Your take on Incest.

Turtwig

When it comes to abortion there is almost unanimous support for some form of abortion. So now time to perhaps divide our tight little community a little bit or perhaps unify it further? How do people fare here on the idea of incest and incestuous relationships?

Personally, this might come as a shock to some but I'm very much on the borderline of seeing nothing wrong with it. Incest without conception I'm 100% unopposed to and incest with conceived a child well to be perfectly honest I'm on the verge of crossing over the thin edge and deeming it wholly acceptable but I need to understand the implied genetic risk factor better first to be sure to be sure. For now, though I'm on the it's acceptable line.

So folks where do you stand?

Dades

*cough*

Meh. Fire away!

Dades

Dades wrote: »

*cough*

Meh. Fire away!

Yeah, but the title in that one had that abomination "yay or nay" (yea or nay).

Incest where the partners had been separated at birth or something - ok. Otherwise I'd be concerned it might be some result of emotional stunting, ability to form non-family relationships, etc. Same for age differences and possible grooming.
Kids, I'd be in the same boat as malty

Ickle Magoo

I have an issue with a parent and child or even uncle/aunt and child relationship if there is a large age discrepancy and the chance that grooming took place - in the case of siblings/cousins, I think it's a bit icky and in a world with billions of people why people can't/don't want to find someone out-with their own gene-pool a bit odd but...meh, whatever rocks their boat.

Turtwig

No.

Dades wrote: »

*cough*

Meh. Fire away!

Ahh that thread was before I joined this beautiful place. Gonna read through it now for some perspective.

Turtwig

No.

Hmm,

I do believe this is pretty much the first disagreement I've had with Robin. If I recall correctly my boards.ie love match for almost perfect.:o

sink

No.

While I have no data my intuition would be that incestuous relationships would have a greater propensity to feature psychological and emotional abuse. So while I would not be against incest in principle I would regard any incestuous relationship to be suspect and so they should be monitored.

Genghiz Cohen

I don't agree (voted no) with it but I shouldn't be allowed to stop to adults doing what they want.

Maybe extra options in the poll are needed,
Yes - Should be legal
No- Should be legal
Yes - Should be illegal (??)
No- Should be illegal

sink

No.

Dades wrote: »

*cough*

Meh. Fire away!

Found my own post in that thread and almost two years on my opinion has not changed much.

sink wrote: »

I don't find the direct act of incest repugnant and I don't see and moral issues with the act itself. That's not to say that I'm attracted to any family members, I think that instinctively we are not due to evolution. But abnormalities in instinct will occur just as in all biological evolution and it is not a moral issue unless it negatively impacts on someone else.

However incest can be damaging psychologically in cases were one of the partners is the dominant and there is a power imbalance even if it's consensual. The difficulty is defining what is damaging incest and what is not.

If you look at it from another point of view, heterosexual/homosexual relationships between non-related persons can also be psychologically damaging if this power imbalance exists.

So after going around in a circle I don't see any ethical issues with incest that do not also exist in non-incestuous couples and therefore they should be afforded the same treatment in the eyes of the law.

Turtwig

No.

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

I don't agree (voted no) with it but I shouldn't be allowed to stop to adults doing what they want.

Maybe extra options in the poll are needed,
Yes - Should be legal
No- Should be legal
Yes - Should be illegal (??)
No- Should be illegal

Nah no interest in discussing the legal issue here. I wanted people's perspective on incest itself.

Have to say I find your position a little odd though, disagree with it, but it should be legally allowed? If I understand you correctly.

sink

No.

Malty_T wrote: »

Nah no interest in discussing the legal issue here. I wanted people's perspective on incest itself.

Have to say I find your position a little odd though, disagree with it, but it should be legally allowed? If I understand you correctly.

It's perfectly reasonable to be against an act but also oppose the criminalisation of the act, e.g. picking ones nose in public.

Turtwig

No.

sink wrote: »

It's perfectly reasonable to be against an act but also oppose the criminalisation of the act, e.g. picking one nose in public.

Ahh now I understand. Thanks.:D

Speaking of that did you know in some countries they just drop their snots on the pavements because they find the idea of putting a used hankerchief in your pocket disgusting and unhygienic?:D

pH

Malty_T wrote: »

Nah no interest in discussing the legal issue here. I wanted people's perspective on incest itself.

Have to say I find your position a little odd though, disagree with it, but it should be legally allowed? If I understand you correctly.

If you ask someone "what they think of incestuous relationships" then you're pretty much asking them if they want to have sex with their family.

I don't personally agree in that sense with incest, I have no desire to initiate a sexual relationship with my siblings, nor if they asked me would I agree to it. I guess that would make me personally against incestuous relationships, I disagree with it.

However, that's not the same as suggesting that any other adults shouldn't, or indeed should be punished/jailed if they did.

So me, I'm personally against incest, but would have no problems with other adults doing it if they wanted.

Genghiz Cohen

sink wrote: »

e.g. picking ones nose in public.

