-original-20250623123134.jpg)
There I was, just minding my own business, catching up on rugby scores on the Kiwi site Stuff.co.nz, when an article popped up and hijacked my brain. As I read, I found myself muttering a growing chorus of "WTF?!" with every scroll.
The piece, penned by Lloyd Burr, opened with this gem: "It’s legal to have a consensual sexual relationship with your siblings, parents, and grandparents in France. Belgium, Japan and more than 70 other countries too." WTF indeed.
Mr Burr continued by way of background; “The late Queen Elizabeth II and her husband Prince Phillip were cousins. Third cousins, but still cousins. They were both great-great grandchildren of Queen Victoria. Yet no one really batted an eyelid or called their consensual relationship ‘incest’. Queen Victoria herself kept it much closer to home, marrying her first cousin Albert. They had nine children together, yet the pair aren’t renowned for their incest or inbreeding. Going back through many of the monarchies in Europe, there are similar examples whether it’s the Spanish Habsburgs (and their infamous enlarged jaw) or the Russian Romanovs - there’s been a lot of incest and inbreeding.” WTF!
So what about Australia? Surely, we’ve got some clear laws in place. Thankfully, yes. According to Criminal Defence Lawyers Australia:
What is Incest (Legally Speaking)?
In Australia, incest refers to sexual relations with close family members. This includes:
Grandparents and grandchildren
Consent? Not a defence. Even if both parties are adults and willing, it’s still a crime.
Why Is It a Crime?
WA-Specific Laws (Section 329 of the Criminal Code)
A rebuttable presumption exists that the accused knew they were related. Lack of consent or coercion also plays a role in defence.
Alright, law covered. Now let’s get back to Burr’s WTF fact-fest.
Countries Where Incest is Legal
Ok so that’s the law and that’s reassuring, but back to the WTF facts and Mr Burrs article as written. Believe it or not there are:
Some of the nations where it’s entirely legal are advanced western countries like Belgium, France, Japan, and Taiwan. Others like Hong Kong, Germany, Ireland, and Germany allow incest, but only for consenting same-sex adults. Even two states in the United States allow consensual incest: New Jersey and Rhode Island. Let me interject here – WTF!
Meta AI chimes in too: Incest is legal in countries like Belgium, China, France, Japan, Latvia, Portugal, Russia (marriage prohibited), South Korea, Turkey (marriage prohibited). Incest is legal for adults only in Argentina, Israel (over 21), Ivory Coast, the Netherlands (marriage prohibited), the Philippines (marriage prohibited), and Spain. Incest is legal in Brazil if over 14 and in Thailand if over 15; however, most marriages in these countries are disallowed or prohibited. Incest is legal in Italy … unless it becomes a scandal. Classic Italy.
Let me once again interject here - WTF!!!
The Science: Why It's Dangerous
Genetically speaking, incest is like playing Russian Roulette with DNA.
One of the main reasons for outlawing incest is that there’s a heightened chance of the offspring having genetic disorders. Professor Andrew Shelling from the University of Auckland’s Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Sciences says it comes down to the interaction of recessive genes. “There's five to 10 of them lurking in our DNA somewhere and provided we find a mate who's different to us, that's fine and they may never come to reality. But if our mate turns out to be closely related, then we could have a serious genetic defect appearing,” he says. There are nearly 8,000 different genetic disorders that could appear causing things like cystic fibrosis, organ malformations, intellectual disabilities, blindness, and cleft palates.
“You don't know what's lurking in your DNA and it may be invisible for generations. But if you reproduce with a close relation, your chances of something appearing is much greater. The amount of relation relatedness increases the probability”. Professor Shelling says the chances of an unrelated couple’s child having some sort of defect is around 2-3%. When they’re cousins, it doubles to 4-6%, and if it’s an uncle and niece, it doubles again to 8-12%.
The Ethical Wrap-Up
Mr Burrs Stuff article concludes with advice from the scientists that bears repeating verbatim. “Given that such relationships are almost always harmful, the state has good reason to legislate against it because it is the business of the state to protect people from abuse and exploitation. “In real life, incest probably almost always does cause harm - particularly in cases involving close family members. Such relationships almost always involve exploitation and abuse.”
Having read the article, I recalled a Muslim friend of mine mentioning that in some strictly religious families, it is almost mandatory that first cousins marry first cousins. I checked and it’s not illegal to marry your first cousin in Australia. The criminal law in Australia does not criminalise the conduct of marrying a first cousin.
Conclusion
After all the WTFs, stats, and laws, I couldn’t help but reflect on my time as a young copper in New Zealand, dealing with a few sad cases of incest. Although only a small sample from personal experience those cases were definitely nasty examples of coercion and sexual violence. More a paedophile’s attack on a vulnerable available victim. More a rape than consensual sexual activity between related persons. I suspect that most cases of incest are exactly that.
Behind the legality debates and historical examples lies a sad truth: incest is usually less about love and more about power.
WTF, indeed.
