Incest in The Chao Garden

[Chao. Enterprises]

Some of you may already know that the chao you made when you bred them can actually breed with their parents. I've always wondered if this was an oversight or if they just didn't bother. I never do this, even though the result may look cool. Do you do this?

[Ivogoji]

My horses and dogs don't care about human mating norms, why should my Chao?

Even if the designers considered this a problem, they probably wouldn't have changed anything. Doing so would have limited the players ability to breed the kind of Chao they wanted. Ditto Pokemon.

[Jeffery Mewtamer]

I reject the incest taboo.

Also, I thought Pokemon did have some code in it that would sometimes prevent a parent from breeding with a child? Or was that only in the G2 games? If I remember correctly, the Day Care Man in the G2 games would say "Brimming with Energy" if this scenario came up. Granted, I seldom did any breeding beyond using Ditto to breed extras for dex completion.

[chaoadventures]

^There was a prevention system for that in GSC, but I remember it was really weak, it worked by checking Defense IVs, so random Pokemon couldn't mate with each other,
and certain off-spring could still breed with their parents. I also can't find anything on it, but I remember reading it somewhere.

I'm pretty sure they thought about it, and realized that, most animals probably don't really care. Of course, if the player cares, they can just stop themselves, if they really want to.

I don't do this, but mostly because I have no reason to. Breeding for higher grades is too confusing (and expensive) for me compared to just reincarnating my chao, and I can't really think of another benefit
from mating a chao and it's off-spring, since I either got what I wanted from breeding its parents or I didn't (and will try again). But otherwise, I still wouldn't.

[Tsui]

I reject the incest taboo.

(image shows 4chan post of off-model Kyuubey from Madoka Magica and the text "no")


I once had a family tree I drew of my Chao, but I lost it, though that's okay because I pretty much have who mated with who committed to memory
Actually, I had this one Chao mate with several others, so they had a lot of kids who were all half-siblings I guess
Never did breed Chao within this "family" and never plan to.

...Chao technically have genes, right? Would inbreeding even affect anything? If you keep breeding the same Chao with their child and their child's child and so on would you eventually get an almost-clone of the original Chao? Or no?

[Goat]

I reject the incest taboo.

(An image of a puppy being held with the caption "He is burning" underneath)

It's a taboo because inbreeding makes stupid people.

Back to the topic, I don't really think Sega thought too far ahead to have incest affect too much. It might affect the colors included, but that's as far I can think of.

[Crazo3077]

Back when I was raising Chao just for fun, and not to do breeding tests, I would keep a detailed family tree and try to avoid inbreeding when possible. Since I started doing testing, I stopped caring as much. In fact, in my most popular video on YouTube, I had a parent (Edge) and their child (Bubbles) mate so that I could get a Shiny Normal Chao. When you need results, you get results.

Admittedly, though, the reason for the incest taboo in the real world is because genetics are more complicated in real life than they are in a computer program. Chao are by no means complex enough to see any potential genetic defects, unless you want to consider Mono-Tone Normal Chao a genetic defect, since that's two recessive genes. I imagine games don't try very hard to maintain a sense of linage, especially if it potentially restricts gameplay.

Though the topic of incest actually makes me think of the show Community. Season 6 Episode 12, which is available for free on YahooTV, ends with a short video where one of the shows writers (Briggs Hatton) talks about incest. Apparently first cousins can have children without any major risk of health issues, and I've been told elsewhere that second cousins have the same statistics as someone entirely unrelated to you. Some stuff has also said that the issue wouldn't be one generation of incest as much as multiple generations back to back, but I'm not a geneticist. I gave up hopes on that when I hit college.

[Jeffery Mewtamer]

Most Chao genes are randomly dominant and the only genes that could really be called detrimental are genes for low ranks in various stats, and even then, having an E-rank in a stat just means it'll take longer to train that stat to S-rank. I'm not as familiar with Pokemon genetics, but the only things that are genetic in Pokemon that could be called detrimental that I'm aware of are low IVs, and the G6 games give methods of not only getting mons with perfect IVs in a few stats without getting lucky with the PRNG, but of ensuring the offspring get close to the best possible combination of there parent's genes.

Also, while random dominance occurs in real-life, to my knowledge, it doesn't occur like with Chao. With Chao, the random choice of which version of a gene to express is done at the organism level whereas real-life examples occur on a cell-by-cell basis. I.e., with Chao, a combination of a red skin gene with a blue skin gene results in either red skin or blue skin. In real-life, such a mix of randomly dominant genes would lead to a splotchy skin tone with random patches of each color.

