Do you find incest wrong?

[CrazyGirl17]

Well... yeah. I dunno, it just feels... off. And when it goes on for generations, well...

 

[Nicarus]

A weird topic for sure. I don't think I have anything to comment on for this one, but then again I did watch Yosuga-no-Sora and found that bit rather...hot? I'm not too good with synonyms. (Sora in that anime is rather gorgeous, but that's besides the point. =P )

 

[Treblaine]

Only within my own family, in which case I'm damn opposed.

Some stranger dating his sister? I don't care, I have more relevant things to worry about.

 

[Treblaine]

I imagine it's the same people who want 'lesbian girlfriends' because, y'know, they'd never cheat on them and they'd be up for a threesome.

*raises hand*

I have a lesbian girlfriend

AND ITS FREAKING AWESOME.
[sub](for many reasons other than just because she is a lesbian, but still)[/sub]

She's never cheated on me (though that's got more to do with her being a good person than with with her sexual orientation) and she totally is up for threesomes. I swear, I'm going to marry this woman.

You where saying?

Someone here is REALLY pushing the definition of "lesbian".

If she has ongoing sexual relations with both males and females, that is Bisexual. Though if she has only ever truly dated a male then she is really heterosexual and does sapphic things just to please you.

PS: marriage is for the person you want to stay together forever with, raise a family and grow old together. Will the possibility of threesomes still keep you together when you are both in your 50's?

 

[Brandon237]

Ninjad by OrenjiJusu.... *sigh*

But as he/she I don't really care as long as it doesn't create a child.

Why should I care if siblings love each other?

This, a child can lead to complications, but short of that, it's fine I guess, I don't really care and don't want to uselessly restrict people, because I am just nice like that ^^

Two captchas in a row... Escapist you are pushing it.

 

[quantumsoul]

I'm against it but I've read that half siblings and 1st cousins are of as far genetic defects are concerned. Something like a 4% increase in chance than unrelated poeple. So I guess its ok, but anything more closely related than that, no way.

 

[Dunkhelzahn]

I'm honestly surprised that nobody seems to have commented about the Westermark effect, yet.

Personally, I'll have to say that I agree with most people on here: If they both consent, then it's fine. Seeing all of the knee-jerk reactions on here is a little disturbing, to be honest.

Wow, it seems like people are willing to fuck anything these days. What's next? Pets? "Ohh, but the puppy loves its owner, and s/he's willing, I don't see anything wrong with that! You're too closed minded!"

You've got to be socially retarded if all you're able to shag are siblings. They will most likely have kids because "they love each other enough". We let this go on, soon we'll be researching ways to cater to the created abominations. Then we'll see a population explosive of mental retards from related parents that don't know how to stick their head out from under the rock they live in. I don't look forward to speaking herp derp in the future.

Honestly, genetic purity is becoming less and less of an issue these days, and seeing some of the other forum posters react with disgust and hate to this topic bears some chilling resemblances to anti-black and anti-gay movements. Not exactly the same, sure, but when you start thinking that children need to be killed to maintain genetic 'purity' (even jokingly) then you should really take a step back and try to rethink your position.

It's not just the genetic pitfalls. Ironically, incest will usher an closed minded society. So no, it's not like an anti-black/gay stance. For example, incest royalty wanting to keep a pure bloodline in power, or the nazis wanting to keep a pure, supreme race. The Nazi analogy, yet farfetched, is more related than your anti-black/gay argument. And seriously, should a father be turned on buy his daughter after raising her for 15, maybe 13 years? "Blah blah blah we're talking about consenting adults" think outside the box. If incest was legal, and the daughter doesn't think it's wrong, you can bet there will be several private incidents of pedo father-daughter incidents. What a way to grow up. We already have too many children fucking as it is. GG rap culture, GG.

I'm sorry? I can understand the references to the French and English (most of the European nations, in fact)'s attitudes to incest within the monarchy, but that's not really applicable today is it? I just fail to see your argument, I'm afraid.

That you back up your point with 'I just think it's wrong' kind of puts you in a shaky position.

The Westermark effect which I referred to earlier (And which I'm forced to assume that you didn't read) basically covers why Incest isn't particularly common between siblings. It basically says (And this is a real dumbed down version) that people that you grow up with from between one to six years old are flagged subconsciously as being siblings and therefore genetically incompatible. It doesn't happen to everyone, obviously, but that is one of the main reasons that 'most' people are repulsed at the thought of intercourse with a brother or sister.

