inbred tards? i mean, they really are. additionally, the problem isn't limited to pakistanis, cousin marriage rates are really high across the middle east in part because of new found wealth (oil) and the nature of islamic laws regarding inheritance.

the siblings in question who had uncontrollable hunger came from a lineage of people who had married within family, it wasnt like razib points out a one-time cousin marriage type of thing. This inner marrying I think has something definitely to do with many people in villages looking for spouses outside of the village when arranging marriages and sometimes marring within a very small village itself is looked at as incestuous even when there is no identifiable blood relation between the two people.

since i doubt comments can handle the requisite HTML, in words inbreeding coefficient is proportional in large part to the number of recent common ancestors. in the united states first cousin marriages are between people who have 2 recent common ancestors. in some societies that's no true, "first cousins" are actually more closely related than that because they have recent common ancestors all across their family tree.

Who cares--gov't will pay--yes, we can!

european gov. might demand selective abortions. that can mitigate some of the cost.

my understanding is that part of the rash of cousin marriages among pakistani britons is that it is a way to get family members to the UK through regular immigration channels. so it isn't just "islam tells me i should do this," there's a strong personal incentive to bump-uglies with your cousin cuz then they can come to the land of fish & chips.

map of near-relative-f*king by region: http://consang.net/index.php/Global_prevalence

9 · razib cousin marriage rates are really high across the middle east in part because of new found wealth (oil) and the nature of islamic laws regarding inheritance.

Wait, how does inheritance law promote cousin-marriage? I thought Islamic inheritance law is pro-male (compared to, say, French inheritance law)--so, wouldn't you have an increased desire to marry daughters up (b/c they get less $$)? And wouldn't that be feasible with polygamy (again, compared to France)?

also, the problem isn't only in deleterious recessives. those major diseases are public health concerns and what not, but inbred people are just susceptible to disease in general. that means probably more lifetime infections and so forth. it isn't just the big rare diseases; but endemic pathogens probably hit the immune systems of the inbred more harshly (no offense to the inbred SM readers ;-).

Wait, how does inheritance law promote cousin-marriage? I thought Islamic inheritance law is pro-male

well, i guess i mispoke, cuz i might not be islamic law per se. but i do know from an israeli arab friend of mine that cousin marriages are seen as a good way to pool money across families where otherwise there's too much distrust. so i guess it's more of the lack of transparency of capital?

also, it's pro-male, but women are supposed to get 1/3 i think (depends on details of which sharia, etc.). ethnographic studies i've read suggests that it doesn't work that way a lot of the time.

Just came across this.
http://in.rediff.com/getahead/2008/feb/11cousin.htm
Interesting!

17 · razib

i[t] might not be islamic law per se. but i do know from an israeli arab friend of mine that cousin marriages are seen as a good way to pool money across families where otherwise there's too much distrust. so i guess it's more of the lack of transparency of capital?

Yeah, good point--family ties in general are more important the less well you have the legal system working between relative strangers!

chitta, those were optimal for 3rd and 4th cousins. 1st and 2nd cousins had fewer kids than expectation. i blogged a possible reason.

btw, from the article:

MPAC spokesman Asghar Bukhari said Mr Woolas' comments "verged on Islamophobia".

and later....

Research for BBC2's Newsnight in November 2005 showed British Pakistanis accounted for 3.4% of all births but have 30% of all British children with "recessive disorders".

god, it's so easy to hate muslims ;-)

one reason that many muslims i've talked to give for cousin marriage is that

1) you've seen your cousin when you were younger, so you know if she's fugly or not if the whole purdah thing is happening

2) you don't get to socialize with non-relative females. so you hit it where you can....

btw, re: fake marriages. full disclosure, my mom tried to convince me into one of those so that one of my cousins could immigrate to the USA. my parents are generally pretty ethical, but if they thought about it has to be a really common rationale. and it isn't just brownz, kurds in denmark do the same. it's a way of bringing relatives over and maintaining old country values by pairing western born with those who might not even know the local language.

22 · razib one reason that many muslims i've talked to give for cousin marriage is that

Yeah, but is it a Muslim thing, or a "from the pind" thing (like West Virginia in the US!)??
My experience is limited, but in my experience you wouldn't find first-cousin marriage in any significant frequency in the Oxbridge Pakistanis, or the wealthy Pakistanis in NYC or LA. . . .

Yeah, but is it a Muslim thing, or a "from the pind" thing (like West Virginia in the US!)??
My experience is limited, but in my experience you wouldn't find first-cousin marriage in any significant frequency in the Oxbridge Pakistanis, or the wealthy Pakistanis in NYC or LA. . . .

when you have frequencies on the order of 1/2 it can't just be rednecks. in the arab world elites do it plenty. one of sadam hussein's wives was his first cousin.

4 · Sanjeev Jain said

I agree with you "future". Finally, Pakistanis have a chance to make a positive difference in the world, lets not dash their hopes. /sarcasam

Razib can ask an outrageous question about "bringing up how they're inbred tards" or whatever because he has shown over the past four years that he's not a bigot. He's not anti-Islam or anti-Pakistan and he has thousands of data points among our archives to indicate that.

Follow the comment policy and all will be good. If you don't want to read it, here's the spark notes version: please keep the haterade to yourself, thanks.

...sorry about the crack ;-) i'll be good from now on, but it was just too easy....

here are tables on inbreeding rates. i'm going to post some of them here in a moment....

27 . razib said

...sorry about the crack ;-) i'll be good from now on, but it was just too easy....

Well, lucky for you I laughed out loud when I read that line, so you sailed right through the Manish Vij Memorial "Unless they're funny"-clause. When our forefathers drafted these guidelines they truly were visionary thinkers.

25 · razib

when you have frequencies on the order of 1/2 it can't just be rednecks. in the arab world elites do it plenty. one of sadam hussein's wives was his first cousin.

You may be right and correct in the big picture, and I'm not speaking from any deep or even thorough knowledge of Arab culture, but Saddam was a total "redneck"/thug/"lumpen prol." in terms of his class background in Iraq, just to keep things honest! I guess he obvioulsy became top-dog for quite a while, but--please let's not compare him in terms of class sophistication to the Hashemites or the pre-'79 persian ruling class, or the current Moroccan royal family, etc.

the coefficient of inbreeding of first cousins assuming no other recent inbreeding is 0.0625. here are some data from the linked table with location and the mean coeff of inbreeding (how closely the couple is related):

pakistan:
lahore - 0.0269
mianchannu - 0.0236
muridke - 0.0240
sheikhpura - 0.0271
gujrat - 0.0277
jhelum - 0.0262
rawalpindi - 0.0286
faisalabad - 0.0286
gujurunwala - 0.0323
sahiwal - 0.0295
all-punjab - 0.0280
lahore - 0.0242
all-pakistan 0.0332
quetta - 0.0217
swat (urban) - 0.0163
swat (rural) - 0.0166

i'm going to put b-desh and india numbers for comparison

bangladesh
matlab - 0.0015
teknaf - 0.0101

india
west bengal muslim - 0.0135
bihar (muslim suburban) - 0.0150
bihar (muslim rural) - 0.0249
bihar (all-muslim) 0.0076
east india all-region muslim - 0.0097
madhya pradesh hindu - 0.0033
madhya pradesh scheduled tribes & castes - 0.0145
madhya pradesh muslim - 0.0215
madhya pradesh christians - 0.0098
all muslims central india - 0.0168
dehli sunni muslim - 0.0100
lucknow shia muslim - 0.0202
udaipur shia muslim - 0.0218
dehli sunni muslim - 0.0180
lucknow hindu - 0.0001
lucknow muslim - 0.0095
all north india muslim - 0.0130
andhra pradesh - 0.0195
andhra pradesh - 0.0324
andra pradesh vedde - 0.0185
karnataka hindu - 0.0333
karnataka muslim - 0.0160
karnataka christian - 0.0173
all karnataka - 0.0299
kerala - 0.0118
kerala - 0.0075
tamil nadu - 0.0231
tamil nadu (rural) 0.0367
tamil nadu (urban) - 0.0203
tamil nadu brahmin - 0.0124
pondichery - 0.0449
bombay hindu - 0.0039
bombay muslim - 0.0095
bombay christian - 0.0012
bombay parsi - 0.0096
maharasthra - 0.0175
all west india muslim - 0.0201

27 · razib said

...sorry about the crack ;-)

I missed the crack, too? You guys never tell me about anything!

please let's not compare him in terms of class sophistication to the Hashemites or the pre-'79 persian ruling class, or the current Moroccan royal family, etc.

sure.

30 · rob said

let's not compare him in terms of class sophistication to the Hashemites or the pre-'79 persian ruling class, or the current Moroccan royal family, etc.

Right. "Only Royals can be inbred." Where have I read that before?

the hashemites are relatively outbred. you can check out their genealogy online. the current king is half-british. one of his father's brothers married a pakistani woman so he has brown looking cousins (queen noor is 1/4 arab, 1/2 swedish and 1/4 wasp i think).

My comment #30 is, of course, the perfect opportunity for my to disclose my own frequent "self-hatred" (thanks, Jai, by the way, for disputing (over multiple threads) the applicability of that term--I use it, in your honor, only in an ironic sense) for pining over some Persian "Banafshi," for example, when I fully realize that, as Puliogre has nicely pointed out, the super-charged economic action on the sub-continent is in the 4 southern provinces--of course, when I start thinking too much this way, I always end up drinking Amarillo at some West Village Italian place that is pressing good food on me to go with my drink, so--ultimately, what do I know?

btw, one generation of outbreeding can abolish almost all of inbreeding's negative effects through genetic complementation.

Didn't East is East have those inbred sisters (twins?) as the scary arranged marriage prospect for one of the kids? And that one was written by a Bangladeshi/Pakistani guy.

ss

35 · razib

the hashemites are relatively outbred. you can check out their genealogy online. the current king is half-british. one of his father's brothers married a pakistani woman so he has brown looking cousins (queen noor is 1/4 arab, 1/2 swedish and 1/4 wasp i think).

Absolutely!
And in comparison, Saddam--well,, not so much.
My ultimate point is that any kind of South-Asian-based pro-Arab bullshit is, well--bullshit. . . .my family has lived in Northern India for millenia, and we don't buy into any sort of pro-Iran or pro-Arab bullshit. Not that those civilizations are bad, just that we don't need to draw on them any more than we draw on China or the British.

My ultimate point is that any kind of South-Asian-based pro-Arab bullshit is, well--bullshit. . . .my family has lived in Northern India for millenia, and we don't buy into any sort of pro-Iran or pro-Arab bullshit.

well, the arabs had an influence mainly in south india, in kerala (they ruled sindh for a bit obviously). in north india it was all turk and persian. but what do you mean "pro-arab" bullshit? north indian hindus are exogamous, so their practices are at sharp variance with their muslim neighbors. muslims often justify their cousin-marriage practices that muhammad married a cousin (i think one of his many wives though, which anti-cousin marriage activists point to in terms of quantity).

40 · razib
but what do you mean "pro-arab" bullshit? north indian hindus are exogamous, so their practices are at sharp variance with their muslim neighbors.

