MrOtingocni
The point I am making is that there isn't a aversion away from something, there is simply a preference towards something. We don't eat wood chips and don't like the way they taste, not because they are bad for us, but rather because we would rather eat potato chips. The potato chips are more advantageous to our survival. This may seem I am splitting hairs but it's important to make that distinction because the following arguments are based on such distinctions and it's important to assign the correct motivation to our evolutionary drives.
It's not that our blind systems somehow know that screwing our siblings makes disadvantaged babies (which it doesn't know that and nor does it compared to mating with someone with a more prominent genetic issue- at least not for the first few generations) it doesn't code that far ahead for cause and effect. It only instills a preference for slightly exogenous mates to confer immunity advantages.
The Westermarck effect shows strong evidence for a higher (socially speaking) system influencing our mate preference BECAUSE it can be "circumvented" by the evidence that even siblings raised away from each other show no inhibitions towards mating. If there were purely a genetic aversion towards inbreeding there wouldn't be a statistically significant event of long lost relatives copulating. I'm stretching a bit on the statical significance but it happens often enough to be reported on.
Also, inbreeding is very common in the animal kingdom. Less between direct descendants, like mother/child, but on the whole most creatures make little distinction between relations. Which makes sense if the options are mate with your brood or potentially die without performing our evolutionary imperative command of passing on our genes.
https://theconversation.com/incest-isnt-a-taboo-in-the-animal-kingdom-new-study-160937
I felt a convulsing shudder roll up my innards, complete with subtle eye twitch at the peak, like a cherry on top, when I read your comment.
Leave us behind? Where is it going?
Pervmiscuous?
As opposed to proverted, the next level of pervert.
The answer to this is the same answer to 80% of the issues that we face on the current tech landscape. It's the answer most need but few want.
You have to circumvent the current monopolies and create your own space. It's the answer to just about everything.
Almost the entirety of what the web is was originally built by enthusists who saw the tremendous benefit of people being able to communicate freely and privately.
Yes, it's hard, and it takes time, and it takes exerting effort towards learning new skills, with a much lower turnout of participants.
But once it's built, it's yours. No longer do you have to bend to other systems, systems that have proven to be detrimental to a fair and open society.
Basically you have to take matters into your own hands and build the thing you want. Not try to work off the back of something already built that isn't friendly to your desires.
Count those that won't follow you as temporarily lost and move on without them.
And besides, no offense bro, even if there was a way to infiltrate Reddit, who would share it here? You could work or contract for Reddit looking for holes to plug or, even worse, the Turkish government.