As for real-life inbreeding, it doesn't, to my knowledge, increase the risk of random mutations, and only increases the likelihood that recessive genes will be expressed. While there are many recessive genetic diseases present in the human gene pool, inbreeding doesn't cause them to magically manifest in families where the genes weren't already present. If a guy who is a carrier for hemophilia impregnates his sister who isn't a carrier he has the same 50% chance of fathering a child who is a carrier that he would have if he impregnated a total stranger who isn't a carrier, and if he impregnated a total stranger who is a carrier, not only would the same 50% chance of fathering a carrier exist, but there would also be a 25% chance of fathering a child with hemophilia. In any of these three scenarios, modern genetic screenings are more than capable of detecting whose a carrier and giving the chances that a child will be a carrier or have the disease, and I'd argue such screening should be covered by insurance to ensure anyone making a deliberate plan to have children has access to such screenings. Also, I'm pretty sure modern in-vitro and sperm filtering technologies can to used to minimize said risks.

Besides, the genetic argument is more an objection to close relatives having children together rather than incest in general, yet even those who are okay with homosexuality in general often have objection to gay incest, and straight incest without any intention of having children is widely frown upon even by those who are okay with sex as recreation.

I also think it worth noting that things like purebred animals with health issues and old-world nobility inbreeding themselves into madness, in addition to taking several generations had other factors narrowing the gene pool. Namely, animal breeders removing animals with unwanted physical traits from the breeding pool, and the more capable heirs often being targeted for assassination or being sent to die in war(if you kill off all your smart, physically fit sons out of fear they'll kill you and take your thrown and only your imbecilic cripple of a son survives long enough to give you grandchildren, your grandchildren aren't going to get the best of your genes no matter who your daughter-in-law is).

[Rouce]

Lol, do we really have to take our strict human morales so far and project them on fictional animal-like video game characters?

It's funny to keep track of families, but rejecting to breed certain chaos is against the game mechanics. And also overly idealistic. They're cute, genderless little fatties that can transform to have different animal parts on them.. Haha.

Also I think Jeffery Mewtamer might be correct regarding the likelyhood of random mutations of inbreeding. Although being in a relationship with a cousin of yours is pretty damnable in our western culture, it's actually perfectly fine in Japan. And the possibility of a disability when having a child grows from 2 up to 4% IIRC. Black and white thinking is not a fitting approach method regarding this topic.

[Jeffery Mewtamer]

^While it might not be socially acceptable, it is my understanding that marriage between first cousins are legally recognized in many parts of the developed world(though often not between Double First Cousins), and it's only the Catholic Church that takes a real hard line stance on consanguinity(barring marriage between anyone closer than seventh cousins). Of course, I'd imagine there are many couples married with children who would violate the Catholic standard without even knowing it, since all but the most tightly knit families are strangers beyond first cousins(and it isn't exactly uncommon for families to be strangers beyond the nuclear family) and no one checks a love interest's family tree.

But yeah, silly to enforce human morals on fictional creatures, especially when there's evidence in many people's backyards that real-life animals don't hold to such standards. Take house cats for example. from what I've seen, most toms won't hesitate to mount their sister, daughter, or mother and most queens won't hesitate to let their brother, son, or father mount them, plus neither toms or queens have any qualms about taking multiple mates, to the point that most litters that aren't conceived under the watch of a human breeder are of mixed paternity if multiple in-tact toms are around.

[Crash32]

I'm 12 years old and this post is inappropriate for me

[Rouce]

^While it might not be socially acceptable, it is my understanding that marriage between first cousins are legally recognized in many parts of the developed world(though often not between Double First Cousins), and it's only the Catholic Church that takes a real hard line stance on consanguinity(barring marriage between anyone closer than seventh cousins). Of course, I'd imagine there are many couples married with children who would violate the Catholic standard without even knowing it, since all but the most tightly knit families are strangers beyond first cousins(and it isn't exactly uncommon for families to be strangers beyond the nuclear family) and no one checks a love interest's family tree.

But yeah, silly to enforce human morals on fictional creatures, especially when there's evidence in many people's backyards that real-life animals don't hold to such standards. Take house cats for example. from what I've seen, most toms won't hesitate to mount their sister, daughter, or mother and most queens won't hesitate to let their brother, son, or father mount them, plus neither toms or queens have any qualms about taking multiple mates, to the point that most litters that aren't conceived under the watch of a human breeder are of mixed paternity if multiple in-tact toms are around.

Yeah, it's kind of funny. While most people love to profile themselves as atheists and independent, smart people they still followthe very christian standards and norms regadring moral and dogmas.

[Goat]

Sorry if I have to be the first person to break the chain again, but some standards exist for a reason.

We have the cognitive thinking to realize that if incest leads to defective children, we simply don't have incest. The standards for letting your inhibitions loose has been getting progressively worse as time has gone on, and I'll be damned if I let the slippery slope when it comes to incest ever be true without at least trying to bring some sense back to people who see a standard and feel it must broken.

[Rouce]

I'm just asking to see this topic differentiated. There are different forms of incest and different approaches to handle this topic. Also it's more productive than the dogmatized "Drugs are bad, m'kay!" mentality. :)

[Goat]

Is the idea of not wanting to bring mentally defective children into this world on purpose, without having a pre-existing mental or physical condition such a bad thing that it needs to be called dogmatic?

Who wins if the idea of incest is more accepted?