Razib, I'm not sure what you mean here. Aren't most North and South Indian groups exogamous?
I guess you might mean to track some variance between North and South Hindus--I think a lot of that comes (historically). I'm not sure I think that my South Indian family has more endogamy than a North indian family--in fact, we would often make fun of the North Indians on that issue. (There is the stress from the north-western invaders, who are not Hindu (you even have the modern Sikhs who I think of as casualties of that civilizational collide--I respect the Sikhs though my sense is that they would deny that they arise from that Muslim-Hindu collision), shall I find it easy to mention! ;-)--but, at the end of the day, you have the Muslims fighting against the smart non-Mulsim math-types!).

Razib, I'm not sure what you mean here. Aren't most North and South Indian groups exogamous?

south indian hindus on average have a lot more endogamy. look at the numbers above and the coefficients of inbreeding. or look at the map. in south india among various hindu groups cross-cousin and uncle-niece marriages are common.

kerala has lower rates of inbreeding than the other 3 south indian states. i do not believe that uncle-niece marriages have ever been prevalent there (these marriages have twice the inbreeding coefficient of first cousin marriages).

42 · razib
in south india among various hindu groups cross-cousin and uncle-niece marriages are common.

This is, admittedly, the soft-spot in my world view!

44 · rob said

42 · razib
in south india among various hindu groups cross-cousin and uncle-niece marriages are common.

This is, admittedly, the soft-spot in my world view!

Yes, I know far too many southies to not be soft in this area either. I'm guessing there's no data to correlate inbreeding with low cognitive abilities or even income levels? (I'm thinking of the many high-achieving, high-IQ southies I know who are from communities that feverishly search the globe for ONLY marriage partners descended from a village a few miles from their own ancestral village).

I'm guessing there's no data to correlate inbreeding with low cognitive abilities or even income levels?

as i said, quantitative genetic studies indicate that the "cost" of a first cousin marriage without extra inbreeding on top is 5 IQ points.

e.g., assume that IQ is 0.50 heritable and you have a population mean of 100. you have individuals whose IQs are 110 and 120 who produce offspring.

if the two individuals are not related, the expected IQ of any given offspring is 107.5. if the two individuals are cousins the IQ is 102.5 per the 5 point "penalty."

FYI, saudi arabian hospitals are becoming very specialized in the area of treating rare recessive diseases....

Hopefully this will be another reason for Western countries to change there immigration policies to make harder for people to go to there homeland and marry someone who has nothing in common and instead marry someone there backward relatives want them.

Countries like Denmark,Holland and Beligum have seen the light and changed there immigration policies make harder for there kind of marriages. But Canada and United Kingdom are clueless and if there current immigration rate of people who come in like so there countries have would no longer be 1st world countries.

I can speak from personal experience, but being in arranged marriage is a nightmare.

But Canada and United Kingdom are clueless and if there current immigration rate of people who come in like so there countries have would no longer be 1st world countries.

Sorry, I should double check what I write before I post. It's just the issue of arranged marriage is very touchy to me.

What I meant to say is, that Canada and the United Kingdom are gonna be hurt in the long run, when they keep letting in so many people from the south asian, who are uneducated and have no chance of intergrating into western society. If this keep up, soon Canada and United Kingdom instead of being 1st world countries, but instead nothing but a cesspool of multicultrism.

Regarding the welfare state, I'm not sure the point even really matters. In cities in West Yorkshire, you'll find Asian populations to be completely self-segregated with their own doctors, grocery stores, etc. Asian immigrants don't take advantage of socialized healthcare because it isn't culturally sensitive AT ALL.

i'm confused, way back when my parents tried to arrange my marriage, they wanted me to marry within our subgroup "Agarwal" clan and they named about 16 different last names that would be appropriate, when i questioned the possibility of inbreeding they stated that would be avoided of course, but over time, even though the Agarwal clan is quite large (containing Mittals, Guptas, Tayals, etc.) I can't imagine how there could not be some element of narrowing the gene pool.
Scientifically, inbred populations do provide great genetic material to research, i'm sure us south asians aren't the only ones who encounter this...

south indian hindus on average have a lot more endogamy. look at the numbers above and the coefficients of inbreeding. or look at the map. in south india among various hindu groups cross-cousin and uncle-niece marriages are common.

This is true. But not all the 'first cousins' are valid partners. It should be mom's brother's boy/girl or dad's sister's boy/girl (unlike the Muslims where I believe there is no restriction). it is "cultural" and in rural areas still the norm. And as razib remarked, even the "educated" go for this arrangement if the girl is "hoooot". We make fun of our friend that he really didn't deserve the girl "lookswise" and has just lucked out because he was the "athai magan / maaman magan" .

This is another reason why the term 'Asian' ends up hurting Hindus and Sikhs in the U.K. There are too many cultural and behavioral differences with U.K. Muslims that get glossed over by that term.

>>A British politician has caused quite a stir with his statements regarding the defective results of the arrangements Asians accede to...his point is that this is a cultural practice which should be examined

For those of you who clamor for Government sponsored Universal Healthcare in the US, this is exhibit A to demonstrate how it is bound to eventually invade the privacy of citizens and infringe on the cultural practices of selected minorities.

The government has no business in telling private citizens whom they can marry, how many children they can have, if they should have more children etc etc. Unless of course, the Government pays for it. Then they will start conducting studies on "The effect of sambar powder on the reproductive tendencies of south Indians". The end result would be to pass a law telling south Indians that they can have at most 2 1/2 children.

By no means am I endorsing first-cousin marriage. My point is that cultural practices evolve over time and people following the practices should be free to stumble and make mistakes (for generations, if necessary). The last thing we need is for the Government to stick its nose into private affairs.

M. Nam

I'm thinking of the many high-achieving, high-IQ southies I know who are from communities that feverishly search the globe for ONLY marriage partners descended from a village a few miles from their own ancestral village).

and

when i questioned the possibility of inbreeding they stated that would be avoided of course, but over time, even though the Agarwal clan is quite large (containing Mittals, Guptas, Tayals, etc.) I can't imagine how there could not be some element of narrowing the gene pool.

In the hindu system there's something called a "Gotra". Although endogamous groups marry within their varna and jati ("caste") they do not marry within the same gotra (whatever that is). This supposedly prevents inbreeding.

Razib can ask an outrageous question about "bringing up how they're inbred tards" or whatever because he has shown over the past four years that he's not a bigot.

I think Razib does not get banned here because he is from a Bangladeshi Muslim family. I suspect that if Razib was a random white dude from Oregon with the same views, he would have been banned in 2004.

I do agree that Razib is not a bigot. Plus as an apostate he has kind of earned the right to be extra critical of Muslims.

Slightly unrelated to the discussion:

I know in English we just have "uncle" and "aunt" used for representing siblings of parents. In Tamil, we have separate words for each relation, for example "athai" is dad's sister and "chithi" is mom's sister. I think Telugu has different words too. Clearly we treat siblings of parents differently based on whether they are related through a mom / dad and hence the need for separate words. Do we have different words in Hindi or other languages. I'm tryng to find out if the presence / absence of such words indicate any relationship to the "marital arrangements" in that particular culture.

Clearly we treat siblings of parents differently based on whether they are related through a mom / dad and hence the need for separate words. Do we have different words in Hindi or other languages.

Urdu:
Moms sister: Khala
Dads sistet: Phuppo
Moms brother: Mama
Dads brother: Chacha (younger) and older (taia)

I believe in Hindi the Dads sister is Bua and Moms sister is Masi/Kaka. Rest are the same as Urdu.

Thanks,

I have heard "chacha" and "masi" (mausi??) not the other ones..

I have heard "chacha" and "masi" (mausi??) not the other ones..

mausi

Time means I comment on SM far less than I used to (I'm sure only a few here remember me). But certain things remain unchanged.

I'm glad you posted this here Anna as I wanted to read what Razib had to say, we did our bit on PP and I had to stand in as the resident geneticist, in the absence of a real one. The "one third of British birth with genetic defects being Pakistani" is, IMO, nonsense. I spent a few minutes trying to look up where this widely-quoted and never-referenced stat comes from and found nothing. The reasoning I gave in our comments for why I think this is rubbish is that the most common genetic defects in the UK are cystic fibrosis, sick cell anaemia and thalassaemia, which are all racially biased away from south Asians. So I would sugges the BBC is wrong.

Rob, whilst purely anecdotal, I know many Oxbridge Pakistanis (naturally the only ones I socialise with, what what) who have hooked up with their first cousins. Including doctors who all took genetics classes, but then again plenty of doctors smoke.

Anna I don't really see what this has to do with the Royal Family. I don't recall Woolas saying "we wouldn't do anything like this!"

What was I saying about things remaining unchanged? Oh yeah, MoorNam's still talking sh*t. If this post pertained to British LAW, you'd have a point. But your desperate attempt to work in a critique of universal healthcare is groundless. Discussing public health issues is healthy, not the sign of a meddling gov't.

52 · Amitabh said

This is another reason why the term 'Asian' ends up hurting Hindus and Sikhs in the U.K. There are too many cultural and behavioral differences with U.K. Muslims that get glossed over by that term.

I hear you and I thought of the exact same thing as I was reading about this pre-posting, but before one of the rabid anti-SM, anti-SouthAsian, anti-Islam, anti-Pakistan contingent seizes upon your comment, I am going to intervene as a preemptive measure.

I'd like to emphasize that the desi community in the U.K. is VERY different from the desi community in this country. We are an American blog and we are not going to change how we self-identify because of what goes on in other countries, nasty anonymous insults or a comment war, four years after the original comment wars; so if any of you feel the need to thread-jack as if this cousin-marriage issue is proof for your views, please refrain. You'll find enough vicious verbal sparring about how Muslims ruin brand "India" in our archives.

Any comments in this vein on this thread will be off-topic and will be deleted. I have a grueling day at work in store for me and if things become uncivilized, I'll close the thread, rather than extinguish a flame war. I'm sure I will not have to do that, though, because you're a reasonable, considerate group of adults who can discuss things without being babysat. Back on topic.

60 · Bong Breaker said

Anna I don't really see what this has to do with the Royal Family. I don't recall Woolas saying "we wouldn't do anything like this!"

He said it was a cultural thing. Part of royal culture is to marry within, to cousins who are also inbred. ;) I can't believe I have to explicitly say this to you of all people Bongsie, but I was trying to be snarky. That's what this has to do with the Royal family. :)

Good to see you again! Thanks for bringing the local perspective. :)

>>Discussing public health issues is healthy, not the sign of a meddling gov't.

Discussion of a health issue by a politician using a Government platform, and linking the health issue to the cultural practice of a certain class of people is a sign of meddling government. Universal healthcare will bring this to our doorsteps.

By all means, everyone has a right to discuss this (in blogs, papers, parties, private forums etc etc). When a politician opens his/her mouth in a public capacity, it's unwelcome intrusion.

M. Nam

63 · MoorNam said

Discussion of a health issue by a politician using a Government platform, and linking the health issue to the cultural practice of a certain class of people is a sign of meddling government. Universal healthcare will bring this to our doorsteps.

I'll allow it. I thought, "Hmmm, interesting idea I'd like to ponder" after MoorNam commented, and that is about as likely as a Red Sox fan wearing a Yankees hat. ;) That and others brought up similar thoughts up-thread.

*I appreciate the shout-out re: public health from BongBreaker, but I'm respectfully disagreeing, especially since it's election season and health care is a hot and relevant issue.