Author: Magnum
For: Langtrees.com
TalkinSex Forum | Perth Escorts | Sydney Escorts | Melbourne Escorts | Brisbane Escorts | Darwin Escorts | Adelaide Escorts | Hobart Escorts | New Zealand Escorts
“Wow reading this actually blew my mind very interesting to read thankyou for sharing ”
“Why incest raises genetic risk Each of us carries a handful of silent, harmful variants (recessive alleles). On their own, they do nothing. They only cause disease when a child inherits two copies of the same recessive variant—one from each parent. For two unrelated people, the odds that they carry the same rare variant are low. When the parents are closely related, they share long stretches of DNA from the same recent ancestors. That greatly increases the chance that they do carry the same recessive variant, and that their child receives both copies. Two useful ideas: • Autosomal-recessive rule: if both parents are carriers of the same recessive variant, each child has a 25% chance of being affected, 50% chance of being a carrier, 25% chance of inheriting neither copy. • Inbreeding coefficient (F): a measure of how related the parents are, and therefore how likely it is their child will receive two copies “identical by descent.” • Parent–child or full siblings: F = 0.25 • Uncle–niece / aunt–nephew: F = 0.125 • First cousins: F = 0.0625 As F rises, the fraction of the genome that becomes homozygous (two identical copies) rises, and the chance that harmful recessives meet increases. What that means in real numbers A rough baseline risk of a serious congenital problem in children of unrelated parents is about 2–3%. • First cousins: risk roughly doubles to ~4–6%. • Uncle–niece/aunt–nephew: roughly ~8–12%. • Siblings/parent–child: substantially higher again, because F is four times that of first cousins. The exact figure depends on which recessive variants are in the family, but the direction is unambiguous: closer relatedness → more homozygosity → more recessive disease. A mini-lesson by picture Think of recessive variants as identical keys hidden in two houses. With strangers, the keys are in different houses—unlikely to form a pair. With relatives, the floor plans overlap; the same hidden key is much more likely to exist in both houses. Children of close relatives are where matching keys meet the same lock. Real-world illustrations (neutral, factual) • The Spanish Habsburgs: Centuries of close intermarriage produced high inbreeding. Charles II of Spain had a calculated inbreeding coefficient near that of a parent–child union and suffered multiple severe health issues; the famous “Habsburg jaw” (mandibular prognathism) became common in the line. • European royal hemophilia: Hemophilia B/A (X-linked) spread through interrelated royal houses via Queen Victoria. This is not caused by cousin marriage per se, but limited mate choice within a small kin network let a rare variant persist and express (e.g., in the Russian Romanovs). • Founder + consanguinity communities: • Old Order Amish (Pennsylvania): increased rates of Ellis–van Creveld syndrome (short stature, polydactyly) and other recessive disorders due to a small founding gene pool and frequent cousin unions. • Mennonite subpopulations: higher prevalence of maple syrup urine disease. • Isolated islands (e.g., Tristan da Cunha): elevated retinitis pigmentosa due to founder effect and endogamy. • Some cousin-marrying populations (e.g., documented UK city cohorts): public-health studies report higher rates of autosomal-recessive conditions compared with city averages. The point is genetics, not stigma: fewer unrelated mates → more shared ancestry → more recessive matches. Two clarifications 1. Incest vs. cousin marriage: both increase homozygosity, but incest (parent–child, siblings) carries far higher risk because relatedness is much closer (F = 0.25). 2. Not every child is affected. Many children of related couples are healthy. The point is probability: the risk is shifted upward because the genome is more likely to align identical recessives. Bottom line You can set aside ethics and culture and still reach the same conclusion. The mechanics of DNA are indifferent: closer biological relatedness increases the chance that rare, harmful recessive alleles meet, and that raises the risk of genetic disease in offspring. That is why, across time and place, populations that restrict mating to close kin see more recessive disorders, and why prohibitions on incest have a straightforward scientific basis, independent of morality.”
“The royal family facts blew my mind. I never knew they were related in that way.”
“That article really is a wild ride of “WTF” moments. While some countries surprisingly allow consensual incest, most outlaw it because of genetic risks, exploitation, and abuse. History shows monarchies practised it, but science makes the dangers clear. Australia’s strict stance feels justified—behind the shocking facts, incest usually hides coercion and harm, not genuine consent.”
“This blog was such a gripping and eye-opening read! It mixed dark topics with a good dose of disbelief and honest commentary. I kept thinking, “WTF?” I had no clue that consensual incest was legal in so many places. Lloyd Burr really dug deep into the legal and historical sides, which added a lot of substance, and the info on the genetic risks really hit home. The ethical take at the end was super impactful—it reminded me that behind every legal technicality, there can be real human harm. It was a tough but necessary read. Thanks for shedding light on this uncomfortable topic! ”
“Turns out, incest is legal in way more countries than you’d think. Thankfully, Australia’s not one of them—science and sanity win here. WTF!”
“Wow, these facts are astonishing and a bit uncomfortable! Crazy how common incest was in royal families and old cultures just to keep power. It’s not something you usually think about, but interesting (and kinda weird) to learn. Thanks for sharing!”
“Thanks Magnus, interesting read. WTF indeed and who would have thought that 79 countries accepting incest as long as it is consensual - that's crazy.”
“Incestuous relationships can lead to increased genetic disorders in offspring due to reduced genetic diversity, raising significant concerns in fields such as genetics and public health.”
By Clicking "I Agree - Enter Langtrees.com" below, you confirm that You
NZ