Talk:Cousin marriage/Archives/2020/April
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Cousin marriage. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Cleanup Needed
This article is in serious need of a cleanup. There are inconsistencies, contradictions, use of pejorative language and a fairly outrageous introduction that asserts that the American view represents "the Western World". The notion that cousin marriage is "stigmatized" in the Western World is referenced by Note 1, but when you read the reference article, you find that apart from two references to the United Kingdom (neither of which were supported or acted upon in that country) the only significant opposition to cousin marriage is in the United States. Similarly, when you look at the world map showing restrictions (and even bans) on cousin marriage (depicted by the color red). The only areas of red on the map are in the United States and in some parts of Asia. There are NO areas of red shown in Europe, South America or Canada - a significant part of the Western World!
Also in the introduction, the incidence of birth defects as a result of cousin marriage is said to be 6%, whereas elsewhere in the piece that number is given (more accurately I believe) as 4%. --621PWC (talk) 04:25, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Seconded, even if it's a year later - the US are NOT "the Western World". In Germany, France, Belgium etc there is no such stigma. 77.11.149.75 (talk) 17:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that article needs cleaning up, but it's too much of an elephant to do all at once. I think it's too long, for a start, not helped by sections like Current Status==United States pointing to another Main Article and then still going on for 8 paragraphs. The following UK section is particularly poor. And a lot of the stuff in Current Status is in fact History. Where to start?!?! So, I'll have a go at the lead, since that might be as far as a reader ever gets. Of course, 77.11.149.75 and 621PWC, you can edit it too. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Europe
"Although Protestant, the Church of Sweden did not ban first-cousin marriage until 1680 and required dispensation until 1844" This is wrong. The Swedish Church law of 1571 (1571 års kyrkoordning) confirmed the old (Skänninge möte 1248) prohibition of marriage until the degree of 4th cousin. In 1680 marriage between second cousins became legal, while first-cousin marriage required dispensation until 1844, when it too became legal. 92.39.36.87 (talk) 23:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Definition
The article begins with this statement:
- Cousin marriage is marriage between people with a common grandparent or other more distant ancestor.
The phrase "or other more distant ancestor" is problematic. By this definition, literally all marriages are "cousin marriages," since all humans on earth have a common ancestor if you go back far enough. Indeed, by this broad definitions every human is a cousin of every other human.
For purposes of the article, this definition does not appear to be accurate. The article really should be addressing only people who are "closely" related to each other. Famspear (talk) 18:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
About the striped states
In the section "2.3 United States" there is a map of the U.S. showing the laws in the several states. Shouldn't there be something in the legend to explain what the distinction is for the striped states (Arizona, Utah, and Wisconsin)? __209.179.31.90 (talk) 22:34, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Arab world
"Cousin marriage rates were highest among women," I think this makes sense if we take into account polygamy, e.g. if a man were to marry four of his cousins, the ratio of cousin marriages would be 4:1 female to male. Would this be a correct reading? If so this could be rewritten as "Because of the practise of polygyny, cousin marriage rates were highest among women." and we can scrub the clarification needed tag.--KTo288 (talk) 18:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Even if poly marriages are taken into account, each marriage in these geographic areas is still between a man and a woman, regardless of how many times either has been married. The rate for women marrying cousins CANNOT be higher than the rate for men unless there are homosexual marriages (which, in the Middle East/Arab world, there are not). Perhaps "rate" is the wrong word? I suspect there is some strong overlap between those that practice poly marriage and cousin marriage in these areas of the world, and that dynamic could be referenced and explained in the article.
Either way, the clarification needed tag should remain unless someone clarifies. As it is, this passage makes no logical sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.71.70.84 (talk) 02:44, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Health risks
Can we mention the health risks as shown here or is this source not considered reputable?--88.104.136.143 (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- Statements regarding health risks should cite sources compliant with WP:MEDRS - cousincouples.com clearly doesn't. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Cousin marriage in Europe
Currently, it is claimed in the article that cousin marriage was "quite common in Europe and the UK for centuries." To support this vague contention, examples of cousin marriages among the royalty are cited.
However, whatever royals did cannot support any general statement about Europeans, royals being a tiny and atypical subset of all people. The Catholic Church banned cousin marriages from the Middle Ages on, allowing them only under special dispensations, and the Orthodox Church apparently had a similar policy. Many Protestant churches apparently permitted cousin marriages, but this was not universal -- the Swedish Lutheran church, for example, had[1] a dispensation requirement for cousin marriage until the mid-19th century, leading to to a cousin marriage prevalence of less than 1% in the 18th and 19th centuries (this was the case in Finland, too[2]). Even where Protestants permitted cousin marriage, there is no evidence that it was actually widely practiced.
