Editing Incest taboo (section)

====Counter arguments====
One objection against an instinctive and genetic basis for the incest taboo is that incest does occur.<ref>Claude Lévi-Strauss, 1969 ''The Elementary Structures of Kinship'' revised edition, translated from the French by James Harle Bell and John Richard von Sturmer. Boston: Beacon Press. 17</ref><ref>Cicchetti and Carlson eds. 1989 ''Child Maltreatment: Theory and Research on the Causes and Consequences of Child Abuse and Neglect''. New York, Cambridge University Press</ref><ref>Glaser and Frosh 1988 ''Child and Sexual Abuse'' Chicago: Dorsey Press.</ref> Anthropologists have also argued that the social construct "incest" (and the incest taboo) is not the same thing as the biological phenomenon of "inbreeding". For example, there is equal genetic relation between a man and the daughter of his father's sister and between a man and the daughter of his mother's sister, such that biologists would consider mating incestuous in both instances, but [[Trobrianders]] consider mating incestuous in one case and not in the other. Anthropologists have documented a great number of societies where marriages between some first cousins are prohibited as incestuous, while marriages between other first cousins are encouraged. Therefore, it is argued that the prohibition against incestuous relations in most societies is not based on or motivated by concerns over biological closeness.<ref>Claude Lévi-Strauss, 1969 ''The Elementary Structures of Kinship'' revised edition, translated from the French by James Harle Bell and John Richard von Sturmer. Boston: Beacon Press. 13–14</ref> Other studies on cousin marriages have found support for a biological basis for the taboo.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Kushnick | first1 = G. | last2 = Fessler | first2 = D. M. T. | doi = 10.1086/659337 | title = Karo Batak Cousin Marriage, Cosocialization, and the Westermarck Hypothesis | journal = Current Anthropology | volume = 52 | issue = 3 | pages = 443–448 | year = 2011 | url = https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/50038/2/01_Kushnick_Karo_Batak_Cousin_Marriage%2c_2011.pdf | hdl = 1885/50038 | s2cid = 20905611 | hdl-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Fessler | first1 = D. M. T. | title = Neglected Natural Experiments Germane to the Westermarck Hypothesis | doi = 10.1007/s12110-007-9021-1 | journal = Human Nature | volume = 18 | issue = 4 | pages = 355–364 | year = 2007| pmid = 26181312 | s2cid = 2039872 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = McCabe | first1 = J. | doi = 10.1525/aa.1983.85.1.02a00030 | title = FBD Marriage: Further Support for the Westermarck Hypothesis of the Incest Taboo | journal = American Anthropologist | volume = 85 | pages = 50–69 | year = 1983| doi-access =  }}</ref> Also, current supporters of genetic influences on behavior do not argue that genes determine behavior absolutely, but that genes may create predispositions that are affected in various ways by the environment (including culture).<ref name=AmPs2010>{{Cite journal | last1 = Confer | first1 = J. C. | last2 = Easton | first2 = J. A. | last3 = Fleischman | first3 = D. S. | last4 = Goetz | first4 = C. D. | last5 = Lewis | first5 = D. M. G. | last6 = Perilloux | first6 = C. | last7 = Buss | first7 = D. M. | doi = 10.1037/a0018413 | title = Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 65 | issue = 2 | pages = 110–126 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20141266 | url = http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/Group/BussLAB/pdffiles/evolutionary_psychology_AP_2010.pdf | access-date = 2015-08-28 | archive-date = 2015-08-20 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150820063400/http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/Group/BussLAB/pdffiles/evolutionary_psychology_AP_2010.pdf | url-status = dead }}</ref>

Steve Stewart-Williams argues against the view that incest taboo is a Western phenomenon, arguing that while brother–sister marriage was reported in a diverse range of cultures such Egyptian, Incan, and Hawaiian cultures, it was not a culture-wide phenomenon, being largely restricted to the upper classes. Stewart-Williams argues that these marriages were largely political (their function being to keep power and wealth concentrated in the family) and there is no evidence the siblings were attracted to each other and there is in fact some evidence against it (for example, [[Cleopatra]] married two of her brothers but did not have children with them, only having children with unrelated lovers). Stewart-Williams suggests that this was therefore simply a case of social pressure overriding anti-incest instincts. Stewart-Williams also observes that anti-incest behaviour has been observed in other animals and even many plant species (many plants could self-pollinate but have mechanisms that prevent them from doing so).<ref>Stewart-Williams, Steve. The ape that understood the universe: How the mind and culture evolve. Cambridge University Press, 2018, pp 135-136</ref>