Also, I used the Anti-Black, Anti-Gay references in the way I would at any infringement on liberal freedoms. I was more commenting on the "EEW GROSS" and "IT'S JUST WRONG" comments by fellow posters than anything else.

 

[Treblaine]

I dunno, never tried.

A related question, though, do you find the idea of sisters (preferably twins) having sex to be less wrong than other forms of incest? A lot of people seem to for some reason.

You see. that's always bugged me.

It's like some common male fantasy to have a threesome with twins.... why?

Then why is it SO MUCH HOTTER when two girls kiss, than if they just stood next to each other dancing sexily? Hell two fully clothed hot women kissing is hotter than a hundred hot naked girls not showing any intimacy to each other.

Why is the sight of women kissing each other so much hotter than any guy kissing two girls?

I think it serves the obscure repressed male fantasy to BE a woman, yet without sacrificing (what they perceive as) an essential part of their masculinity: their attraction to females. That is the paradox of male heterosexuality and their obsession with the female form it can extend to the illogical fantasy of BEING of the female form.

 

[Chromanin]

Ditto.

And what's with this "if you defend homosexuality then you defend incest" argument? I really can't believe we've devolved so much as a species that every form of love has to be degraded to sex.

I'm also amazed at how many people get pissed at all the "I've lost my faith in humanity" threads we get around here and try to make the argument that we're worth a damn. Clearly, we're just animals and nothing special. So why are you people against incest if it produces a child? We're animals. Therefore, the only goal is survival. We need to reproduce like we're catholic rabbits.

 

[Leg End]

Consent is a difficult one when you could have the situation where one family memeber has groomed the other for literally their entire lifetime.

Nah, it's disgusting. There are millions of people in this world and the only one for you is someone you grew up with? Someone who if you go down the normal relationship route with your gonna have a problem brewing down the line, one that is totally avoidable by following the very good example 99.99% of people exhibit...

...Isn't incest illegal in USA?

Doesn't that make this topic off the cards? Come on moderators, clarify and apply the forum rules in this thread!

That would obviously be out of the question, or I'd at least be smacking them.

The Westernmark Effect. That is all.

The USA has 50 states and all of them have differing laws on everything, including incest.

The forum rules do not apply the way you think they apply. Please, read dem again.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Yes, it is wrong.

Ever so wrong.

And why do these incest threads keep coming back?
Is this the new ''in'' thing?

Can we go back to zombie situations please.

Some horny guys must be attracted to their sisters

 

[Samurai Silhouette]

Snip

Not going to waste my time debating with someone that takes things out of context or likes to pervert the opposition's arguments with negative, unrelated connotations. Think outside the incest box please.

 

[Cheery Lunatic]

I smell someone trying to get their precious badges.

I'm gonna assume you're directing that at me, and I'm gonna say no I'm not, as I really don't care about badges whatsoever.
I was honestly expecting this thread to live for only maybe 2 pages, 3 tops.

I brought it up because my Philosophy Club had a discussion over it the other day.

Ever so wrong.

And why do these incest threads keep coming back?
Is this the new ''in'' thing?

Can we go back to zombie situations please.

Sorry, I didn't know there were so many topics done on it.
I've never actually seen a thread on it (granted I don't closely watch every hot thread each day), and I thought to find the Escapists' input on it since it's so controversial.
I mean, this isn't me trying to subtly say I want to bang my siblings. I'm a girl, I'm straight, and I have two sisters, so the incest thing doesn't affect me on the "herp wanna shag my bro" kind of deal.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I think it's fairly audacious of you to say what you have considering you were the first one here to hurl mud. I only respond with the tone I'm given. I wouldn't have dreamt of been rude to you with no reason. And here you're going to admonish me for what I said when you were the aggressor? Please.

Anyway, I don't see how anything here disagrees with what I've said. Obviously any risk of a child is out the window with homosexual incest, so if this is the reason or a reason why incest is "wrong", then that completely absolves homosexual incestuous couples of any notion of "wrongness".

Since the risk of a deformed kid being brought into the world seems to be your (admittedly reasonable) worry, that raises a few questions/facts.

Completely safe sex between heterosexuals (condom, proper lubrication, pill and spermicide) reduces the risk of pregnancy to something insane like a 0.001% chance of getting pregnant every time you have sex. Considering I am a woman who is anal retentive about contraception and wants to avoid having kids at all costs, I've made sure I'm informed.

