You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 12:28:06 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Incest  (Read 7012 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: Incest
« Reply #25 on: July 06, 2012, 11:35:17 AM »
I have the same view for this that I do for homosexuality. I do not care what someone does behind their closed doors so long as it does not negatively affect me. My preference is that I do not hear all the details - just as I ask not to hear all the details from my friends or coworkers (straight or gay).

I will admit that there is a certain squick factor there for me - I mean, I KNOW my family and I certainly have no sexual interest in any of my family members - but to each his/her own so long as it is consensual and not abusive.

Offline Caitlin

Re: Incest
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2012, 11:35:46 AM »
Um - just to point out...

The premise on the OP is that the couple is not interested in producing children at all, and is taking every precaution not to.  I'm not sure if this could include voluntary sterilization, but properly used birth control at a bare minimum.  This takes the whole genetics factor out of the equation, making them 'non-contributory' towards the human population.
In that case I have nothing against it, as long as it's consensual, though if it involves a parent - child relationship then the child should be at least at the age of consent.

Unfortunately though, I hear more negative stories of abuse when it comes to incest than positive ones where it's consensual.

Offline Will

Re: Incest
« Reply #27 on: July 06, 2012, 01:31:54 PM »
In that case I have nothing against it, as long as it's consensual, though if it involves a parent - child relationship then the child should be at least at the age of consent.

Unfortunately though, I hear more negative stories of abuse when it comes to incest than positive ones where it's consensual.

You have to wonder how many people in consensual, incestuous relationships have any motivation to "go public," though.  Obviously, if it's abusive, one would hope that it would come to light and be dealt with at some point.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Incest
« Reply #28 on: July 06, 2012, 02:00:58 PM »
Kind of like non-acrimonious divorces that way.

Offline AndyZ

Re: Incest
« Reply #29 on: July 06, 2012, 03:01:53 PM »
One thing that I notice about these kinds of discussions is how easily the slippery slope kicks in.

It's simple enough to say that you're only talking about homosexual relationships where pregnancy wouldn't be an issue, but what about heterosexual relationships?  What about if they want to have a child?

It's exceptionally easy to look at an individual issue, say that it's not a problem, and then open the floodgates.  Attempting to only allow the issue to squeak through on those grounds, without getting into the issue of where the problems lie, isn't much better.  Far too often, people just say, "Well, we've already done all this," and keep on going.

People have been pretty cool about giving their reasonings on here so far, though, but I haven't really seen much in the way of blanket statements as to what should be okay and what isn't, other than words like "consensual" and "abuse."

I would much rather see a full and detailed list than simply whittling (for lack of a better word coming to me at the moment; other suggestions would be welcome) to come up with individual things, with reasonings for any barriers.

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Incest
« Reply #30 on: July 06, 2012, 03:26:32 PM »
Discussion on a purely theoretical basis is all well and good. 

So, a family rents a beach house for the summer and as everyone arrives Uncle Nate and cousin Julie take one room and Aunt Betty and cousin Mark take another.  Julie and Mark are over eighteen. 

A theoretical discussion on whether or not incest should be prosecuted needs to include applying that opinion in a family setting in my opinion.

I'm not looking for a response; just asking that you think about it.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Incest
« Reply #31 on: July 06, 2012, 04:13:28 PM »
Well, regardless of taking measures to prevent pregnancy or not wishing to have a child there is simply no way to take the health risk completely off the table in regard to a heterosexual couple having sex.  The health risks are significant for a child if there are genetic factors involved.  A simple punnet square will show the problems with this arrangement.  Perhaps some people will still cry that this is not fair in this particular instance, but how often is this particular instance going to occur entirely. 

The second issue is in regard to the power dynamics.  A family situation always has power dynamics.  Parents are supposed to have power and dominance over their children, the children growing up to eventually find their independence and go to establish their own family units.  Older siblings typically have some power over younger.  People do not exist that long with each other, grow up with one another without there being power dynamics.  Attempting to setup another instance of their not being dominance of one over the other, of eliminating any coercion in the relationship is near impossible.

There is also the situation, in the same vein of power dynamics, of role shift.  For instance of a mother and son having sex.  The problem then comes that the relationship of mother and son has become different as the son now assumes the position of lower, potential husband.  He might become more dominant toward his mother and other family members as he is now the lover to the woman who was once filling the role of mother.  What happens to that relationship?  Perhaps some do not see this shift in role as important, but keep in mind that one of the signs of rape between father and daughter is the daughter assuming many roles and tasks of the wife.