I would normally open a can of worms and mention drug legislation.
No real interest, don't think it should be illegal.

sink

No.

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

I would normally open a can of worms and mention drug legislation.
No real interest, don't think it should be illegal.

That was the first thought that came into my head but I decided something less emotive would be a better example.

Turtwig

No.

pH wrote: »

If you ask someone "what they think of incestuous relationships" then you're pretty much asking them if they want to have sex with their family.

I don't personally agree in that sense with incest, I have no desire to initiate a sexual relationship with my siblings, nor if they asked me would I agree to it. I guess that would make me personally against incestuous relationships, I disagree with it.

However, that's not the same as suggesting that any other adults shouldn't, or indeed should be punished/jailed if they did.

So me, I'm personally against incest, but would have no problems with other adults doing it if they wanted.

I'm not sure asking someone what they think of something is the same as would they do it.

After reading a few responses here, I'm tempted to ask this question too
If you were in love with a sibling do you think you would feel guilty/ashamed with yourself?

Personally no I don't think I would. Am I right here in saying that some posters would?

eoin5

No.

I don't see any problem with it really, as long as they're in Shelbyville.

Pygmalion

No.

Pretty much the same as my opinion on anything else.
I don't believe an action should be punishable if all those involved give informed consent.
Informed consent in this case implying, among other things, that there was no grooming or abuse, and that all parties are old enough to understand the actions and consequences.

That said, if there's truth to the claims that those conceived in incestuous relationships have a much higher risk of birth defects or deficiencies then it could be argued that those involved shouldn't conceive.
Of course, there are many non-incestuous couples who have the same risks (i.e. genetic disorders they're likely to pass on), so if we're going to have a standard on this it'll be interesting to see how many people would like to see it implemented without bias.

challengemaster

Well, if you look at it from an evolutionary or biblical standpoint, at one stage or another it was all pretty much incest.

Turtwig

No.

challengemaster wrote: »

Well, if you look at it from an evolutionary or biblical standpoint, at one stage or another it was all pretty much incest.

Which means what exactly? We're an evolved species with complex social structures and ethics.Nature isn't really going to help explain anything here.

magicbastarder

my take on incest? i don't *take* on incest. i *give*.

AhSureTisGrand

My opinion is on incest is the same as on coprophilia: fine if you must but oh sweet baby Jesus

nozzferrahhtoo

No.

There may very well be useful and informative discussions to have on this subject, which I think the OP genuinely intends, but I have seen this topic now on too many threads on too many forums to know how easily it gets derailed into emotion and false science and worse.

For a start there is a linguistic problem here in that we have one term “incest” for a whole range of encounters just like we have one word “sport” for thai kick boxing and lawn bowling... yet there is massive differences between the two. Clearly sex between a father and his teen daughter is on a different moral plane of inquiry than cousins or siblings of equal ages and status. Yet we have one word for that entire plane and that obfuscates conversation on this issue to the point of near impossibility.

There is also the mistake of thinking, as all too many people do, that incest causes genetic mutation or deficiencies. This is not quite true. All it does is increase the possibility that a defect present in both of the parents, which is genetically recessive, will meet its allele in the womb and become the dominant trait. Anyone carrying a recessive harmful gene faces this issue in all reproduction however. The likelyhood is just a little bit higher that if you carry it, your sibling does.

There is also a problem of honesty in this subject. There are many who cite things like reproduction, genetic defects etc as being the reason they are against incest entirely. Yet however if you put it to them a situation where reproduction is not an issue... for example if one of the parents is sterile... somehow genetic defects was removed as an issue... or somehow 100% perfect contraception is created... to name some examples.... they are STLL as firmly against incest as they were before. This tells us that whatever their reasons are... they are alas not the ones they are pretending they are.

I personally see nothing wrong with incest per se, with the aforementioned caveats that we would apply to any kind of sex where one person is somehow taking advantage of power over another. We have certain taboos against superior to the subordinate sexual relations where one side is being exploited and that is no different with incest.

If two equal people such as siblings or cousins who are consenting adults want to explore their relationship sexually however then that is not for me to comment on. I can see no argument against it, nor have I seen any valid ones on any of the many threads I mentioned.

However I would venture one warning against it, rather than a moral argument against it just in the interests of trying to see both sides of the issue here and provide the OP with some extra fodder for thought....

Sex changes relationships. Many of us know this from experience when we have engaged in it with a best friend and the awkwardness the next morning left the friendship damaged beyond repair. We see "friends with benefits" also all too often getting more serious emotionally than intended. We see how hard it is when breaking up with a partner to stay "just friends" no matter how many of us aspire to try.

The world is full of potential mates and friends, so although losing a friend due to a relationship changed by sex is tragic, it is not as tragic as it could be.

Family relationships are rare. We only have 2 real parents. Most of us will only have a small number of cousins and siblings. Relative to the number of potential friendships in the world the number of potential family members is massively smaller and almost non-existent in terms of percentages.