No no, I knew about the Royals' pairing preferences (and haemophilia etc) but what I meant that you have brought in the Royal Family as an example of British culture. Arguable, but point taken. If Prince William had said the above statement, then I'd understand your tack, but a British politician doesn't have to be a de facto supporter of Royal practices. (btw I hope you're feeling better A)

linking the health issue to the cultural practice of a certain class of people

is FACT, in this case.

Plus as an apostate he has kind of earned the right to be extra critical of Muslims.

I think that granting of that right has been rather subjective by the public. What about Ayaan Hirsi Ali ? She's an apostate too...has she earned that right too ?

Discussion of a health issue by a politician using a Government platform, and linking the health issue to the cultural practice of a certain class of people is a sign of meddling government.

A current story in the news about how a cultural practice can become a health issue:

For the first time, health officials report that the AIDS virus can be spread by a mother pre-chewing her infant's food, a practice mainly seen in poor, developing countries.

The first involved a 15-month-old African-American boy in Miami, diagnosed in 1993. His great-aunt was infected with HIV and pre-chewed food for the boy when he was between the ages of 9 months and 14 months.

Then a 3-year-old Caribbean-American boy was diagnosed in 1995, also in Miami. His HIV-infected mother pre-chewed food for her son.

Still uncertain they had definitively connected the practice to the spread of HIV, the doctors wanted more evidence. It was years later before they could confirm a third case, which occurred in 2004. A 9-month-old African-American girl was diagnosed with HIV in Memphis. The mother began pre-chewing the girl's food when she was about four months old.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23033131

Vikram -- by brother in Kram -- if Ayaan Ali Hirsi wanted to comment on the Sepiboard, I would welcome her. If Razib decided to work for the American Enterprise Institue (right down the hall from David "Axis-of-evil" Frum!), I would mock his sorry ass.

Neither Razib nor Ayaan are defined solely by their lack of religion -- for example, Razib is the wackest Bangladeshi-American rapper this side of Kevin Gnapoor. Can Ayaan rap? Does she rap about bombing Iran? Context matters.

(But I promise you, Vikram, that if you went to work as assittant-torture-justifier to Donald Herbert Walker Frumsfeld, I would defend you always. Kram Solidarity. Peace.)

another pro-1st-cousin marriages reason i've heard is that it helps to keep the "traditions"/"values" in the clan/family.

E.g. when your mum-in-law is also your dad's sister (for example), whom you've known since young, there's less chance of gossip, scurrilous or otherwise, going around.

In Singapore, the main Indian groups known to be into 1st-cousin marriages are:
- some North Indians: mainly Muslims/Pakistanis, but also some well-to-do Sikhs from "old" families, for whom keeping the "traditions" intact matters
- some South Indians: not sure what caste/group my friend was from, but his mama (mum's brother) married his sister

#68:
Uh ok... that was more than a bit muddled in syntax and meaning... but I'll indulge you and assume you actually had something relevant to say... Peace.

Razib -- do you have the cite for the inbreeding co-efficients you list? The numbers look a little funny. Punjab is 60% of Pakistan, yet the all-Punjab number is .0280 and the all-pakistan number is .0332. That gives a non-Punjab figure of .041. But the numbers for given for NWFP -- Pindi (.0286) and Swat (.016) -- are well below the all-Pak number, which means Sindh must be unbeleivable inbred to bring the all-Pak average up to .0332.

But it isn't. So what's going on?

Re: 61 · A N N A said

52 · Amitabh said

I'd like to emphasize that the desi community in the U.K. is VERY different from the desi community in this country. We are an American blog and we are not going to change how we self-identify ...

Yes, that makes a lot of sense, but I guess what confuses newbies (like I was) is, if this is an "American" blog, then why would desi issues in the UK or elsewhere be discussed? Maybe, SM's bloggers should have a policy that non-US issues should be discussed by specifying why these issues are relevant to desis in the US? That would link up staying a US Desi blog and commenting on global Desi happenings.

another pro-1st-cousin marriages reason i've heard is that it helps to keep the "traditions"/"values" in the clan/family.

The best way to keep traditions/old values is not to move to the west.

#41, I agree Sikhs are somewhat a result of the hindu muslim civilization collision-the founders being tired of both religions orthodoxy (course over generations we are starting to go that way). On the topic of marriage with cousins-its looked down upon especially in the Jat Sikhs. I have heard of family members saying that traditionally, ppl avoid arranging marriage if the groom or bride's parents or grandparents have the same last name. Of course, most Jats marry other Jats so there is always some level of inbreeding. Punjabis, though, contain genes from a LOT of invaders-Turks/Afghan/Persian/Greek/Mongol-so there is more diversity to go around (?)

is, if this is an "American" blog, then why would desi issues in the UK or elsewhere be discussed?

Why wouldn't they? Desi people in America (yes, even 2nd gens) have family and friends everywhere and beyond that, some of us are interested in what happens in diasporic communities. What an odd question.

Maybe, SM's bloggers should have a policy that non-US issues should be discussed by specifying why these issues are relevant to desis in the US? That would link up staying a US Desi blog and commenting on global Desi happenings.

Implicit in this is the notion that we should have certain areas of coverage and that we don't deserve to post about something global, without a disclaimer.

We are an American blog because we were founded by desis who were born and raised in this country, not because we chose to be hemmed in to subject-ive straightjackets. The point of stating that we are American is to express that we write from an American perspective, not that we only write about things with explicit connections to this country.

This entire exchange is off-topic and has the potential to derail the thread. I'd respectfully ask that going forward, if you respond, to please do so via email. Back on topic, everyone.

Just wanted to say that I find this thread fascinating! I remember there being a discussion in my genetics course in college about the risk that inbreeding poses on a fetus, and the numbers for 1st cousins was generally small. However, this post is pointing out the fact that multiple 1st-cousin marriages over a string of generations can have a negative cumulative effect on the genetic pool of a family.

I come from a very small caste in Gujarat..so small in fact that my Mom told me that she's glad we moved to the States because there wouldn't have been any guys in my caste for me to marry. Totally weird to hear that.

While many places in the world have some sort of taboo against inbreeding, Britain also has a cultural taboo against people who keep trying to breed with themselves, so much so that it is now a generic insult in British English for anything, including losing at cards.

While Americans tend to be more relaxed about making relations weirder than usual.

/removes tongue from cheek

This is yet another fave topic to rile people up that's linked to this trend of bringing up anti muslim sentiment.
The whole thing comes up every once in a while in he media about genetic defects and inbreeding and as mentioned there seems to be no valid references.

There are too many cultural and behavioral differences with U.K. Muslims that get glossed over by that term.

Again the majority of British public are aware of the differences of the different asain communities but no need to go there. Anyhow there is nothing in Islamis thats about marrying cousins. It's probably just about 'keeping tradition and wealth in the family'.

Am I too late to comment on this post? I always miss the interesting stuff.

My grandparents were first cousins. I don't really know the history of my family, but I'm betting a very sizeable proportion of their forebears were pretty closely related before marriage as well. The whole thing has to do with keeping the property within the family, as ours is a matriarchal system. I blame most of my health related issues on them. I was one of those who got lucky and only got Asthma as my share of the family inheritance [/barf]. I've got a few close relatives who got blessed with double soda glasses since they could barely walk, and a nice dose of depression as an added bonus (you know how well that gets treated in India. The ignorance is horrifying).

I think they're completely justified in bringing up this topic, and (expletive) all those tender societal sensibilities of those (expletive) ignorant morons. It is us, the product of their arrant avarice and ignorance who end up paying the cost.

P.S: Uh .. SM Intern, is there an acceptable word for the expletive, which kinda has the same force of expression that I can use without crossing boundaries here. I swear I'm tryingto clean up my language, but sometimes, those words are needed :-)

Most of my relatives use the words "cousin-brother" or "cousin-sister" when referring to cousins. Its also customary to call older cousins bai or ben (brother or sister). Do Pakistanis or Indian Muslims do this? I'm guessing probably not since that would make cousin marriage even more weird.

From what i've seen in the uk and met people in this marriages, when the marriages happen it's normally to a cousin the bride or groom has never had any contact with either cos they are from abroad or they didn't grow up together.

Dr1001:

The whole thing comes up every once in a while in he media about genetic defects and inbreeding and as mentioned there seems to be no valid references.

Um, were you not reading the comments nor the article? There's plenty of evidence - a simple MedLine or Ovid search reveals extensive research into it.

Apologies. that read incorrectly: of course there are references and im aware of these, but i meant this is not the predominant cause of defects ...

Do Pakistanis or Indian Muslims do this? I'm guessing probably not since that would make cousin marriage even more weird.

I don't know about Pakistani Muslims, but Indian Muslims just say cousin brother inshallah.

For those of you who clamor for Government sponsored Universal Healthcare in the US, this is exhibit A to demonstrate how it is bound to eventually invade the privacy of citizens and infringe on the cultural practices of selected minorities.

Thank goodness, politicians does not indulge in any comments about other cultures in the US, except when it comes to senior citizens or the extremely poor. Oh, I forgot. Pandering is permissible, it's only negative comments that aren't.

79 • lostingeekdom said

SM Intern, is there an acceptable word for the expletive, which kinda has the same force of expression that I can use without crossing boundaries here. I swear I'm tryingto clean up my language, but sometimes, those words are needed :-)

Yes, there is an acceptable word; it is often referred to as "the F-bomb". I realize that if you're trying to clean up your language, that suggestion is not going to help. We don't moderate profanity, per se. If --to borrow from a current Orbit commercial--you say "Why the french toast are we discussing the kama sutra again?", that is fine. If you say, "You know what, Abhi? You can go french toast yourself for not appreciating Modi", that's a bit different.

Excellent!

Razib, the data you've presented is for the most part from surveys in the 60s and 70s. Come across anything more recent?

Jumping in mid-thread, but has anyone seen this? Arrived in my Sci Am weekly digest just now.

When Incest Is Best: Kissing Cousins Have More Kin

Study analyzing more than 200 years of data finds that couples consisting of third cousins have the highest reproductive success

By Nikhil Swaminathan

[...]

Scientists came to their conclusions after studying the records of more than 160,000 Icelandic couples with members born between 1800 and 1965. "The advantage of using the Icelandic data set lies in this population being small and one of the most socioeconomically and culturally homogenous societies in the world," the researchers report in Science, "with little variation in family size [and] use of contraceptives and marriage practices, in contrast with most previously studied populations."

The results of the exhaustive study are constant throughout the generations analyzed. Women born between 1800 and 1824 who mated with a third cousin had significantly more children and grandchildren (4.04 and 9.17, respectively) than women who hooked up with someone no closer than an eighth cousin (3.34 and 7.31). Those proportions held up among women born more than a century later when couples were, on average, having fewer children.

[...]

"It may well be that the enhanced reproductive success observed in the Iceland study at the level of third [and] fourth cousins, who on average would be expected to have inherited 0.8 percent to 0.2 percent of their genes from a common ancestor," Bittles says, "represents this point of balance between the competing advantages and disadvantages of inbreeding and outbreeding."

85 · SM Intern said

79 . lostingeekdom said

SM Intern, is there an acceptable word for the expletive, which kinda has the same force of expression that I can use without crossing boundaries here. I swear I'm tryingto clean up my language, but sometimes, those words are needed :-)

Yes, there is an acceptable word; it is often referred to as "the F-bomb". I realize that if you're trying to clean up your language, that suggestion is not going to help. We don't moderate profanity, per se. If --to borrow from a current Orbit commercial--you say "Why the french toast are we discussing the kama sutra again?", that is fine. If you say, "You know what, Abhi? You can go french toast yourself for not appreciating Modi", that's a bit different.
Excellent!

