Listen to this story.Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
IT JUST SEEMED so wrong. In January Nick Wilson, a Kentucky state legislator who achieved reality-TV fame for winning “Survivor” in 2018, created a frenzy on social media when he sponsored a bill that removed “first cousin” from the list of incestuous family relations. Mr Wilson said that the omission was a mistake and the bill was quickly withdrawn. The new draft put “first cousin” back on the list of criminal sexual relations, alongside parent, sibling, grandchild and other blood relatives.
Since much of Kentucky is covered by the Appalachian mountains, a region stereotyped for encouraging incestuous sexual behaviour, jokes quickly spread online. The reactions on X (formerly known as Twitter) ranged from humour to disgust to fear for the resulting offspring. Only a few pointed out that in many states it is legal to have sexual relations and marry one’s first cousin. Is it really OK to kiss your cousin?
Geneticists mostly say that it is, with some caveats. In 2021 the National Society of Genetic Counsellors (NSGC) published updated guidelines for consanguineous couples (people descended from the same ancestor) and their offspring. The risk to offspring is greater, but the increase is quite small. According to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention about 3% of all babies born in America have birth defects. The NSGC guidelines state that for “couples with no known genetic disorders in the family, there is an additional 1.7% to 2.8% risk for significant birth defects.”
Many other couples face far higher risks of genetic complications for their offspring, and those unions are not banned. Classic Mendelian genetics (the kind taught in biology class) predicts that if two people each have a recessive gene for certain disorders, such as cystic fibrosis or sickle-cell anaemia, there is a 25% chance their child will be born with that disorder. Yet those marriages are allowed. “The law against first-cousin marriage is a major form of discrimination,” says Robin Bennett of the University of Washington’s department of medicine, who was a co-author of the NSGC guidelines. For offspring “the risks are very low and not much different than for any other couple,” she says.
Throughout Western history attitudes about consanguineous marriages have varied. The Bible does not directly ban sexual relations between cousins—how else would all of mankind have descended from Adam and Eve? The Roman Catholic Church did later prohibit first cousins from marrying, though exceptions were made for a fee. Martin Luther, the father of Protestantism, objected to such payments, so many Protestant denominations allowed these marriages free of charge. As is clear from novels such as “Mansfield Park” and “Wuthering Heights”, the people of Georgian and Victorian England were not too squeamish about such relations. Queen Victoria was married to her first cousin, as were both Albert Einstein and Edgar Allan Poe.
In some cultures, marriage between close family members is encouraged today. It secures wealth and reinforces social connections within the family. It might even make marriages easier, on the optimistic assumption that the in-laws are more likely to get along. In some areas of the world (Pakistan, the Middle East), nearly half of all marriages are between close relations. No European countries ban marriages between first cousins (though Norwegian policymakers recently debated doing so).
There are limits to the amount of intermarriage that is healthy. Charles Darwin, the father of evolutionary biology, who married his first cousin in 1839, was reportedly conflicted about his own arrangement. The Darwins had ten children, but three of them died during childhood and three of his surviving children never had any offspring with their spouses. Some historians surmise that the children suffered from genetic abnormalities due to their parents being closely related—the families of Darwin and his wife had a long history of intermarriage.
Yet despite the fairly low genetic risk for most couples, the “ick” factor prevails in Western culture. The family dynamics can be difficult to explain to others. Many consanguineous couples choose to keep quiet, says Ms Bennett. For this reason it is difficult to know how many of these couples exist in America.
Despite the fact that first-cousin marriages are pretty low-risk for offspring, 25 states do not allow first cousins to marry. In six states, it is legal to marry a first cousin, but with caveats (if one person is unable to reproduce or elderly, for example). However, if Mr Wilson’s experience in Kentucky is indicative of the public’s reaction, it will be a long time before such laws will be stricken from the books. ■
Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important electoral stories, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note from our Lexington columnist that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
THERE WAS a time, not long ago, when an important skill for journalists was translating the code in which powerful people spoke about each other. Carefully prepared speeches and other public remarks would be dissected for hints about the arguments happening in private. Among Donald Trump’s many achievements is upending this system. In his administration people seem to say exactly what they think at any given moment. Wild threats are made—to end habeas corpus; to take Greenland by force—without any follow-through. Journalists must now try to guess what is real and what is for show.
THERE WAS a time, not long ago, when an important skill for journalists was translating the code in which powerful people spoke about each other. Carefully prepared speeches and other public remarks would be dissected for hints about the arguments happening in private. Among Donald Trump’s many achievements is upending this system. In his administration people seem to say exactly what they think at any given moment. Wild threats are made—to end habeas corpus; to take Greenland by force—without any follow-through. Journalists must now try to guess what is real and what is for show.
Hiring decreased just slightly in May even as consumers and companies braced against tariffs and a potentially slowing economy, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday.
Nonfarm payrolls rose 139,000 for the month, above the muted Dow Jones estimate for 125,000 and a bit below the downwardly revised 147,000 that the U.S. economy added in April.
The unemployment rate held steady at 4.2%. A more encompassing measure that includes discouraged workers and the underemployed also was unchanged, holding at 7.8%.
Worker pay grew more than expected, with average hourly earnings up 0.4% during the month and 3.9% from a year ago, compared with respective forecasts for 0.3% and 3.7%.
“Stronger than expected jobs growth and stable unemployment underlines the resilience of the US labor market in the face of recent shocks,” said Lindsay Rosner, head of multi-sector fixed income investing at Goldman Sachs Asset Management.
Nearly half the job growth came from health care, which added 62,000, even higher than its average gain of 44,000 over the past year. Leisure and hospitality contributed 48,000 while social assistance added 16,000.
On the downside, government lost 22,000 jobs as efforts to cull the federal workforce by President Donald Trump and the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency began to show an impact.
Stock market futures jumped higher after the release as did Treasury yields.
Though the May numbers were better than expected, there were some underlying trouble spots.
The April count was revised lower by 30,000, while March’s total came down by 65,000 to 120,000.
There also were disparities between the establishment survey, which is used to generate the headline payrolls gain, and the household survey, which is used for the unemployment rate. The latter count, generally more volatile than the establishment survey, showed a decrease of 696,000 workers. Full-time workers declined by 623,000, while part-timers rose by 33,000.
“The May jobs report still has everyone waiting for the other shoe to drop,” said Daniel Zhao, lead economist at job rating site Glassdoor. “This report shows the job market standing tall, but as economic headwinds stack up cumulatively, it’s only a matter of time before the job market starts straining against those headwinds.”
The report comes against a teetering economic background, complicated by Trump’s tariffs and an ever-changing variable of how far he will go to try to level the global playing field for American goods.
Most indicators show that the economy is still a good distance from recession. But sentiment surveys indicate high degrees of anxiety from both consumers and business leaders as they brace for the ultimate impact of how much tariffs will slow business activity and increase inflation.
For their part, Federal Reserve officials are viewing the current landscape with caution.
The central bank holds its next policy meeting in less than two weeks, with markets largely expecting the Fed to stay on hold regarding interest rates. In recent speeches, policymakers have indicated greater concern with the potential for tariff-induced inflation.
“With the Fed laser-focused on managing the risks to the inflation side of its mandate, today’s stronger than expected jobs report will do little to alter its patient approach,” said Rosner, the Goldman Sachs strategist.
Friday also marks the final day before Fed officials head into their quiet period before the meeting, when they do not issue policy remarks.