Incest?

[deathzero021]

i dont care at all. thats my opinion.

 

[thiosk]

I have a brother who I kind of crushed on when I was younger and did...stuff...with when I was younger and curious. So I really have no issues with it at all, and really can't understand what makes it 'squicky' to some.

Its way more common than anyone will admit. The interesting thing is that if you take immediate family members, they typically don't show any such feelings if they live together-- something is coded that seems to work as a big turn-off.

It gets way more interesting when you take people who were separated at birth, for instance, or perhaps the unmet biological father and daughter meet for the first time, the infatuation-o-meter often goes through the roof.

Humans are funny creatures.

 

[Morti]

So long as everyone involved is capable of giving, and has given, mature, informed consent, then I don't see any reason why anyone should care what they do (as a general rule, not just relaing to this topic).

However, we do know the Westermark Effect exists, so when it isn't working, we need to question if that is a result of psychological trauma or not. If it is, then they may not be capable of consent in that context.

Its way more common than anyone will admit. The interesting thing is that if you take immediate family members, they typically don't show any such feelings if they live together-- something is coded that seems to work as a big turn-off.

It gets way more interesting when you take people who were separated at birth, for instance, or perhaps the unmet biological father and daughter meet for the first time, the infatuation-o-meter often goes through the roof.

Humans are funny creatures.

This is outlined in the Wikipedia article for the westermark effect, since it is difficult to find a more perfect genetic match that your own siblings, on average, you would normally find them irresistable. The westermarck effect is evolutions way of preventing us inbreeding ourselves to death.

 

[Dethenger]

Reverse imprinting, IIRC.

The Westermarck Effect, specifically, though I too am dependent on my memory.

OT: I don't really care about anyone engaging in any sort of incest. What 2 consenting adults do on their own time is their own business. Now, I don't think it'd be right for them to have kids, but at the same time I remember reading that the potential hazards of having an inbred child aren't as likely as they're made out to be.

 

[Aethren]

I have a question for The Escapist: what's your opinion on incest, and would you ever engage in it?

I am imagining this is going to turn into a flame war at some point, so hey! Let's add some fuel for that fire!

I personally have no problem with incest, whatsoever. I have a brother who I kind of crushed on when I was younger and did...stuff...with when I was younger and curious. So I really have no issues with it at all, and really can't understand what makes it 'squicky' to some.

So that's my view, your turn escapist

Captcha: "It's Super Delicious" ooooooh my! <3

Brother/sister is a huge fantasy with mine, but then again, I don't have a sister, so sadly it stays in fantasy-land and roleplaying games.

 

[Blade_125]

An important this for a species survival is genetic diversity. If you engage in incest you are narrowing the gene pool such that any offspring will have a higher chance of an genetic defect showing up. SO if there is a history of something in your family it is far more likely to affect a child with only genetic material from that family.

That being said, if there are no genetic issues in the bloodline then there won't be any issues. Humans have bred animals this way all through history. Check out the parents of prize winning horses. Even the Egyptian Pharoes did this (of course I guess they would have hidden any flipper babies from history)

But if you are not worried about children then it's all about societal views.

 

[Varun Garuda Maharaj]

Its beacause the chances of an an offspring recieving genetic defects are GREATLY increased.

 

[Robot Number V]

*deep breath*

OK. So apparently science is telling us that it's totally OK to have kids with a close relative. So...I suppose...that if you want to do it....Ugh....Then...just...FINE. But don't fucking tell me about it.

Because despite science and logic...I think it's weird and gross. I doubt my feelings will ever change.

 

[Flippincrazy]

This thread amuses me with its mix of outright revulsion, the classic 'if my sister/brother was super hawt' and then the mature-ish discussion of the potential consequences.

OP, the 'fooling around' with your elder brother type of incest that you described is pretty okay in my book - however you have to bare in mind that said elder sibling might be exploiting the younger sibling - just something to bare in mind aside from the insta-EWNO! response.

Know what the most entertaining thing about this thread is? People playing the genetics card. True, there is an increased probability of genetic disabilities past from the related parents to the children, but think of two things. One, this is only a marginal increase that'll only really express itself after many occasions of inbreeding within a family tree - which is statistically highly unlikely among most - or hard luck. Secondly, if we're thinking in a pseudo-objective manner and claiming that incest is wrong due to potential genetic abnormalities being more prevalent - do we also conclude that it is morally wrong for people with outstanding genetic conditions to have children?

Sure, the idea itself is rather sick in my mind, but if others want to do it...I think we should revise are thinking on this matter, culturally-speaking. It's not only rednecks and the nobility that do such things, quite average nice people do - should we criticize them?

 

[Vivi22]

Its beacause the chances of an an offspring recieving genetic defects are GREATLYincreased.

Not entirely true. The increase in risk is certainly higher with siblin-sibling relationships since they likely share the genes for any hereditary conditions one may carry, but even branching out to first cousins (still quite closely related), the risk of child mortality is only about 4% higher. Even then, I haven't seen a study that didn't have a ridiculously low sample size so it's hard to say how prevalent problems actually are since this entire thing we're debating is a massive social taboo, and to large extent, illegal in many parts of the world.

Even still, this isn't a valid argument unless you're going to argue that people with genetic conditions shouldn't reproduce since the odds are much higher they'll pass them on to children. But since we don't do that, making a special case for this one situation we find objectionable is hypocritical.