In other words sibling and parental relationships are something rare and that we will never have again. If one wishes to risk changing beyond repair that rare and special relationship into one that you can have with anyone else at all on the planet, then I hope that they have thoroughly thought through the consequences of that before they do so. Once a sister, for example, becomes a sexual partner… getting back to a relationship where she is just your sister again will be exceedingly difficult and for some impossible.

So while I see no valid arguments against incest per se, I would urge the highest level of caution to anyone intending to engage in it and to be sure that what they hope to gain really does scale with the emotional loss that is being risked.

MagicMarker

No.

Consenting adults who are mentally sound? No problem, live and let live.

Ambersky

I wont be voting on this one because Im not able to be dispassionate or intellectually objective on this matter.
To tell my own story would as nozzferrahhtoo has warned, quickly derail the thread into emotion.
I truly believe we are only beginning to understand the power dynamics and systems operating within families and society that contribute to and enable sexual abuse to happen and to continue.
Of course I take it that the intention here is to talk about sexual relations between people of similar strength and power, however I find that it is those who hold the power that are the most unaware of it or eager to deny its dynamics when it comes to them.

We have recently come through a time of huge revelations about sexual abuse within religious run organisations but as we know most abuse happens in families.
Children can be most protected or they can also be most hurt within their own family
It has been and remains very difficult for the voices of those who have less power, less strength, less confidence to be heard.
The law is all we have to stand between those who do abuse their power, believing they are in the right according to their own individual moral compass and within their own castle walls.

I think the people who should be deciding on this one are the people who have actually experienced it, not in theory but in its reality.
There are some closely related adults who have developed sexual relationships are they looking for a change in the law?
Perhaps for them there could be accomodations but for the vast number of people who experience sex with a close relative it happens as a child and it is usually the most powerful who decides whether there is any harm in it.
Children also, particularly young children, think that whatever happens within their family is normal.
They usually think whatever is happening is caused by them ( magical thinking, Mammy and Daddy are fighting because Im bad)
It takes years for a child to have the capacity to realise there is anything wrong with their family and that it isnt their fault.
I firmly believe it is impossible to work out real mutual sexual consent with children.
As nozzferrahhtoo has said the term incest is way to wide a distinction around what exactly is ment by the word would have to be made before I could even entertain the idea.

amacachi

I like the way the French think.

robindch

Malty_T wrote: »

I do believe this is pretty much the first disagreement I've had with Robin. If I recall correctly my boards.ie love match for almost perfect.:o

Aw, sweety-honey-buns! Checks... (dammit)

Well, don't get me wrong. I've significantly less than no interest at all in incestualizing my own family (extended and otherwise), but once honest consent is observed and the age-gap kept to single figures or thereabouts, I've no intellectual problem with siblings, cousins, parents, grand-parents, hell, why not the whole lot, going at it like rabbits and turning something like christmas into a weekend to remember. But then again, I don't do that any more than I've some mad desire to wean the same lot off celery, ham, ling and any other distasteful habits they might have picked up.

But once they use protection, well, whatever floats their schlongs.

cavedave

I believe much of the reason we have laws against incest is to stop threats to state and religious power. Wealth can accumulate in families and if they marry cousins that can further concentrate power.

From here

Successful religions and states eventually realize they have to coexist with families, but they do what they can to contain them, particularly the most threatening ones. The anthropologist Nancy Thornhill has found that the incest laws of most cultures are not created to deal with the problem of borther-sister marriages; brothers and sisters don’t want to marry to begin with. Although brother-sister incest may be included in the prohibition and may help to legitimize it, the real targets of the laws are marriages that threaten the interests of the lawmakers. The rules ban marriages among more distant relatives like cousins, and are promulgated by the rulers of stratified societies to prevent wealth and power from accumulating in families, which could be future rivals

This is not exactly what others are discussing here but the theory that laws against incest are not just for genetic or abuse reasons. But particularly to keep power in religions and politics rather than families.

smokingman

This is one I wouldn't be too open minded about.
I would see it as wrong but not for the usual "ick! euuuuuugh!" reasons.

I see us all as having an obligation to the race. An obligation to further the species in as good a way as possible. Some here are arguing along the lines of "as long as there's no conception, it's grand" but if there's a sexual relationship, there's always the risk it will happen.

This "obligation" I'm talking about is one where we need to pick as genetically diverse DNA as we can in a partner, (while still trying to find the one we want to stay with for the rest of our lives - it's a pretty tough task to combine the two I know).

The concept of royalty has done the race a disservice over the centuries and has probably put us back a few thousand years in what we could have been. Incest is similar and as a human, I find it against our better interests.

Zombrex

Like most things it should only be allowed if they are hot

ShooterSF

Someone posted this before not such more as an argument for incest but rather that we are all subject to deciding based on emotion and then rationalising it afterwards which makes many an argument pointless as people put forward reasons built on emotion.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/experiments-in-philosophy/200804/what-s-the-matter-little-brothersister-action

On review I'm not against it if it's between two mentally stable consenting adults
though it wouldn't be for me.