[Rouce]

Have you read what was posted above? Although by this time legal in most countires, cousin marriage is incest and still being considered damnable in our society. And although the chance of a disabled child just grows from 2% up to 4% as well as there are genetic tests that you can make to prevent this matter, you'll still be most likely shunned by society and be viewed as some freak in your social environment. This is not due to the fear of defective children. These are remaining world views from our christian culture.

I'm not arguing for incest. I'm just saying that you can't generalise.

[Goat]

Wanna know something else christians also warned about? The Slippery slope.

"First its gays, then it's incest and pedophilia." The latter while not relevant, has been seeing some ground gained as far as letting self admitted pedophiles write about their frustration with people upset at them in certain places.

I've also seen just how social movements go, first they ask for acceptance, then they ask for protection under law. It's better to stomp it out early than it is to let a non elected officials make decisions for everyone else with no room for debate.

If they were right before, I don't see a reason to doubt them now. You have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to what's acceptable. Even if this isn't the worst thing, and even if I doubted the slope before, it can and will lead to worse.

[Rouce]

Haha, what you're talking about is cultural marxism. And I agree that it's retarded alongside political correctness. Feminism is pretty retarded too in contrast to egalitarianism.

But: You have again to differentiate. People being gay, having same sex relationships and not hiding about this is okay. Protecting them under the law in a different way than heterosexuals is not. Also there is no room for any pedophile crimes or underaged relationships in our society. But again: Pedophilia doesn't equl to pedophile sexual predator. There are a lot of people born this way which they can't change anything about. These people don't want to rape any children at all and suffer from being like they are. These people don't deserve hate, they deserve therapy and our help.

Y'know, just because cultural marxism is about many of these topics doesn't mean it's solely an idea and topic of this same perception. Women had less rights then men in the past. Common sense fixed it. Cultural marxism lets it appear to be still a problem and forces us to believe and do non-sensical things. Therefore makes it a problem again.

[Jeffery Mewtamer]

Also, considering that most humans are wired against being sexually attracted to those they've shared living space with, I have my doubts widespread acceptance of incest is going to suddenly lead to a rash of girls seducing their brothers. I'm completely okay with incest and would love to have a girlfriend call me onii-chan, but there's no one among my non-stranger family I'd willingly have sex with. Hell, outside of isolated populations where it's hard to find someone you aren't closely related too, I'd imagine most cases of real-life incest in the developed world are between people unaware of their blood relationship. I know at least 3 people with half-siblings they've never met and wouldn't know from Adam or Eve, and one of those 3 has 4 full-siblings that likely haven't met those half-siblings either, and I get the impression that I'm in the minority for only having full-siblings. Even if only 10% of the population has a half-sibling they've never met, pairing up any two people at random gives a 1% chance they're half-siblings and don't know it.

Also pedophile and child molestor aren't synonyms and being the former isn't required to become the latter. Child molestors are certainly deserving of scorn, but treating all pedophiles as if they'll molest a child at the first opportunity turns them into decoys for child molestors and isn't the kind of attitude likely to encourage at-risk pedophiles to seek help rather than giving in to their darker impulses. We don't treat every straight man like he'll rape any woman given the chance, so why does our attitude change so drastically once the lower end of his prefered age range drops below some arbitrary number?

In general, my rule of thumb regarding sexual morality is "Comdemn the act, not the thought, and then only if the act harms a participant."

[Tsui]

Jeffery do you even think about what you're posting on a forum for a children's video game series?

Have you all even considered that there might be users here who might have a much more personal take on these kinds of subjects? You're so detached. And that's coming from me. Not every case of incest is a loving relationship where the people involved just happen to be related. A lot of it is abuse. That's part of why it's seen as so bad.

Sorry I'm just not used to seeing people be so insensitive towards this kind of stuff and defend it. And honestly, some opinions are best kept private.

[Rouce]

I would say let him word what he has to say and it's O.K. And while indeed inappropriate for children (although most people here are people that played the DC/GC version in their childhood?) he hasn't said anything offensive imo. Just because you distinguish people with inborn pedophilia and pedophile sexual criminals doesn't make you justify/defend the latter and underaged intercourse. Because all sexual crimes are disgusting, especially when talking about children. That's the point, there's not just black and white.

But I agree that he could have kept his personal position on this private. The onii-chan phrase I mean. Lol.

[LimitCrown]

This discussion should probably be in the General Discussion board, not the General Chao Chat board.

[Rouce]

This discussion should probably be in the General Discussion board, not the General Chao Chat board.

Well, it started with gameplay mechanics. Only then it slowly became Off-Topic.

[Roaxes]

My god how much this post has de-railed since I last read it.

[Jeffery Mewtamer]

Yeah, sexual abuse is uncool, no matter who the abuser is, no matter who the abused is, and no matter what their relationship is. My apologies if any of my posts could be misconstrued as defending any form of sexual abuse or any form of non-sexual abuse, as it was not my intention to defend such. What I am defending is the individual's right to freedom of thought and the right of consenting adults to express their love as they see fit without external interference.

Still, this thread should probably be closed for going off topic and straddling the line of appropriate conversation.