If you were to tell any other couple for any other reason to not have kids, best case scenario people laugh at you. Worst case, it's seen as offensive. It was law, it would be seen as unjust and struck down.

 

[Loop Stricken]

Its beacause the chances of an an offspring recieving genetic defects are GREATLY increased.

Yes.

From 2% to a whopping 4%.

 

[Ferisar]

The only kind of incest I'd ever find on a positive scale is hot lesbian sisters.
Past that, I don't care what people do with each other, as long as they know they may make a child that is likely to be genetically inferior and have a crappy childhood.

If it's just a fling thing, even less care for it.

So, really, do what you want 'cause a pirate is free, I guess.

 

[Entitled]

We have a word for forcibly limiting reproductive rights to increase genetic perfection, and that word is "Eugenics".

You know who was a big fan of eugenics?

 

[Overusedname]

Sophisticated mammals, our cousins, have set up social norms that seem to minimize incest naturally, free of moral conditioning, where as homosexuality in animals runs rampant and is harmless. This is true of Apes and wolves, for example. These creatures function on raw instinct. Incest is still in the animal kingdom all over the place, but for the ones most similar to us, it seems to be minimal.

The problem with evolutionary psychology is, that it's not necessarily compatible with modern morality.

Yes, there is the Westermarck effect, but nature also tells us to find the people most similar to us physically the most attractive, as a way to separate herds from each other, keep a breeding community closed to outsider groups, and prevent the spread of foreign diseases.

So, should we outlaw interracial marriages? After all, these people are going against what nature and science tells the rest of us!

The thing is, that most of these evolutionary psychological effects are often contradicting each other, not shared by us to the same degree, often they are rendered obselete by modern society, and many of them are overwritten by all that human emotional-rational-moral thinking that we are doing.

Once again: I know. But once again, why do creatures of the same species have sex with different breeds anyway? I'm not saying it's always applicable, but the behavior of our cousins are always something to consider. There is evidence in nature, both within humanity and out, that says we weren't biologically meant to do this. Morally is a different discussion. But it's important to note that unlike gay sex and polygamy, incest appears to be connected to real problems. Big ones. Social science suggests similar issues. These conclusions are subject to change over time. Like I said, I'm playing the waiting game.

You have to understand I've looked into this extensively, and currently have literally no reason to accept that it's harmless right now. When I get evidence to the contrary...well, you get the point.

 

[Icehearted]

The whole kiddy incest thing might be okay, I often hear about kids playing "doctor" not with sexual intent (I guess? since they're too young and don't understand) but just out of curiosity.

Nope. It's been proven that children engage in sexual role-play and often develop fascination with sexuality at very young ages (I'm thinking just after the toddler years and in grade-school, but I couldn't specifically cite number off the top of my head). It goes beyond playing doctor, and is often actually reflective on perceived gender roles (playing house for example). I saw a fascinating study on this years ago, where they observed boys and girls having sleep overs, and the sexual jargon among them when they thought they were not being filmed. Among these was a girl, I think 4-6 years, wanting a costume to look like Jasmine from Aladdin because she "liked the sexy of it".

As for incest, often it begins with siblings of the opposite sex. It's actually also totally normal, or so I've read.

Another fun fact: incest is often the most prevalent sexual fantasy people indulge in around the world. Again, I can't cite from off the top of my head (this was also something I learned about more than a decade ago). So for all it's detractors, myself included, go figure.

 

[Entitled]

Another fun fact: incest is often the most prevalent sexual fantasy people indulge in around the world. Again, I can't cite from off the top of my head (this was also something I learned about more than a decade ago). So for all it's detractors, myself included, go figure.

Also, it's interesting that incest as a fetish, is often unrelated to sexual attraction to one's relatives.

For example I wasn't ever attracted to my sisters (I don't even like them as people), but I always found brother-sister incest stories titillating. It's hard to explain, but there is just something truly romantic about a relationship between two people who are so close together, wo loved each other in their whole lives, and them taking it to a next level even against all taboos.

 

[Nannernade]

The one reason people have a problem with it is because it's a stigma, like if someone goes to a psychiatrist they're automatically labeled crazy, also a stigma. Personally I'm not a fan of it but to each their own I s'pose.

 

[Seydaman]

Morally I do not believe there is anything wrong with having sex with those related to you by blood. The only caution is not to create a child, as the rate of defects are notably higher. I think the cultural stigma against it is frankly, dumb.

 

[Ashadow700]

Well, one thing that annoys me more then anything is when other people tell me what to do or not to do, when the specific action in question has absolutly no affect on anyone other then myself. So, to avoid hypocrocy, if a brother and sister would like to... do things, go ahead. I guess.
Having children together on the other hand - that is crossing my line.

But let's bring another hypothetical scenario into this discussion: Say that there was no genetic defect to having kids with your relatives. Would incent then still be a "wrong" thing, and what are the specific reasons for this?
I would have to say... not really. Aside for the whole moral aspect of it, which change from culture and time period, I can not think of any actual reasons for it to be a bad thing....
F* me, how did I come to this conclusion?

And would I sleep with my little sister? NO! No, I would not.

 

[Twilight_guy]

I do not support it. Neither does genetics. From what I've heard every human culture has rules against it as well. I guess you can do what you like but nobody is going to ever support you, only turn a blind eye if not be negative.