Ah .. don't tempt me. I'm not really trying to clean up my language, just trying to ensure that I don't incur the wrath of the almighty SM Intern and get kicked out before I've made enough mischief to warrant getting kicked out ;-) Though French Toasting my previous comment would reduce the sting of my long fermenting, deep seated bitterness at the asininity of my ancestors, and I'm not quite ready to let go of that yet :-P

And .. blech about Modi. I don't want to think about the maroons who still think he's all peaches and cream.

We are an American blog because we were founded by desis who were born and raised in this country,

But what would you do. if you were asked to give up your dreams for freedom.

JGandhi:

Most of my relatives use the words "cousin-brother" or "cousin-sister" when referring to cousins. Its also customary to call older cousins bai or ben (brother or sister). Do Pakistanis or Indian Muslims do this? I'm guessing probably not since that would make cousin marriage even more weird.

I have heard this usage widely but not universally, and it was once explained to me that "cousin-brother" and "cousin-sister" refers to a cousin that one is not allowed to marry using society's rules, while "cousin" refers to a cousin one IS allowed to marry using the same rules.

The common rule for deciding marriageability in Tamil Nadu is the bitwise parity rule, which says that you're allowed to marry a relative if the bit parity of the path you trace to him/her is odd, assigning bits (0/1) based on the gender of intermediate relatives, and XORing the bits as you go along. According to this rule, the examples that Ponniyin Selvan gave (father's sister's child and mother's brother's child) are odd parity and allowed, while the converses (mother's sister's child and father's brother's child) are even parity and not allowed.

Hey, I didn't come up with this stuff!

You can find a brief write-up on Wikipedia however, which I paste below:

Floyd Lounsbury (1964) discovered a seventh, "Dravidian" type of terminological system that had been confused with Iroquois in Morgan’s typology of kin-term systems because both systems distinguish relatives by marriage from relatives by descent, although both are classificatory categories rather than based on biological descent. Kay (1967), Scheffler (1971), and Tjon Sie Fat (1981) gave variant criteria for Dravidian classificatory logic, but the basic idea is that of applying an even/odd distinction to relatives that takes into account the gender of every linking relative for ego’s kin relation to any given person. A MFBD(C), for example, is a mother’s father’s brother’s daughter’s child. If each female link (M,D) is assigned a 0 and each male (F,B) a 1, the number of 1s is either even or odd; in this case, even. In a Dravidian system with a patrilineal modulo-2 counting system, marriage is prohibited with this relative, and a marriageable relative must be modulo-2 odd. There exists also a version of this logic with a matrilineal bias. Discoveries of systems that use modulo-2 logic, as in South Asia, Australia, and many other parts of the world, marked a major advance in the understanding of kinship terminologies that differ in from kin relations and terminologies employed by Europeans.

Apparently not used only in Tamil Nadu.

90 · pingpong said

JGandhi:

The common rule for deciding marriageability in Tamil Nadu is the bitwise parity rule, which says that you're allowed to marry a relative if the bit parity of the path you trace to him/her is odd, assigning bits (0/1) based on the gender of intermediate relatives, and XORing the bits as you go along. According to this rule, the examples that Ponniyin Selvan gave (father's sister's child and mother's brother's child) are odd parity and allowed, while the converses (mother's sister's child and father's brother's child) are even parity and not allowed.

Hey, I didn't come up with this stuff!

Yep, you're right. Not just in Tamilnadu. I'm from coastal Karnatak, and this rule is applicable in my community. I'm betting this also applies for parts of Kerala as well.

Yep, you're right. Not just in Tamilnadu. I'm from coastal Karnatak, and this rule is applicable in my community. I'm betting this also applies for parts of Kerala as well.

Except that one might expect Kerala to be matrilineal and assign 0 to males and 1 to females, while TN usually does the opposite. (This won't matter if the number of intermediate relatives is itself even, like first cousins or second cousins, but it will matter for relations like "mother's brother's daughter's daughter's child").

In your earlier comment, you said that

I've got a few close relatives who got blessed with double soda glasses since they could barely walk

Did you mean that they had to wear glasses from the time they could walk or did you mean that their vision was so bad that they kept walking into obstacles?

"The last thing we need is for the Government to stick its nose into private affairs."

It is probably too late for that. The corruption of the democratic process began with the income tax and the subsequent vote-buying through wealth redistribution policies.

Except that one might expect Kerala to be matrilineal and assign 0 to males and 1 to females, while TN usually does the opposite. (This won't matter if the number of intermediate relatives is itself even, like first cousins or second cousins, but it will matter for relations like "mother's brother's daughter's daughter's child").

Are you kidding? If not, I am not sure I understand. Mother's brother's daughter's daughter's child should be acceptable by the odd parity rule, independent of the gender assignment of 0s and 1s, right? What might matter is which link takes precedence if there is a conflict i.e. both parents have conflicting relative links, and you need to pick one for the rule (i.e. you are not checking all possible link combinations).

92 · pingpong said

Except that one might expect Kerala to be matrilineal and assign 0 to males and 1 to females, while TN usually does the opposite. (This won't matter if the number of intermediate relatives is itself even, like first cousins or second cousins, but it will matter for relations like "mother's brother's daughter's daughter's child").

Ok, my brain is a little addled with flu, so you're losing me with the parity bits. My community is also matrilineal, and here's what's acceptable and what isn't, as far as I'm aware of:

Brother and sister's kids: yes. Brother and brother or sister and sister's kids won't work. The family name goes through the mother, so those with the same family names cannot marry.

I think people use simple rules to calculate who is "murai" paiyan or "murai" ponnu meaning with whom matrimony is allowed instead of the complex boolean math across generations.

mom's brother's kids / dad's sister's kids are allowed. They are "murai". If you want to go back one generation, that is mom's mom's brother's son's daughter, you need to take the relationship of mom with her mom's brother's son. Mom and him are "murai", since they are not married, he becomes a brother (in relationship terms) of the dad. And his kids are not legal.

I just found this article from British paper today. It's about a Britsh Pakistan educated girl who forced to marry her father fat uneductated cousin who is 20 years older then her.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=513757&in_page_id=1879

When will the goverment of England see the light, and changes it immigration laws, to not only saves the lifes of thousands of young south asian women, but also it country in the long run.

I try to post this, in the news section. But the stupid thing said my password was wrong again.

Are you kidding? If not, I am not sure I understand. Mother's brother's daughter's daughter's child

Crap. I mistakenly put in one too many "daughter's" for whatever reason. Apologies. Apparently I like having daughters around.

And yes, it might be easier to just see if the number of ones is odd or even instead of doing a full XOR (though both give the same answer).

But it isn't. So what's going on?

re: inbreeding coefficients, my cites came from many different studies. the "all punjab" study might not have draw on the same data as the specific location studies. the inbreeding coefficient numbers for humans give a general sense, but can't be taken as that precise.

re: the iceland study, i blogged it here. note that the 1st and 2nd cousin marriages were less fertile, while the 3rd and 4th cousin marriages were the most fertile. 3rd and 4th cousins are not generally an issue for deleterious recessives unless you have A LOT of repeated inbreeding in your family tree.

finally: re: universal health care, i'm pretty sure that we're going to have similar discussions in the USA without or without it. after al, even without universal health care we have medicare and medicaid and what not. selective abortions of babies with down syndrome means that the number of these children has decreased greatly in the past generation, but some individuals (often religious conservatives for obvious reasons) continue to go to term with these fetuses. one can calculate the economic cost of health care and services for this individuals, so these parents often feel that they are judged that they went to term. we might as well start talking about these things since we're not isolated islands, the choices of other people do affect you.

Crap. I mistakenly put in one too many "daughter's" for whatever reason.

Well, independent of all that, my basic question is why the mapping of genders to 0s or 1s matters. It should be the same whether female=1 or 0, right? The only implication of matriarchy or patriarchy is which link should take precedence in case of conflicting relative links, isn't it?

Sorry to be nitpicking, I am not sure if I am missing something.

we might as well start talking about these things since we're not isolated islands, the choices of other people do affect you.

Now that's just socialist commie crazy talk!

90 · pingpong said

I have heard this usage widely but not universally, and it was once explained to me that "cousin-brother" and "cousin-sister" refers to a cousin that one is not allowed to marry using society's rules, while "cousin" refers to a cousin one IS allowed to marry using the same rules.

[as is my lack/disregard of punctuation in these sentences].

When will the goverment of England see the light, and changes it immigration laws, to not only saves the lifes of thousands of young south asian women, but also it country in the long run.

How is the country at risk because some jerk is putting pressure on his daughter to marry a cousin? You might find better audience for your self loathing here.

I meant here.

selective abortions of babies with down syndrome means that the number of these children has decreased greatly in the past generation, but some individuals (often religious conservatives for obvious reasons) continue to go to term with these fetuses. one can calculate the economic cost of health care and services for this individuals, so these parents often feel that they are judged that they went to term. we might as well start talking about these things since we're not isolated islands, the choices of other people do affect you.

Right. But do any of these religious conservatives volunteer in homes for children suffering from a variety of genetic defects? I mean, if you don't stop howling from the time you're born, till the time you're dead, and you're constantly in pain (in addition to sight, hearing and severe learning impairments), wouldn't the 'costs to others' argument not even be necessary?

it was explained to me that the phrase 'cousin-brother' is a terrible assault on the english language :)

How is the country at risk because some jerk is putting pressure on his daughter to marry a cousin?

It's not just one jerk, it's thousands of them who are forcing there daughter's to marry there cousins. By bringing in uneducated people into the country it slows the intergration process by one generation. Also more of these people will have no loyalty to the great country and instead are loyal to there homelands. If there homeland was so great, then why did they ever leave.

I guess I must have missed something, but the Pakistani community in England is doing a great job of intergrating and ever never caused problems that effect other south asians.

By bringing in uneducated people into the country it slows the intergration process by one generation. Also more of these people will have no loyalty to the great country and instead are loyal to there homelands. If there homeland was so great, then why did they ever leave.

So, clueless, is it ok if they marry college educated cousins who can spell?

This is another reason why the term 'Asian' ends up hurting Hindus and Sikhs in the U.K. There are too many cultural and behavioral differences with U.K. Muslims that get glossed over by that term.

"All Asians are not alike, but all (U.K.) Muslims are."

So, clueless, is it ok if they marry college educated cousins who can spell?

No it not ok if they marry there cousins. There are enought Pakistani's in England, that they should marry someone there. And if they want to marry someone from Pakistan, then they could move there and marry all there cousins they want.

And if these young Pakistani women want to marry a guy who is not Pakistani, don't get mad at them. Blame youself for the way you raised the men in your community. So when are alot of educated Pakistani girls are turned off by them, you can understand why?

109 · Rahul said

"All Asians are not alike, but all (U.K.) Muslims are."

rahul, thank you.

Well, independent of all that, my basic question is why the mapping of genders to 0s or 1s matters. It should be the same whether female=1 or 0, right? The only implication of matriarchy or patriarchy is which link should take precedence in case of conflicting relative links, isn't it?

