Page 20 | When did marrying a cousin become socially unacceptable?

LionBird · 2024-12-07T08:12:27+00:00

I'm a big Agatha Christie fan and noticed there are quite a few references to cousins being in a relationship. I'm rereading Taken at the Flood currently, which is set in 1946, and the main character is engaged to her cousin and nobody seems to think it's strange! Obviously it was quite common in royal circles too in the 19th century but post-WW2 isn't that long ago so I'm not sure how and when it became unacceptable to have a relationship with a cousin - can anyone shed some light on this?

TeaRoseTallulah · 05/10/2025 16:04

crockofshite · 07/12/2024 08:23

Perhaps choices were limited back in the day? Few people travelled or knew anyone outside their community so options for pairing up narrowed.

Although even in the 21st century in some communities cousin marriage is still common and health issues sadly widespread.

It was to do with keeping land and money within the family originally .

It's still legal for first cousins to marry and I think defects would only happen when cousins marrying cousins happened again and again - which is what happens in some Asian communities. Happy to be corrected.

LatteLady · 05/10/2025 18:52

There is a fascinating, long running series on R4 called, Born in Bradford, which follows research done in the Community. I, particularly, remember one episode which explored the issues around, diabetes, MH and a raft of genetic issues in the Pakistani community. As some have said on here, initially the close family marriages were a way of keeping land and wealth in the family, however the younger generation have now moved away from this as a choice, however one of the episodes interviewed a couple who were about to get married, with some genetic issues in their extended family, but what shocked me most was that the bride to be was a doctor.

I think most people are aware of the issues in various European Royal families due to the genes of Queen Victoria, including haemophilia in the Russian royal family.

PrincessSophieFrederike · 05/10/2025 22:48

User37482 · 05/10/2025 09:17

I didn’t have a single muslim friend when I was growing up who wanted to marry their cousin. I think the younger generation have much stronger feelings about not doing so which is great news. I always felt tbh that the “keep wealth in the family” thing was bollocks otherwise a lot of those communities would be loaded. I think it has more to do with control.

I imagine that in very clannish families things like ignoring domestic abuse etc is routine because it’s not like you can just say “fred the fucker has been hitting me so I’m leaving him” you will end up with pressure form your own mum and dad, aunt and uncle, your husbands spouses (who are also your cousins) possibly your own siblings who may be married into the same nuclear family. I personally think it’s a practice which make it really easy to exert social control on women.

This, definitely. A cousin marriage in a clannish community, even if there isn't overt patriarchal mentality/misogyny and coercion, has this risk baked-in.

Sam Bidwell writes often quite sensibly in The Critic, I liked his article on the benefits of British families being more nuclear historically than extended.

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-british-family-is-nuclear-powered/

I think people like Mary Harrington & other writers in her orbit (often US Catholics who call themselves 'postliberals') miss this. As he notes, they idealise extended families & act like these have been historically much more important to Britain than they actually were. These types often praise societies like Asia or the Mediterranean where extended families are still a big thing- though as he points out, their birth rates are also low.

What they ignore is that this setup has often meant a lot of controlling behaviour from parents, and has typically subjected women to their parents-in-law, placing a lot of elder care solely on women, too. The nuclear setup has allowed Britain to transcend the more tribal/clannish mentality & innovate. Ofc a lot of innovation has come from China etc but it has typically been harder bc of the need to be subject to the family and follow their wishes. The WEIRDEST People in the World is also very good on this topic

I'm not anti-extended families, I lived with my grandmother growing up & wouldn't change that for anything. But she was a very easy-going person. When the setup means the younger people have little say in their lives, that's when it's more problematic.

persephonia · 05/10/2025 23:15

PrincessSophieFrederike · 05/10/2025 22:48

This, definitely. A cousin marriage in a clannish community, even if there isn't overt patriarchal mentality/misogyny and coercion, has this risk baked-in.

Sam Bidwell writes often quite sensibly in The Critic, I liked his article on the benefits of British families being more nuclear historically than extended.

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-british-family-is-nuclear-powered/

I think people like Mary Harrington & other writers in her orbit (often US Catholics who call themselves 'postliberals') miss this. As he notes, they idealise extended families & act like these have been historically much more important to Britain than they actually were. These types often praise societies like Asia or the Mediterranean where extended families are still a big thing- though as he points out, their birth rates are also low.

What they ignore is that this setup has often meant a lot of controlling behaviour from parents, and has typically subjected women to their parents-in-law, placing a lot of elder care solely on women, too. The nuclear setup has allowed Britain to transcend the more tribal/clannish mentality & innovate. Ofc a lot of innovation has come from China etc but it has typically been harder bc of the need to be subject to the family and follow their wishes. The WEIRDEST People in the World is also very good on this topic

I'm not anti-extended families, I lived with my grandmother growing up & wouldn't change that for anything. But she was a very easy-going person. When the setup means the younger people have little say in their lives, that's when it's more problematic.

Show quote history

Putting cousin marriages aside. I think that there are downsides and upsides to both the more nuclear family and the extended family. As there are to more individualistic versus collectivist mindsets. I know people with very involved mothers in law and it's actually lovely for them - the MiL has a very close relationship to the grandkids, she had support. But I suspect she massively lucked out.
I don't think (abusive situations aside) there is one "good" way to live. One of the things I think Britain has done well is broadly recognising that fact. So we tend towards the nuclear family much more than South Europe. But its also not unusual to have different family setups and extended family setups. I think that's where Mary Harrington and similar writers really go wrong. They always come across as very certain that This thing(TM) is the correct thing and it's really terrible the thing died out/is dieing out.
Also, I think class plays a role in nuclear V extended family structures in the UK. But that's a bit off topic.