Two adult brothers in a relationship

Bambi wrote: »

tbh, like a lot people, my acceptance of the various types of sexuality is on the basis that what consenting adults do with each other is none of my damn business. On those grounds I'd be a hypocrite to have a problem with this, in theory.

Yes, "consenting adults." Incest by it's nature brings question to the idea that two siblings can properly consent.

Imagine bringing him home to meet the parents!

The Op is missing a news article....so here's one:

Gay porn’s most shocking taboo

Based on their YouTube channel, Elijah and Milo Peters just seem like your average, slightly awkward Czech teenage twins. They enjoy role-playing games and steak. They like frolicking around on the beach in their elaborately patterned underwear and taunting each other while bodybuilding. (“Hey you lazy-ee boy! Put some weight on eet!”) But the Peters twins aren’t quite as innocent as their goofy grins and adorable accents suggest.


Over the past few months, they have become two of the most controversial performers to hit the gay porn world in a very long time. That’s because they’re willing to break a taboo that, even in an industry that thrives on extremes, is too extreme for many: twin incest (or, more succinctly, twincest). While the concept of twin performers is not new to the gay porn world, the Peters twins are notable both because of the extent of their popularity and the things they are willing to do with each other on camera. They French kiss; they perform oral sex on each other; they have anal sex; and most shockingly of all, they do it in a tender and romantic way.


“My brother is my boyfriend, and I am his boyfriend,” says one of the twins during a phone call from Prague (Elijah and Milo sound so much alike on the phone it is impossible to tell which one is speaking). “He is my lifeblood, and he is my only love.”

For some reason the idea of them having a romantic relationship together seems more creepy to me than the actual making porn together.

Would their babies not have genetic defects.

Bambi wrote: »

what in it's nature brings into question that both parties are of sound mind?

As I've already said the idea that they're siblings means there's questions over abuse, trauma and unhealthy relationships within the family.

And as someone else pointed out there's a huge amount of siblings who were separated at birth or childhood ending up together after finding each other in adulthood but before finding out they're related. Most evidence for this is where there has been difficulty conceiving or when a child has been born with genetic disease due to both parents (naturally) carrying dormant genes for the genetic disease. This points to some idea of attraction between people with the same parent existing on a genetic, subconcious level.

In the people separated at birth case I have no problems with them forming relationships (as abuse is unlikely.) I would like if they were both DNA tested before conceiving because the likelihood of having a child with a disease is higher. However, that's not because of the way inbreeding causes deformities, that actually happens a lot further down the line of intra-family breeding and is more likely to occur with cousins than siblings (there's been studies on this but I've lost my database access now I've finished Uni.) All this however is quite improbable in a modern society unless a specific strategy of eugenic type breeding has been followed. The reason for DNA testing is just because there's a higher chance that both parents carry dormant genes and there's quite a lot of diseases that occur if a man and woman unaffected by the disease but carrying the gene conceive.

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's a convenient example whereby " gut feelings" have caused people to be persecuted and ostracised.

Interracial marriage would be another example. I'm sure there are many who "just feel" it is wrong.

It's also a common tactic fundamentalist religious nutjobs in America use against equal rights for homosexual people.

gvn wrote: »

Are some people purposely reading the opposite of what Scanlas is saying? He's said he doesn't oppose homosexuality, nor oppose his specific example of incest. How is that an argument against homosexuality?

Some people in this thread will look for any reason to get offended.

And to answer Scanlas' question:

If both individuals are of sound mind, if neither one groomed the other during childhood (which is a valid argument against parent-child incest), and neither were themselves subjected to sexual abuse during childhood, then I can see no basis for objection. I might find it absolutely disgusting, but my own, personal feelings on something are not a valid basis for objecting it.

Well done for saying that. Its not a popular opinion so I'll be the first (and perhaps only) to back you up on it



Btw, I am also disgusted by it.

What are yis all on about. It's wrong full stop. For the people who are justifying or rationalising it. Your telling yourselves that you find yet sisters attractive as well. Ugh.

OP the question raises more questions about your mindset than it does about the topic. Ok you can see no wrong with it but why are you even thinking like that? You seem like a pretty disturbed person.