I don't see any support for the claim that cousin marriage was quite common in Europe. I'm going to remove the claim unless reliable sources showing that the practice was at least moderately common across many countries are cited.--Victor Chmara (talk) 18:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with you on the "common" issue. I've substituted the phrasing that I suggested on my talk page which is closer to what has been in this section for years - the "quite common" phrase was introduced several months ago. The royals are only there because they are easy to document and no claim is made for frequency. Most are protestant – presumably Louis XIV was powerful enough to ignore the coercions of Rome. Chris55 (talk) 18:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Cousin marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101213032656/http://www.chinadaily.com.cn:80/world/2007-06/15/content_895516.htm to http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2007-06/15/content_895516.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:37, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Pakistan
I've added the correct citation for one of the articles in this section which is available at NIH, in response to the request, but I haven't checked the content. Can someone who understands coefficients of inbreeding better than me check this. Chris55 (talk) 19:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Cousin marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090906043319/http://www.tpt.org/aatc/2009/06/25/quotes_for_inspiration to http://www.tpt.org/aatc/2009/06/25/quotes_for_inspiration
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110727061257/http://www.terra.com.pe/entretenimiento/noticias/oci114253/marina-mora-se-casa-con-su-primo-hermano.html to http://www.terra.com.pe/entretenimiento/noticias/oci114253/marina-mora-se-casa-con-su-primo-hermano.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214221803/http://www.csa.gov.et/pdf/Cen2007_firstdraft.pdf to http://www.csa.gov.et/pdf/Cen2007_firstdraft.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:01, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Bunkum...
"Some scientists contend that the risk is relatively small at 5%, compared with a 3% risk for children whose parents are not genetically related."
The reference (PLoS) cites an additional 3% risk for cousing-marriages producing offspring with genetic defects in populations where cousin-marriages are uncommon vs. a 5% additional risk in populations where they are common. That's a completely different statement than the one I call bunkum. The second source listed is an OpEd, for crying out loud. Kleuske (talk) 01:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- See, for instance Genetic disorders in the Arab world, British Medical Journal Kleuske (talk) 01:48, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- I've tweaked the assertion for better agreement with the sources cited in support. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)
- Yes. I saw. I will respond tomorrow, since it's 3:03AM over here. In the mean time, consult google.scholar ("consanguinity recessive genetic disorders") for some interesting studies, like the one above. Kleuske (talk) 02:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cousin marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120219184747/http://www.ccourt.go.kr/home/english/download/decision_10years.pdf to http://www.ccourt.go.kr/home/english/download/decision_10years.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100115203405/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PC.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PC.HTM
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cousin marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://archive.is/20090528032523/http://www.msawest.com/islam/history/biographies/sahaabah/bio.FATIMAH_BINT_MUHAMMAD.html to http://www.msawest.com/islam/history/biographies/sahaabah/bio.FATIMAH_BINT_MUHAMMAD.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:46, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Jamaica
On the map, it is shown that it is legal but it's not!!! Marrying your cousin in Jamaica is a criminal offence and can even cause death. Marrying your cousin in Jamaica is not accepted. This can lead to you being mocked by others for 'marrying your family' which is called 'family ram' in Jamaica. Shirazian (talk) 10:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- You are incorrect. Cousin marriage is still legally permitted in Jamaica, even if people tend to disapprove. The Marriage Act only says that a marriage is void if the parties are within the prohibited degrees of consanguinuity according to the laws of England; England has never forbidden cousins to marry. The map is correct. [1] PepperBeast (talk) 19:55, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- ^ "Marriage Act" (PDF). Ministry of Justice. Government of Jamaica. Retrieved 25 August 2017.
Bhinder et al journal article
This journal article might be worth citing: Bhinder, Munir Ahmad; Sadia, Haleema; Mahmood, Nasir; Qasim, Muhammad; Hussain, Zawar; Rashid, Muhammad Mudassar; Zahoor, Muhammad Yasir; Bhatti, Rashid; Shehzad, Wasim; Waryah, Ali Muhammad; Jahan, Shah (2019). "Consanguinity: A blessing or menace at population level?". Annals of Human Genetics. 83 (4): 214–219. doi:10.1111/ahg.12308. ISSN 1469-1809.
Cousin Marriage
I've put a photo and some sources. 129.127.32.138 (talk) 02:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
India
This edit caught my eye and caused me to look at this section -- just the final paragraph. I noted the following:
India's Muslim minority represents about 14% of its population and has an overall rate of cousin marriage of 22% according to a 2000 report. This dichotomy ...
"What dichotomy?", I wondered. I read the final two paragraphs of the section and looked at what I think is the 2000 report mentioned ([3], cited at the end of the final paragraph) and still couldn't figure it out. It seems to me that some re-writing is needed, but I'm not going to try to do it. Perhaps someone who understands this better than I do might do that. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 18:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- Presumably the rather odd idea is that there are plenty of people around in India who are not your cousins (though not your religion either). I cut "dichotomy" though I'm still not sure the sentence makes much sense. Johnbod (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2020 (UTC)