Third there is the problem of introducing sexual tension to relationships that are supposed to be innocent of those factors.  People depend on their family for a myriad of reasons.  Emotional, financial, spiritual and so on types of support are expected from family members.  Sex can make those waters quite murky and complex, adding a dynamic that would make most people uncomfortable.  The strain is not simply between the lovers, but also to other family members as they deal with the relationship.  Anyone ever had sex with a friend and the relationship gone sour?  Apply that to a family member, someone who cannot be “dumped” and for whom there is a great deal of history. 

Offline Lilias

Re: Incest
« Reply #32 on: July 06, 2012, 04:35:36 PM »
A lot of the laws defining incest come from times when procreation was a given in any sexual relationship, and families were indissoluble, hence the restrictions concerning relatives by marriage. Several legislatures drop step-siblings and siblings-in-law into the incest barrier; I personally see nothing reprehensible about a relationship between two people who share no genes at all, just because their parents or siblings chose to marry.

I'm going to leave the blood relation thing alone because I have no clear opinion on the issue. Although it's interesting that first cousins are considered forbidden as often as not.

Offline Serephino

Re: Incest
« Reply #33 on: July 06, 2012, 06:39:29 PM »
Actually, if you use a punnet square (if it's the thing I'm thinking of), there is only a 25% chance of passing on the recessive trait, assuming both parties are carriers.  That may be too high of a risk for some people, and obviously genetics is a lot more complicated than a square, but still, it's not as bad as people like to make it out to be if it's just a one-generation thing.  Now, if you have several generations worth of incest, then, yes, there is more of a risk for genetic defects. 

The Egyptians and European Nobility went a little nuts because it was nothing but incest.  The Egyptians believed the pharaohs were living gods, and therefore, it was blasphemy to dilute their blood.  Each pharaoh married his sisters, female cousins, and even mother and aunts if they were still alive and could bear children.  His queen had to be a sister, and she was supposed to be the mother of his heir.  It was pretty much the same with European Nobility.  They were too good to dirty their blue blood with common blood, so all they had was each other.  Over time the gene pool got smaller and smaller.

But we're not talking about several generations here.  Other than admittedly finding one of my first cousins kinda hot, I don't really understand the attraction.  However, I don't understand the attraction to furries either.  That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with someone being turned on by furries, it just isn't for me.  I support the right of consenting adults to have any kind of relationship they wish, be it homosexual, incest, or polygamy.  There is the possibility of abuse and coercion, but you have that in any dynamic.  Police officers, teachers, and bosses have already been mentioned, and there are probably other examples I just can't think of right now.  Just because the possibility exists doesn't mean that all such relationships involve abuse and/or coercion. 

Okay, so here is food for thought.  An older sibling has some influence over a younger sibling.  That is usually true.  Now, think back to high school.  You, a lowly Freshmen/ Sophomore see this really cool Senior.  You want that cool person to like you.  For some reason, said cool person notices your existence.  Again, you want them to like you, and you want to please them.  This happens, more often with older boys and younger girls.  The girl is so psyched that the hot older guy wants them that they end up doing things they wouldn't normally do; like sex.  For argument's sake, let's say the guy didn't do anything like say he'd break up with her if she didn't sleep with him.  He just made it clear that's what he wanted, but would've taken no for answer.  Is that coercion?  Should that be criminalized, even if he did threaten to break up with her?     

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Incest
« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2012, 07:30:12 PM »
Okay, so here is food for thought.  An older sibling has some influence over a younger sibling.  That is usually true.  Now, think back to high school.  You, a lowly Freshmen/ Sophomore see this really cool Senior.  You want that cool person to like you.  For some reason, said cool person notices your existence.  Again, you want them to like you, and you want to please them.  This happens, more often with older boys and younger girls.  The girl is so psyched that the hot older guy wants them that they end up doing things they wouldn't normally do; like sex.  For argument's sake, let's say the guy didn't do anything like say he'd break up with her if she didn't sleep with him.  He just made it clear that's what he wanted, but would've taken no for answer.  Is that coercion?  Should that be criminalized, even if he did threaten to break up with her?     


Only if she reports him.  Like any other law in creation.