I'm not sure that it works out to be equivalent. Pretend that there are three intermediate relatives between A and a prospective B. Now using the odd parity rule, either there should be exactly one ONE and two ZEROs, or there should be three ONEs. However, if the mapping from (0/1) to (male/female) is changed, then the logic appears to invert itself, because the number of intervening links is itself odd (three in this case). In other words, if A and B have three males intervening, while some other P and Q have three females intervening, not both of them can be simultaneously legal according to the parity rule. If the number of intermediate links were to be even (as is the case with most common first cousin evaluations), then the mapping of sex to binary digit shouldn't matter.

it was explained to me that the phrase 'cousin-brother' is a terrible assault on the english language :)

To shay, I shay.

There are enought Pakistani's in England, that they should marry someone there. And if they want to marry someone from Pakistan, then they could move there and marry all there cousins they want.

Oh, now you should marry only people inside the country? Which visa categories are allowed? Are tourists who are inside the country for less than 90 days acceptable? What about Canadians who marry Americans? Are they traitors too? Or is marriage across countries acceptable between Western Europeans, and white Caucasians in general?

Really, there is no need to use women as a shield, Shikhandi-style, for a Lou Dobbs argument. Even Lou Dobbs hasn't stooped that low yet.

No it not ok if they marry there cousins.

this is obviously an attempt at creating a new language--where "there" means 'Pakistan' and "not ok" means "Muslim"

No it not ok if they marry there cousins.

this is obviously an attempt at creating a new language--where "there" means 'Pakistan' and "not ok" means "Muslim"

Gives "No it Muslim if they marry Pakistan cousins".

I'm not yet enlightened. :)

Oh, now you should marry only people inside the country? Which visa categories are allowed? Are tourists who are inside the country for less than 90 days acceptable? What about Canadians who marry Americans? Are they traitors too? Or is marriage across countries acceptable between Western Europeans, and white Caucasians in general?

Don't make me the bad guy. I think most people in England feel the same way about all the uneducated Pakistani's who come to England though marriage.

Other western European Countries have seen there immigration polices changed to the same issue. Holland and Denmark are 2 examples.

Other western European Countries have seen there immigration polices changed to the same issue. Holland and Denmark are 2 examples.

remember, this persnickety approach to immigration forced Mizz Integration Hirsi Ali out of Holland on a technicality.

a frequent theme in your comments is how uneducated all Muslim immigrants are while you repeatedly use "there" instead of "their." (among many other grammatical and comprehension errors) If you're so steamed about the ignorant masses coming in, you should feel compelled to brush up on your English grammar.

Don't make me the bad guy. I think most people in England feel the same way about all the uneducated Pakistani's who come to England though marriage.

What about the uneducated citizens of enlightened Western European countries who have single-digit teeth and sit around all day with beer drooling onto their wifebeaters because they couldn't hold down their jobs, and complain about the bad breaks their country gave them? Should we deport them to Pakistan?

perhaps,this public debate might give rise to taking a medical history prior to arranging a marriage and consequent appropriate premarital medical counseling and prenatal counseling for some of the more common conditions? recessive conditions are not restricted to people from the south asian subcontinent and there already are communities in which this type of counseling is somewhat common prior to marriage. for example(and correct me if i am wrong), ashkenazi jewish couples choose to get tested for tay-sachs and other conditions common in the Ashkenazi jewish community.
in several Mediterranean countries, hereditary anemias like thalassemia are common and premarital and prenatal counseling is commonly offered to couples --thalassemia is very common among certain segments of the south east asian population and similar premarital screening/counseling might be a thought

Wait, I'm sorry, there's a cultural issue at play re: cousin-marriage? I'm sorry, but hasn't the peerage been breeding across first cousins for centuries? It sounds like this is a point of cultural simpatico between white Brits and (desi) Brit Muslims :)

Do we have different words in Hindi or other languages. I'm tryng to find out if the presence / absence of such words indicate any relationship to the "marital arrangements" in that particular culture.

Hindi is similar.

Maybe we're just really lazy, but I call all my cousins (of varying degrees) "Bhenji" and "Bhaji" (unless we're the same age) and all my parents' cousins accordingly. My favorite terms, however, are things like "Nanibhuaji" (my nanaji's sister).

On the topic of marriage with cousins-its looked down upon especially in the Jat Sikhs. I have heard of family members saying that traditionally, ppl avoid arranging marriage if the groom or bride's parents or grandparents have the same last name.

In other words, if A and B have three males intervening, while some other P and Q have three females intervening, not both of them can be simultaneously legal according to the parity rule.

No, parity and xor both give the same result (you need an even number of both 0s and 1s). Basically, in the case of odd number of hops, all combos are legal (is that too kinky for you?) since you cannot simultaneously have two even numbers add up to an odd number.

I've always heard rumors about a high rate of cousin marriages among the Parsi community. But looks like razib's data doesnt support it, at least amonng the B'bay Parsis

Re: #50, although I'm not fond of the practice, marrying within caste/clan groups is not nearly as bad as marrying within families. Relatedness drops off exponentially, meaning that your odds of picking someone closely related at random from a group of several thousand individuals (where "closely related" means that your coeff. of relatedness is significantly higher than the frequency of some common recessive disease) are pretty low.

If a high frequency of first cousin-marriages over many generations results in a population of "inbred tards", it's amazing that Pakistanis are even able to walk around bipedal!

Forgive my defensiveness but I am a Pakistani coming from a family where cousin marriage is the norm rather than the exception, and has been so for generations. Our family is from the Potohar region of Punjab which borders Mirpur in Azad Kashmir where the vast majority of British-Pakistanis are originally from, Yes, we are "country" but we are definitely not stupid, nor are we a bunch of mutant freaks with webbed feet.

As a first generation Canadian, I have struggled with the issue of cousin marriage ever since I learned of the practice. Initially, it was an embarrassing part of my culture that I did not want anyone to know about, but as I matured, I realized it was nothing to be ashamed about. It is a part of my roots. Maybe I won't marry one my cousins but when I look at the results in my own family, I have to doubt the presumption that the risk factor is inordinate. To use my own family as an example, I have over 100 first cousins and not one of them is handicapped, mentally or physically. My brother also married his first cousin and has three beautiful boys.

In saying all of that, I think the more problematic issue for UK Pakistanis is the practice of marrying from the motherland in itself. This is not only contributing to a plethora of problems within the UK (and for the record, I don't consider lack of "integration" a problem - a community doesn't need to be "integrated" within its host culture to be successful, but that's a topic for another post) but in Pakistan as well, but I'll have to save these thoughts for a future post...gotta run now.

124 · digitalcaptive when I look at the results in my own family, I have to doubt the presumption that the risk factor is inordinate.

Look, it all depends on the details of the practice. Occasional marriage with first-cousins isn't particularly dangerous (and nothing to be ashamed about, really!), but sustained intermarriage over generations with first cousins is very dangerous. So, whether it's a problem or not depends on how much out-marriage occurs, not on any sort of exogenous norms from religion, class or culture.

Yes, we are "country" but we are definitely not stupid, nor are we a bunch of mutant freaks with webbed feet.

well, if you want to be accurate, psychometric tests show that pakistanis (and other south asians as a whole) don't do so hot. and pakistanis are certainly underperforming other south asian groups in the UK academically (even bangaldeshis are starting to overtake them!). there is probably some deficit due simply to inbreeding. and there's a reason that geneticists go to pakistan to study rare recessive diseases such as microcephaly.

My brother also married his first cousin and has three beautiful boys.

they'd be better looking all things controlled being outbred. inbreeding tends to increase fluctuating asymmetry. the key here is that inbreeding is a handicap thrown on top of the base of expectation. if you start out with really good material, it will still work out probably. that being said, it makes the odds a little worse than they would be otherwise.

p.s. just so i don't forget, uncle-niece marriages have twice the inbreeding coefficient of first cousin marriages.

No, parity and xor both give the same result (you need an even number of both 0s and 1s). Basically, in the case of odd number of hops, all combos are legal (is that too kinky for you?) since you cannot simultaneously have two even numbers add up to an odd number.

Parity and XOR are equivalent, but the resulting outcome of whether a match is legal or not does depend on how 0/1 is mapped to male/female in case of an odd number of links. I'm pasting a table below, but be warned the formatting might be screwed up.

Relatives        XOR(A,B,C)        XOR(A,B,C)
(A,B,C)          (F=0, M=1)        (F=1,M=0)
F F F                0                1
F F M                1                0
F M F                1                0
F M M                0                1
M F F                1                0
M F M                0                1
M M F                0                1
M M M                1                0

Under the XOR columns, 1 represents a legal match and 0 an illegal one. In both cases, exactly 4 of the 8 combinations are legal, but the two XOR results are bitflipped when the mapping changes. Therefore no combination is legal with both the mappings.

But try it with two relatives instead of three:

Relatives        XOR(A,B)        XOR(A,B)
(A,B)            (F=0, M=1)      (F=1,M=0)
F F                0                0
F M                1                1
M F                1                1
M M                0                0

In this case, irrespective of the mapping, the legal cases are when there is one female and one male in the chain, consequently the mother's brother's child and father's sister's child are legal pairings.

This was what I meant when I said that it depends on the sex->bit mapping. Was this what you had in mind?

Regarding Divya's comment about gotra preventing 'inbreeding', it doesn't, because as Ponniyan said, marrying your cousin on your mom's side is allowed. This is because your cousins on your mom's side will have a different gotra than you.

Also, if pakistanis underperforming academically has to do with inbreeding, shouldn't south indians similarly underperform on these tests as well? As razib's stats show, south indians (with the exception of keralites) have rates of relatedness similar or higher than pakistanis.

"To use my own family as an example, I have over 100 first cousins and not one of them is handicapped, mentally or physically."

Woah. How many uncles and aunts do you have?

Regarding Divya's comment about gotra preventing 'inbreeding', it doesn't, because as Ponniyan said, marrying your cousin on your mom's side is allowed. This is because your cousins on your mom's side will have a different gotra than you.

Johnson, I said gotra supposedly prevents inbreeding. I don't really know what gotra is about, but when I asked, I was told that it's something people consider when fixing marriages in order to prevent inbreeding. I did not know marrying cousins was allowed either, so there goes that theory.

Regarding Divya's comment about gotra preventing 'inbreeding', it doesn't, because as Ponniyan said,marrying your cousin on your mom's side is allowed. This is because your cousins on your mom's side will have a different gotra than you.

Absolutely incorrect. In North India mom's side cousins are still cousin-brothers and cousin-sisters. Marraige with a couson-sister or cousin-brother from Mom's side would never occur.
Oh the generalizations about India !!!!
Someone learned once said that "When you are saying something true about India, you are also saying something absolutely false"

Razib,

I'll be honest I've been a lurker of gnxp, and know what you're all about and frankly I can't stand you. However, I'll try to put that aside here and deal with the issue at hand.

On what foundation can the underperformance of Pakistani children in UK schools be attributed in whole, or in part, to the prevalence of first cousin marriages within their community? I'd really like to see the study that can isolate the culture of these children from their "inbred ness", and make a credible case for that theory. Not only that, how are you going to separate the fact that British-Pakistani school children often have at least one parent with little or no understanding of the English language from the fact those parents are often related. So what then would take precedence in impacting the child's performance in school?

I know far too much about my culture and my people, the good and the bad, to lend credence to "genetic determinism" being a major source of our problems without substantive proof.