Secondly. That also absolves the wrongness of intercourse between family members who are sterilized or totally infertile. If a guy has a vasectomy or the woman has her tubes tied, no possibility of having a kid. So in this case it would also be "okay".

And finally, if bringing a potentially deformed child into the world is a worry, then women over 50 shouldn't be allowed to have kids. The risk of genetic deformities between a person and their first cousin is about the same as a woman over 50 giving birth.

Well I find it hard to be civil with a person that has basically called a portion of the forum uninformed, backwards, ignorant twats because they do not share the same view as them.

Last statement to the top will be addressed as it is easier for me to type it up.

I never said women over 50 should have kids but that is off topic and something for another day.

It is still not right as it encourages the practise to begin which walks a fine line then more will want to do it which will lead to other cases of people wanting it.

Regardless of the fact that pregnancy percentage is so low it really doesn't make a difference as so few people take such precautions. There are still people in the world(developed world) who think pulling out and being a virgin are effective forms of contraception. So until all that stuff is gone that low of a chance is not good enough to consider it. Even with my own family if I did that with my sister and she did get pregnant there is a chance that people in my family have Rhesus Negative Blood. Now I don't know how much you know about that but it does lead to major complications and even with such a small chance I wouldn't even consider the chance of reinforcing such a negative(budum tish) trait.

 

[Pimppeter2]

I imagine it's the same people who want 'lesbian girlfriends' because, y'know, they'd never cheat on them and they'd be up for a threesome.

*raises hand*

I have a lesbian girlfriend

AND ITS FREAKING AWESOME.
[sub](for many reasons other than just because she is a lesbian, but still)[/sub]

She's never cheated on me (though that's got more to do with her being a good person than with with her sexual orientation) and she totally is up for threesomes. I swear, I'm going to marry this woman.

You where saying?

Someone here is REALLY pushing the definition of "lesbian".

If she has ongoing sexual relations with both males and females, that is Bisexual. Though if she has only ever truly dated a male then she is really heterosexual and does sapphic things just to please you.

PS: marriage is for the person you want to stay together forever with, raise a family and grow old together. Will the possibility of threesomes still keep you together when you are both in your 50's?

Okay, well she's technically Pansexual. But she's also a lesbian. Which is what we're talking about.

And as for the marriage comment, it was mostly kidding about the reason. We've been together for over a year. She's amazing, for other non-sexual reasons. I was just teasing.

 

[Boba Frag]

Yeah, cos the people who engage in that are such balanced and well rounded individuals....
(Oh, the sarcasm!)
Fictional case in point: Cersei and Jaime Lannister. Collossal paranoid ***** meets unhinged, vain psychotic.

There have been numerous cases where it's very much horrible abuse by an older relative- nothing consensual whatsoever.
Christ, have we all forgotten Josef Fritzel??

I don't know if I'm missing like, a double layer of sarcasm or something... But are you honestly comparing cases of abuse/control to two consenting, fully capable adults actively deciding to engage in incest?

If that's seriously your argument, the cases of spousal abuse around the world would vastly outnumber cases like the fictional and real (Fritzel) cases you mentioned. So why not be against heterosexual relationships as well? After all, if a handful of crazies are being crazy and maladjusted, clearly everyone else in a similar situation is too.

Seriously though. If I'm totally off the ball and I missed something in your post, just ignore me.

I'm tempted to ignore that alright because I have yet to see any compelling evidence of consenting adults engaging in it.
Yes I am seriously comparing the two cases as I believe it's a fundamentally deranged and sick practice.

There have been far more cases of incest involving the horrible abuse of the Fritzel case, also in my own country.

Feel free to argue back, it won't change my opinion on it being a disgusting and genetically fucking backward practice.

Where exactly are linking incest with consensual heterosexual relationships? What is the linkage here?
What's your point or goal in linking these together?

Incest is a form of abuse, but we're focussing the discussion on that, not spousal abuse which is a separate issue.

 

[00Pyro]

If you love someone then you should be able to have a relationship with them.
But inter-family pregnancies can screw stuff up.

Here's the thing about that, you don't need sex to show you love someone. Most people love their families. I really just needed to put that out there.

Of course, I love my family. Its perfectly possible to have a relationship without any sexual contact. But sometimes people feel that that isn't enough to show their feelings.

 

[jakjay1995]

I personaly am not into it but everyone has their quirks. If the feeling is mutal between them and they don't keep going on about it then I don't have a problem with it.