Offline Valerian

Re: Incest
« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2012, 08:10:35 PM »
The Egyptians and European Nobility went a little nuts because it was nothing but incest.  The Egyptians believed the pharaohs were living gods, and therefore, it was blasphemy to dilute their blood.  Each pharaoh married his sisters, female cousins, and even mother and aunts if they were still alive and could bear children.  His queen had to be a sister, and she was supposed to be the mother of his heir.  It was pretty much the same with European Nobility.  They were too good to dirty their blue blood with common blood, so all they had was each other.  Over time the gene pool got smaller and smaller. 

This is something of a side point, obviously, but pharaohs were allowed to marry any woman they liked, noble or commoner. and frequently took advantage of that.  For instance, the mother of Ramses II, aka Ramses the Great, was a commoner and therefore not related to her husband at all.  And the chief wife didn't have to be a sibling, though she often was -- most of the time, the chief queen was expected to govern in her husband's absence, so she was usually chosen for her abilities in that area.

Royal women had it much worse in Egypt, though they weren't really a very sexist society in other areas -- a princess was not allowed to marry beneath her as the men could, and marrying princes or kings from other countries was forbidden lest that lead to foreign claimants to the throne.  So if an Egyptian princess didn't marry a relative, she didn't marry at all.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Incest
« Reply #36 on: July 07, 2012, 09:07:43 AM »
The senior in this case is using coercion, yes.  Because of his popularity and fame alongside her reluctance to do the act until he threatens to leave her.  He is using the threat of withdrawing his presence to make her do something she does not wish to do.  The act is not illegal because the girl in this case has the option to end the relationship, thereby severing any real danger from the interaction.

How does one break up with their brother?

Were this a case of the older brother and the younger sister, then there is a more dangerous edge here.  The brother cannot simply go away in this instance as they occupy the same house.  He will be there while she sleeps, while she bathes, while she enjoys time to herself.  Who is she to go to if he begins to threaten her?  Interjected into her household, a place of safety and security especially at such a vulnerable age, is the tension that sex brings.  No longer is the older sibling just her brother but also a jilted lover and ex-love interest.  There is a confusion of roles there.

Offline Will

Re: Incest
« Reply #37 on: July 07, 2012, 09:15:28 AM »
So if they don't live together, it's okay?

Offline Caitlin

Re: Incest
« Reply #38 on: July 07, 2012, 09:26:33 AM »
You have to wonder how many people in consensual, incestuous relationships have any motivation to "go public," though.  Obviously, if it's abusive, one would hope that it would come to light and be dealt with at some point.
Yeah, I considered that as well. Most are aware of the taboo on it and will keep it to themselves.
Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
One thing that I notice about these kinds of discussions is how easily the slippery slope kicks in.

It's simple enough to say that you're only talking about homosexual relationships where pregnancy wouldn't be an issue, but what about heterosexual relationships?  What about if they want to have a child?

It's exceptionally easy to look at an individual issue, say that it's not a problem, and then open the floodgates.  Attempting to only allow the issue to squeak through on those grounds, without getting into the issue of where the problems lie, isn't much better.  Far too often, people just say, "Well, we've already done all this," and keep on going.

People have been pretty cool about giving their reasonings on here so far, though, but I haven't really seen much in the way of blanket statements as to what should be okay and what isn't, other than words like "consensual" and "abuse."

I would much rather see a full and detailed list than simply whittling (for lack of a better word coming to me at the moment; other suggestions would be welcome) to come up with individual things, with reasonings for any barriers.
Though I can understand such a wish, I simply couldn't give you one since I believe every case would have be judged on itself. In some cases there are circumstances in which I would find it more acceptable than in others.

There was a news article last year where a brother who was separated from his sister for a long time met her, fell in love and got 4 children with her, after which they found out that they were brother and sister. His sister was also in the lower regions with her IQ and in this case I would have said, well let them stay together, the harm is already done anyway.

However, the german judge ruled differently. The man went to jail for several years and he even the European Court ruled against him. As a result he's now divorced and has a broken family. I don't see how anybody gained anything from that.

On the other hand, if he had known that she was his sister and married her despite knowing, then I'd have been against it. It's only a single circumstance that is different and it can already swing my favour of being for or against it.

Making a certain set of rules is nearly impossible. I live by certain principles, which would let me decide that one case is okay and another isn't, but who is to say that it's not my principles that are flawed?
Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
Discussion on a purely theoretical basis is all well and good. 