This topic makes me think though how is it even possible for a population where cousin marriages are so frequent to show such a tremendous amount of diversity in terms of expressed traits? We range from dark haired and dark skinned (like black) to blue eyed and blonde haired, often within the same immediate family. So at least in terms of phenotypic diversity, us, Potoharis/Mirpuris show a lot more diversity than the average South Asian or European population for that matter.

----

Johnson,

I have 12 uncles and 15 aunts.

Both my grandfathers had two wives, and not that's by circumstance rather than by choice...ha.

Also for the record, my parents are second cousins through my grandfathers and unrelated via my grandmothers. In spite of that, I turned out intelligent and symmetrical.

I know that not all first cousin marriages result in genetic defects. For instance, Charles Darwin married his first cousin and they had I think 10 children who all turned out fine. What I don't understand is how bad genes from first cousin marriages are passed on if the birth defects can restrict how long the child lives? For first cousin marriages that are not arranged, I think that both cousins should marry only if both decide not to have children. For the arranged first cousin marriages, I don't understand how families can go through with that when they face the risk of birth defects? If it's for the sake of inheritance they should consider that their is a chance their heir won't survive to adulthood.

I'd really like to see the study that can isolate the culture of these children from their "inbred ness", and make a credible case for that theory. Not only that, how are you going to separate the fact that British-Pakistani school children often have at least one parent with little or no understanding of the English language from the fact those parents are often related. So what then would take precedence in impacting the child's performance in school?

1) bangladeshis are more foreign-born than pakistani, who are actually a relatively native-born community among brownz. that's why the pakistani (especially) educational performance is so dispiriting. i think it's probably a generalized issue with lack of integration and what not.

2) but, i didn't say it was all due to inbreeding, but i'm saying that the likelihood is that some effect does occur. breeding with close relatives does have a host of depressive effects on expectation. this isn't something i'm making up, it's quantitatively well attested. e.g., the risk of deleterious recessive doubles with first cousin marriages. IQs of children of first cousins are about 5 points lower than they should be taking into account heritability, the parents' IQs and regression to the mean. these are straightforward quantitative genetic calculations and inbreeding is a "correction factor."

This topic makes me think though how is it even possible for a population where cousin marriages are so frequent to show such a tremendous amount of diversity in terms of expressed traits? We range from dark haired and dark skinned (like black) to blue eyed and blonde haired, often within the same immediate family. So at least in terms of phenotypic diversity, us, Potoharis/Mirpuris show a lot more diversity than the average South Asian or European population for that matter.

you obviously weren't a thorough lurker. two points

1) inbreeding does not necessarily decrease total genetic diversity as much as you think. rather, it strongly reapportions it. in fact, let's say that you have two alleles where 1 is dominant to 2. if you have them assorting in the population randomly the frequency of phenotypes is going to be 3/4 of the dominant type, and 1/4 of the recessive type. if you assort those who manifest the recessive type preferentially each generation you will have a situation where 1/2 of the population exhibits the dominant type and 1/2 the recessive, though the allele frequencies remain the same. in this way inbreeding can increase population level variance because of the emergence of distinct genotypic pools.

2) though, on average, inbreeding does reduce effective population and so result in greater power for stochastic forces to fix deleterious recessives.

3) if you read gnxp you know that gene flow is a strong parameter. the persistence of extant phenotypic diverse is an illustration of that. inbreeding coefficients are high in relative senses, most of the loci are still not identical by descent. i'm not implying that your people are selfing clones which are purging all genetic variation out of the system.

4) there is the issue of genetic load. there is some work which shows that repeated cousin-f**king leads to high enough early mortality rates that the burden of recessives is reduced from the population because they are exposed to selection. that might be the case with your inbred clan (there is some data on this with south indian groups who habitually engaged in uncle-niece marriage which is 2 X as problematic as first cousin marriage).

In spite of that, I turned out intelligent and symmetrical.

as i keep saying, i'm not asserting deterministic truths. there are plenty of inbred people who are normal. but a disproportionate number of people with illnesses are inbred. i don't see what's so difficult to understand? in any case, it isn't like the muslim nations aren't away of this issue, as i noted saudi physicians are getting really good at treating a host of rare recessive diseases. we all carry around recessives that we're not aware of and rarely manifest in societies we getting it on with cousins isn't the norm. in societies where around 1/2 of the marriages are between first cousins they expose a much larger proportion of their rare recessives and so doctors have to get good at diagnosing weird ailments. so i guess cousin-marriage is good for people like bongbreaker, keeps them employed ;-)

What I don't understand is how bad genes from first cousin marriages are passed on if the birth defects can restrict how long the child lives?

each human has several new bad recessive mutations that their parents don't have. we then pass these mutations on to our children. so first cousin marriages could be an issue just because new mutations that emerged in one of their grandparent's generation got passed down to them. also, not all bad mutations are fatal. a lot of them just reduce fitness somewhat. think of albinism.

133 · Noma said

For first cousin marriages that are not arranged, I think that both cousins should marry only if both decide not to have children.

I think this is a bit strong. Why not genetic counselling?

How does risk of birth defects due to first-cousin marriages compare to risk of birth defects due to other reasons? Wouldn't a part of the risk depend inherently on the kind of genes the couple have to begin with?

Say, pregnant women consuming alcohol. In some cultures nobody blinks an eye when a glass of wine is consumed though some risks exist due to alcohol consumption. Are birth defects due to cousin marriages on par with these?

I don't think it is rational to dismiss something without a comparison of all risks (no matter how icky some find the idea of marrying the cousins). In general, it is a good idea to know about all the risks while considering children.

Considering an ideal world:
Perhaps government could institute genetic counselling if they are so worried about the effect of birth defects on public health. Wouldn't that atleast make the couple educated on what they could be getting into?

Btw, wasn't (is?) there a requirement for blood test before marriage license could be issued in some US states?

How does risk of birth defects due to first-cousin marriages compare to risk of birth defects due to other reasons? Wouldn't a part of the risk depend inherently on the kind of genes the couple have to begin with?

2-3% vs. 4-6% recessive diseases between outbred and first cousins. a genotypic screen would catch things people already knew about (common recessives). the problem is that it wouldn't catch weird stuff that's really rare.

the isolated choices of first cousin marriages as those that occur in the USA isn't as much of a public health issue. but if half of americans married their first cousins it would be an issue. its about numbers. liberty is totally feasible when the impact is minimal. it only because an issue with public health expenses start to be hit by the fact that some people prefer to marry within the family as a "cultural practice."

136 · razib said

2-3% vs. 4-6% recessive diseases between outbred and first cousins. a genotypic screen would catch things people already knew about (common recessives). the problem is that it wouldn't catch weird stuff that's really rare.

I appreciate the comparison. However, I was getting at other "cultural practices" that could cause different birth defects/diseases and not necessarily only recessive diseases.

(Side note: Compare risk of recessive diseases vs. fetal alcohol syndrome - a pregnant woman in western cultural practice may consume an occasional glass of wine while a devout muslim pregnant woman may never touch alcohol. Would cousin marriage practice and alcohol consumption practice have same public health costs? Could the public health costs be better managed by educating a wider population about fetal alcohol syndrome? -- this is just an example for comparison)

The problem is, there is always going to be "unknown" weird stuff. How would I know that too much inhalation of a household air-freshner isn't causing some fetal defects?. Why should just one thing become a target?

On the other note, I wasn't particularly thinking of US in context of cousin marriages. This was brought up as a public health issue in UK. I don't often find completely rational discussions when public health is tied up with issues of comparably low health risk. (e.g., obesity becomes an "epidemic" and Australia seems to have included BMI in health screening for new immigrants - I am yet to understand the relationship between BMI of a new immigrant and the additional increase of public health cost. Shouldn't obesity of existing population be of more concern? -- ok I stop here).

Why does "immigrant cultural practice" of cousin marriage becomes a public health risk when the British themselves had a common practice of first cousin marriage until recently? Couldn't the risk be significantly reduced with genetic counselling?

Why aren't other cultural practices (belonging to different cultural/ethnic groups) being listed on the same note? I think that would give a comprehensive insight into cultural practices vs. public health risks instead of targeting just one cultural/ethnic group.

I hope I am coming across clearly on the issue of risk comparison. For example, the risk of a road accident is higher than a plane crash. But still, plane crash recieves high publicity. Is relation between public health risk and the cousin marriage becoming one such thing used for politics?

[Bah, I know. Too many questions!]

RE: consuming alcohol while pregnant, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_alcohol_syndrome#Prevention -- given the public health costs for a child born with FAS, significant efforts have been taken as far as preventative action is concerned. The focus is generally on alcoholism, as opposed to the occasional drink (see stats in link). And, at least in some western societies, there is significant awareness (even a taboo) regarding the dangers of pregnant women drinking.

As for this, there have been enough studies done, regarding alcohol consumption, and with cousin-marriage, to get a rough estimate on public health costs. The former *is* discouraged, and from a societal-cost pov, so should the latter.

Noma:

What I don't understand is how bad genes from first cousin marriages are passed on if the birth defects can restrict how long the child lives?

"1) bangladeshis are more foreign-born than pakistani, who are actually a relatively native-born community among brownz. that's why the pakistani (especially) educational performance is so dispiriting. i think it's probably a generalized issue with lack of integration and what not."

Dude, give me a break. If UK Pakistanis are marrying their cousins, they're marrying them from their ancestoral villages. The culture of the UK born Pakistanis therefore remains perpetually that of the 1960s era remote Punjabi village. This is a culture that never cared about formal education. I would attribute the poor performance of UK Pakistanis to that cultural heritage moreso than their "inbred" genetics, but of course, for someone seeking to justify racism against various populations, even hinting at that kind of socio-cultural explanation won't do.

2) but, i didn't say it was all due to inbreeding, but i'm saying that the likelihood is that some effect does occur. breeding with close relatives does have a host of depressive effects on expectation. this isn't something i'm making up, it's quantitatively well attested. e.g., the risk of deleterious recessive doubles with first cousin marriages. IQs of children of first cousins are about 5 points lower than they should be taking into account heritability, the parents' IQs and regression to the mean. these are straightforward quantitative genetic calculations and inbreeding is a "correction factor."

Reference the studies. I would really like to know how MUCH riskier it is, and what basis the conclusion that "IQs of children of first cousins are about 5 points lower than they should be" was made.

I have my doubts that the risk is significant enough to jump to all these explanations on everything from why UK-Pakistanis are not "integrated" to why there's terrorism in the Middle East, even as a "partial" explantation. It's foolhearty and smacks of someone with an ulterior agenda.

Besides, there's frequent enough out-marriage within the Pakistani community to make that kind of conclusion-jumping about us, a much more complicated affair than assumed. Not everyone in my "inbred" clan is married to a cousin, they've also married complete foreigners from the Burmese women they brought back during the second world war to men and women from unrelated clans. All fairly common practices within our community, yet apparently that history is to be ignored when applying the findings of a limited number of studies to entire population groups.

A study on inbreeding depression and IQ in North Indian Muslim children found a deficit of 11 points for the inbreds.

http://www.popline.org/docs/1031/091810.html

I'm certain this is a significant factor as to why Pakistanis in the UK underperform academically compared to Indian children.

This just in...

www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10640683

Chaz -- you take a study on children in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, and use it to determine ("I am certain") an outcome for British children of Punjabi immigrants? Too much of a stretch.

Ikram, Pakistanis in the UK have IQs 6-7 points lower than Indians. Given that roughly 55% of Pakistanis marry first cousins, is it not at least likely that inbreeding is a causative factor? Regarding academic achievement there may be various cultural factors at work, but the relation to an IQ deficit caused by inbreeding looks pretty likely.

>>Ikram, Pakistanis in the UK have IQs 6-7 points lower than Indians. Given that roughly 55% of Pakistanis marry first cousins, is it not at least likely that inbreeding is a causative factor?

Wrong.

Inbreeding increases intelligence and mental strength. Indeed, most intelligent communities across the world have selective inbreeding as a part and parcel of their culture.

What inbreeding does is to reduce physical strength and endurance. It decreases resistance to common diseases/viruses and makes one more prone to congenital birth defects.

M. Nam

Chaz,

So first you're going to ascribe this supposed 6-7 pt. average IQ gap between Pakistani and Indian school children in the UK mostly to "inbreeding" and then on top of that you're going to jump to the "certain" conclusion that this rather small IQ gap is a "significant" reason why Pakistanis are under-performing in school vs. Indians in the UK? C'mon man, you really expect that to convince a skeptic? Do better.

Beyond which if I'm to swallow this propaganda whole, I have to ask myself this question wouldn't one expect a significantly higher IQ gap than a mere 10 points given the compound effects of generational "inbreeding" ...

digitalcaptive

1) Inbreeding reduces IQ. I used the study of North Indian Muslim children because this population is more similar to Pakistanis. Other inbreeding studies of different populations find a smaller IQ deficit of around 5 points, the greater figure for North Indian Muslims could well be due to the "compound effects of generational inbreeding". If we assume that the inbreeding IQ deficit of UK Pakistanis is similar to that of North Indian Muslims, and 55% of them are inbred we get an IQ deficit of ~6 points.

2) IQ significantly affects academic performance (although I never suggested it was the only factor).

I don't see why it's so implausible or controversial that the lower IQ of UK Pakistanis might affect their academic performance.

You didn't use the word "might" earlier, you said you were "certain". Big difference.

Also, to say IQ significantly affects academic performance is one thing, but to use that to say that a gap of less than 10 is a) mostly due to inbreeding, and b) that pakistani school-children are lagging WELL behind in school mostly because of this IQ gap simply doesn't sit well with me.

Inbreeding increases intelligence and mental strength. Indeed, most intelligent communities across the world have selective inbreeding as a part and parcel of their culture.

Where are these intelligent communities that encourage selective inbreeding? Clayton, Georgia?

MoorNam:

Inbreeding increases intelligence and mental strength. Indeed, most intelligent communities across the world have selective inbreeding as a part and parcel of their culture.

Also, wtf is up with everyone getting so defensive? The cousin-marrying proclivities of the Pakistani Brits(and the rural Finnish, may I add) were even discussed in first year genetics class, and I live neither in the UK nor in the USA.

check out the blue people of kentucky
http://www.rootsweb.com/~kyperry3/Blue_Fugates_Troublesome_Creek.html

Digitalcaptive, dont you think it would be mad nasty procreating with your cousin? If you marry your cousin, your kids marry their cousins and your grandchildren marry their cousins, somethings going to go wrong by that time.

Chaz -- you have a hypothesis about the intelligence of Mirpuri-Britons -- fine. But you haven't explained why a study of children in a town in Uttar Pradesh supports your hypothesis on the intelligence of children in Bradford, UK.

Exaclty what factors make the population studies in Aligarh similar to that of Pakistani Britons? Why have very high levels of inbreeding among South Indian populations (see Razib'stats above) not brought about the same result? Why do you think the result of inbreeding in the UK will be similar to Aligarh and not, say, Pondichery or rural Tamil Nadu?

If you're going to make strong definitive claims (you said "I'm certain"), provide strong evidence. The study you cite does not provide definitive evidence for the claim you make.

Ikram

My hypothesis is that inbreeding is lowering the IQ of British Pakistanis, given that inbreeding is well known to reduce IQ in other populations (not just North Indian Muslims) I don't see why British Pakistanis would be any different.

"Why have very high levels of inbreeding among South Indian populations (see Razib'stats above) not brought about the same result?"

Have studies been done on these populations regarding the inbreeding IQ deficit? Did they produce a different result?

Duh, only Royals can be inbred.

a foolish choice of title, actually: the Habsburg family are famous through Europe, with Carlos II, the last Habsburg king of Spain, cited as the disastrous final consequence of generations of cousin marriage. One marriage between first cousins will increase a low probability of handicap to a higher but still low level. As Razib points out and the Habsburgs show, it is repeated cousin marriages that have a disastrous effect.
On the other hand, repeated cousin marriages may concentrate useful genetic qualities: one English family, famous for its long tradition of cousin marriags, produced many depressives and also great composers, scientists, businessmen, economists and many eminent but lesser people. I refer to the Wedgwood-Darwin family, which included Josiah Wedgwood, Charles Darwin, Ralph Vaughan Williams, J.M. Keynes, Francis Galton and quite few secondary emineneces.

Also, wtf is up with everyone getting so defensive? The cousin-marrying proclivities of the Pakistani Brits(and the rural Finnish, may I add) were even discussed in first year genetics class, and I live neither in the UK nor in the USA.

Meena, I already explained in an earlier post why I would get "defensive". It's not that hard to understand, especially when someone refers to your people as "inbred tards". I'm sure they didn't refer to Pakistani Britons in manner in your first year genetics class.

Digitalcaptive, dont you think it would be mad nasty procreating with your cousin? If you marry your cousin, your kids marry their cousins and your grandchildren marry their cousins, somethings going to go wrong by that time.

It doesn't matter what I think is nasty. All I know is that this was a traditional practice, and not something new. For generations cousins have married and what's the result? Are these cousin-marrying populations significantly "inferior" to those that have not? I just don't see enough substantive evidence for it to be used as a rational for everything from Pakistani under-acheivement in British schools to the fall of muslim empires, to the point where people are absolutely "certain" of it. Give me a break. From my perspective, all of this just seems like another way to malign a people that refuse to "integrate" and "westernize" themselves. Oh well.

digitalcaptive:

Meena, I already explained in an earlier post why I would get "defensive". It's not that hard to understand, especially when someone refers to your people as "inbred tards". I'm sure they didn't refer to Pakistani Britons in manner in your first year genetics class.

156 · Roger said

a foolish choice of title, actually:

Forgive my inability to comprehend you, but I don't see how it's foolish, given your comment. I'm open to understanding why I might have made a mistake, but your explanation just confirms that Royals are married off to their cousins, and people don't seem to care about that.

I'm not sure why you find it objectionable...it was just a catchy title which is consistent with my voice and the overall preference for snark on SM.

There was another comment I was confused by re: gothras preventing inbreeding and someone said it wasn't true, because you could marry a cousin on your mom's side...because that person would be from a different gothra. If they are from a different one, isn't it okay? Isn't the prohibition only about knockin' chappals with someone from your own clan (which seems logical, though I'm neither a geneticist nor an expert on South Indian customs?

Anna writes:

>>There was another comment I was confused by re: gothras preventing inbreeding and someone said it wasn't true, because you could marry a cousin on your mom's side...because that person would be from a different gothra. If they are from a different one, isn't it okay?

Gotra system is practised only by Hindus of certain castes. They point to the original few dozen rishis thousands of years ago whose descendants spread out on the subcontinent. If you marry someone within a gotra, it's like marrying a sibling. Gotras are also a loose way of defining blood groups.

As far as emprical evidence goes, the Gotra classification has seemed to worked pretty well upto now.

Some of my relatives who have married within their Gotra point out to their normal children as evidence that the Gotra is just humbug. What they don't know is that these effects show up after two-three generations, not right away.

M. Nam

There was another comment I was confused by re: gothras preventing inbreeding and someone said it wasn't true, because you could marry a cousin on your mom's side...because that person would be from a different gothra. If they are from a different one, isn't it okay? Isn't the prohibition only about knockin' chappals with someone from your own clan (which seems logical, though I'm neither a geneticist nor an expert on South Indian customs?

gotra refers to the sage you are descended from, and is inherited from the paternal line. gotra doesn't preclude marrying within the clan, not all members of a clan belong to the same gotra. However, gotra is not a fail-safe to prevent inbreeding because people can marry relatives descended from their mother's side (for example, mother's sibling's child) without violating this restriction.

Also, I have another question: Is gotra universal to all Hindus, or is it Brahmin-specific?

Meena,

"Where was anyone referred to as 'tards'?"

Um, within the body of this thread. See post #9.

That's Razib, tho. It's not like the people in the original article used the term or anything near it. Just because you object to someone's use of the phrase(one who is notorious for such provocative terms) doesn't mean all avenues on discussion of inter-familial marriages should be closed off...and they ARE a bad thing.

btw we (my family) are Tambrams and adhere to the gotra system...

Meena,

As well, I didn't say anything about native (read: White) Britons, so I don't know what you're going on about in that respect. I said Pakistani Britons.

the gotra system is cute and all, but as has been pointed out, flawed. it would, for example, prohibit marrying a tenth-cousin, but permit marrying a maternal first cousin. yeah.. that's not how it works. chances are, if you marry someone of the same gotra(m), and you don't share any known ancestors, that's much, much safer than marrying your first cousin of a different gotra.

166 · jackal said

the gotra system is cute and all, but as has been pointed out, flawed. it would, for example, prohibit marrying a tenth-cousin, but permit marrying a maternal first cousin. yeah.. that's not how it works. chances are, if you marry someone of the same gotra(m), and you don't share any known ancestors, that's much, much safer than marrying your first cousin of a different gotra.

I believe among people who have a gotra system, marrying within the gotra is taboo and marrying cousins is also taboo. Its not like gotra system is the only restriction.

nope, us tambrams have followed the gotra system historically, and a couple of my mom's cousins married their maternal first-cousins. of course now it's discouraged. but even a few decades ago, my dad's uncles/aunts were trying to convince him to marry a cousin, which he refused to for obvious reasons.

I believe among people who have a gotra system, marrying within the gotra is taboo and marrying cousins is also taboo. Its not like gotra system is the only restriction.

Not true among Tamil Brahmins, at least. Cousin marriage is not uncommon, at least in my parents' generation. The non-inbreeding justification for gotras smacks of pseudoscience.

As far as emprical evidence goes, the Gotra classification has seemed to worked pretty well upto now.

I know tons of my friends' families who have religiously followed the gotra system, while still marrying maternal relatives, and there is a disproportionate and non-negligible number of them who have assorted chronic conditions.

168 · jackal said

nope, us tambrams have followed the gotra system historically, and a couple of my mom's cousins married their maternal first-cousins. of course now it's discouraged. but even a few decades ago, my dad's uncles/aunts were trying to convince him to marry a cousin, which he refused to for obvious reasons.

All of the Gujarati Brahmins I know think marrying their cousins is taboo and they have a gotra system. I asked a tambram here and he said his family also considers cousin marriage taboo. May be cousin marriage is more of a village, pastoral tradition?

JGandhi:

May be cousin marriage is more of a village, pastoral tradition?

Judging by the lyrics of this song, probable. It's essentially an ode to the singer's father's sister's daughter and his reluctance to look outside the family, and the movie is quintessentially rural in character, as are many Bharathiraja movies.

Rahul:

Also, I have another question: Is gotra universal to all Hindus, or is it Brahmin-specific?

Can't speak for everyone here, but usually a gotram that is named after a rishi is a Brahmin characteristic. There do exist non-rishi gotrams like Siva Gotram and Vishnu Gotram, but not everyone identifies with them (or the system).

Parity and XOR are equivalent, but the resulting outcome of whether a match is legal or not does depend on how 0/1 is mapped to male/female in case of an odd number of links

pingpong, I also meant to thank you for the boolean logic table.~A xor ~B = A xor B, and I was just extending the result without thinking properly about it, and that's where xor differs from parity. Good, you learn something new every day.

All of the Gujarati Brahmins I know think marrying their cousins is taboo and they have a gotra system. I asked a tambram here and he said his family also considers cousin marriage taboo. May be cousin marriage is more of a village, pastoral tradition?

It's taboo now certainly, but up to a couple of decades ago, in my educated, urban tambram extended family, there were a few cousin marriages.

Anyhow, saying gotras along prevent inbreeding is silly, and, as Rahul said, a modern pseudoscientific attempt at rationalizing gotrams. They give you some measure of patrilineal descent, but if you don't have any known common ancestors (in the past 100 years) it's way safer than maternal cousin marriage (or vice versa in malayali matrineal gotram systems, I presume).

Anna: my compplaint about the title wasn't wholly serious either. i was referring to the fact that after the Habsburgs cousin intermariage in the European royal families became less common. However, the example of the Wedgwood-Darwin family seems to show that beneficent qualities may also be made more common by cousin marriage. The gotra system referred to may have good effects in making marriage partners more dispersed, but your cousin will share the same genes as you regardless of gotra, so the same risks are there. It's not the occasional cousin mariage but persistent and repeated cousin marriage that has a serious effect. The fact that current generations are healthy does not alter the fact that potential dangerous factors become more common with every such marriage.
Some geneticist pointed out that the most efficient change in marital behaviour in rural England wasn't the table of kindred or injunctions against cousin marriage but the invention of the bicycle; it's ironic that the invention on the aeroplane makes cousin-marriage easier now.

175 · Roger said

The fact that current generations are healthy does not alter the fact that potential dangerous factors become more common with every such marriage.
Some geneticist pointed out that the most efficient change in marital behaviour in rural England wasn't the table of kindred or injunctions against cousin marriage but the invention of the bicycle; it's ironic that the invention on the aeroplane makes cousin-marriage easier now.

Are young Pakistani men in the UK being forced into cousin marriages, or are they choosing to get married to girls in rural Pakistan?

Also, I have another question: Is gotra universal to all Hindus, or is it Brahmin-specific?

Interestingly, even the Jatts refer to their clan names (such as Dhillon, Sandhu, Dhaliwal, Gill, etc) as 'got'. Although it is not the same system and has none of the ritual basis that Brahmin gotras do. But I believe it does affect their marriage choices...apparently they can't marry people from their paternal or maternal got, or their dadi's (paternal grandmother's) got...but, correct me if I'm wrong here Jatto, but maybe they can still marry from their nani's (maternal grandmother's) got? Seems like a good system to prevent inbreeding while still marrying within the caste. Muslim Jatts in Pakistan I believe do marry their first cousins though.

"Absolutely incorrect. In North India mom's side cousins are still cousin-brothers and cousin-sisters. Marraige with a couson-sister or cousin-brother from Mom's side would never occur."

I never said that cousins on your mom's side aren't cousins. What I said was that the gotra system is patrilineal for the most part. That means the kids of your aunts do not necessarily have the same gotra as you. In the case that the gotra system is matrilineal (I suppose among some groups in Kerala), well then the kids of your uncles do not necessarily have the same gotra as you. Either way, the gotra system does NOT prevent you from marrying cousins birthed from either the aunts or uncles of your family.

example: say your grandfather's gotra, and by extension you and your father's gotra, is bharadwaj (or bharathwaj or however you may spell it).

your mom's sister marries a guy who's gotra is Bhargava. Her child, your first cousin, will now be Bhargava.

And, according to gotra rules, it would be acceptable to marry that cousin.

johnson, you seem to be describing southern indian (if anything) traditions. What you are talking about certainly does not hold true in the North.

I think the real hard-core gotra system in the true sense only applies to southern brahmins.

80 · JGandhi said

Most of my relatives use the words "cousin-brother" or "cousin-sister" when referring to cousins. Its also customary to call older cousins bai or ben (brother or sister). Do Pakistanis or Indian Muslims do this? I'm guessing probably not since that would make cousin marriage even more weird.

Every (US) Pakistani/Indian Muslim I have met do. I don't see why it should be any different. Then again, Bhai or Baji/Aapi is used as an honorific term for any older peer and does not specifically connote blood brother/sibling in this use.

Am always fascinated by discussions of UK Desis...

134 · razib said

1) bangladeshis are more foreign-born than pakistani, who are actually a relatively native-born community among brownz. that's why the pakistani (especially) educational performance is so dispiriting. i think it's probably a generalized issue with lack of integration and what not.

Could you say more about why you think nativity should result in higher achievement? U.S. immigration research suggests that successive generations of non-white immigrants fare increasingly worse. (call it the brown factor)

2) but, i didn't say it was all due to inbreeding, but i'm saying that the likelihood is that some effect does occur.

But, quantitatively, wouldn't that just be a drop in the bucket? C'mon, how much of the difference do you reckon it actually accounts for? I'm with digitalcaptive on this - there are far too many other (largely structural) factors that likely account for the disparities.

177 Amitabh said

Interestingly, even the Jatts refer to their clan names (such as Dhillon, Sandhu, Dhaliwal, Gill, etc) as 'got'.

The idea of writing a song based on reciting caste names strikes me as ridiculous, frankly. Still, I would have been far more intrigued by a Southie remix: how many "Muthusubramaniams," "Mahalingams," and "Vaidyanathans" can a singer fit into one verse before running out of breath?

"Johnson"
Under NO conditions may the sisters children or brothers children marry each other according to Hindu Dharma. Chidren of brother and sister may marry.
Grand-children of sisters MAY marry, I am not sure. Children of sisters and children of brothers are considered blood siblings :-) and thus taboo to marry even with different gotras. In the South, first right of refusal is for the mama(brother of mother of bride) or his sons. That is why in many marriages, it is the mama who brings the bride to the mandap.

I'm certain that some Hindus in Kerala marry their cousins; I had a classmate who knew that he was going to marry his cousin right from the time they were kids (she was his "murapennu"). I know that they were madly in love and wrote to/called each other regularly when he was 15 and in Boarding School; having a girlfriend at that age and his parents being cool with that made him quite popular. The only reference that I could pick up from a bit of googling was from this site:

It is also worth mention here that all Hindu communities in Kerala except the Namboodiris practiced cousin marriage. A boy could rightfully claim the hand of the daughter of his maternal uncle or paternal aunt, in marriage. Among Muslims cousin marriage is a common practice but Christians never marry among their blood relations and cousins.

"johnson, you seem to be describing southern indian (if anything) traditions. What you are talking about certainly does not hold true in the North.

I think the real hard-core gotra system in the true sense only applies to southern brahmins."

Perhaps that is so. I'm not too sure how it is in the North. So North Indian brahmins don't use the gotra system?

Regardless, as many south indians hindus DO practise cousin marriage, how can it be considered taboo according to hindu dharma, as these people are clearly hindu?

I'm certain that some Hindus in Kerala marry their cousins; I had a classmate who knew that he was going to marry his cousin right from the time they were kids (she was his "murapennu").

I'd assume that the South Indian Hindu culture starting with food habits and marriage practises are the same (though could differ across castes) and I think mostly that assumption is right. The reason why people are claiming it (marriages within the family) is not present in Kerala is because there are a far fewer Hindus in Kerala, they are either in a minority ( less than 50% ) or just hovering above 50%, so their influence is not that much and people might not be aware.

Regarding "gotra", I think it is a big deal for Brahmins / upper castes, but not so for lower castes. I have heard the priests ask for Gothra when they do certain rituals like performing a puja / "thithi" commemorating your dead ancestors. I believe the sanskrit slokas differ gothra wise. But for marriage alliances gotra is not a major blocker.

I'd not worry too much about cousin marriages contributing to the genetic disorders. Not being a geneticist, I think it is a game of probability (and increase of risk from 2% to 4% is not that high), and I'd assume people take the risk for a "hot" cousin if it is allowed in their "cultural" groups. I never knew that marrying "cross cousins" was taboo in North India for long.

"Are young Pakistani men in the UK being forced into cousin marriages, or are they choosing to get married to girls in rural Pakistan?"

I don't know, JGandhi, and my knowledge is limited to personal observattion that acquaintances with ancestors from the Indian subcontinent, whatever their religion, do seem to marry cousins from home more often than is statistically expected. At a guess, this is from a desire to keep family ties despite geographical distance; indeed, if they lived in the same place as their kindred there might not be the same emphasis on it as there seems to be.

186 · Ponniyin Selvan said

The reason why people are claiming it (marriages within the family) is not present in Kerala is because there are a far fewer Hindus in Kerala, they are either in a minority ( less than 50% ) or just hovering above 50%, so their influence is not that much and people might not be aware.

Yes, there are practically no Hindus left:

Kerala's principal religions are Hinduism (56.1%), Islam (24.7%), and Christianity (19%). [link]

To me, "56%" is not just hovering over 50%, nor does it scream "endangered minority". But don't let facts or reality get in the way of myth-making. One state in India doesn't have an overwhelming number of Hindus vs. other religious adherents and it's a crisis!

lol my mother told me in 06 or 07 that she wanted to set me up with my cousin. i was aghast. tambram from a small village in palghat (palakkad) district in Kerala.

Kairali:

Do you have a problem in comprehension?. Get some help.

Am probably a little late to this discussion but as a Christian from Kerala, I understand that it is acceptable to marry a third cousin from the mother's side but from the father's side it is not acceptable to the church to marry any one closer than a seventh cousin. Don't ask me the rationale for this.

My wife is a Hindu from Kerala and although - as has been pointed out by others - they are allowed to marry first cousins under certain circumstances, what is striking is that when we meet other Christians from Kerala, it almost invariably turns out that there is a relationship lurking somewhere whether directly or through marriage. We seem to encounter less of this when we meet with Hindus from Kerala.

Other Christian mutineers from Kerala will be able to relate to what I am saying because part of the convo when Christian Keralites meet, seems to invariably dwell on the family name (veetu paru) and thereafter there is the invariable identification of relationships. For someone not acquainted with the strictures against Kerala Christians not being allowed to marry relatives, I would not blame them for thinking that Kerala Christians must be a pretty inbred group!

I'm the product of roughly sixteen generations of cousin marriages. My parents and one set of grandparents were both first cousins as well. And I've failed most of my classes in school. hahahaha My IQ must be in the negatives.

I'm guilty of this - often due to family and social isolation,
kids tend to fall in love, lust or some combination of the two with
essentially their close genetic blood relative (of the same generation)

...glad all my cousins look like gorillas (these days at least)

.....for better or worse - very little can stop the juggernaut or power of love...

:first time you feel it, it may make you mad..." Huey Lewis