So, a family rents a beach house for the summer and as everyone arrives Uncle Nate and cousin Julie take one room and Aunt Betty and cousin Mark take another.  Julie and Mark are over eighteen. 

A theoretical discussion on whether or not incest should be prosecuted needs to include applying that opinion in a family setting in my opinion.

I'm not looking for a response; just asking that you think about it.
This is probably the most acceptable situation, especially if Betty and Nate are brother/sister and Mark/Julie are sister. To me aunt/nephew and uncle/niece relationships don't fall under 'true' incest anyway, so I'd be okay with that. For me 'true' incest is between direct blood relatives, so parents/children or siblings.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
Actually, if you use a punnet square (if it's the thing I'm thinking of), there is only a 25% chance of passing on the recessive trait, assuming both parties are carriers.  That may be too high of a risk for some people, and obviously genetics is a lot more complicated than a square, but still, it's not as bad as people like to make it out to be if it's just a one-generation thing.  Now, if you have several generations worth of incest, then, yes, there is more of a risk for genetic defects. 

The Egyptians and European Nobility went a little nuts because it was nothing but incest.  The Egyptians believed the pharaohs were living gods, and therefore, it was blasphemy to dilute their blood.  Each pharaoh married his sisters, female cousins, and even mother and aunts if they were still alive and could bear children.  His queen had to be a sister, and she was supposed to be the mother of his heir.  It was pretty much the same with European Nobility.  They were too good to dirty their blue blood with common blood, so all they had was each other.  Over time the gene pool got smaller and smaller.

But we're not talking about several generations here.  Other than admittedly finding one of my first cousins kinda hot, I don't really understand the attraction.  However, I don't understand the attraction to furries either.  That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with someone being turned on by furries, it just isn't for me.  I support the right of consenting adults to have any kind of relationship they wish, be it homosexual, incest, or polygamy.  There is the possibility of abuse and coercion, but you have that in any dynamic.  Police officers, teachers, and bosses have already been mentioned, and there are probably other examples I just can't think of right now.  Just because the possibility exists doesn't mean that all such relationships involve abuse and/or coercion. 

Okay, so here is food for thought.  An older sibling has some influence over a younger sibling.  That is usually true.  Now, think back to high school.  You, a lowly Freshmen/ Sophomore see this really cool Senior.  You want that cool person to like you.  For some reason, said cool person notices your existence.  Again, you want them to like you, and you want to please them.  This happens, more often with older boys and younger girls.  The girl is so psyched that the hot older guy wants them that they end up doing things they wouldn't normally do; like sex.  For argument's sake, let's say the guy didn't do anything like say he'd break up with her if she didn't sleep with him.  He just made it clear that's what he wanted, but would've taken no for answer.  Is that coercion?  Should that be criminalized, even if he did threaten to break up with her?     
Actually, I have to set you straight here on the European nobility Serephino. They didn't feel too good to mingle with commoners, or at the very best that was only a small reason. The bigger reason was a financial one. Marriage outside their group meant breaking up their wealth and lands, which wasn't acceptable. It was okay to marry strategically in such a way that you gained more lands and wealth, but if your heir carried a different last name then it would mean that your family lost their possessions to another family. It was much more a way to protect their lands from falling apart than to prevent commoners to become nobleman. The latter did play a role too, but a much smaller one.

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Incest
« Reply #39 on: July 07, 2012, 10:57:41 AM »
Discussion on a purely theoretical basis is all well and good. 

So, a family rents a beach house for the summer and as everyone arrives Uncle Nate and cousin Julie take one room and Aunt Betty and cousin Mark take another.  Julie and Mark are over eighteen. 

A theoretical discussion on whether or not incest should be prosecuted needs to include applying that opinion in a family setting in my opinion.

I'm not looking for a response; just asking that you think about it.
This is probably the most acceptable situation, especially if Betty and Nate are brother/sister and Mark/Julie are sister. To me aunt/nephew and uncle/niece relationships don't fall under 'true' incest anyway, so I'd be okay with that. For me 'true' incest is between direct blood relatives, so parents/children or siblings.
Allow me to describe the scenario in more detail.

Your parents/in-laws rent a house at the beach for a family vacation.  They have three children who along with their spouses and their children will be joining them.  Betty is their daughter and married to Nate.  Julie and Mark are Betty's and Nate's daughter and son.  Betty and Mark share a bedroom and Nate and Julie share another.  This is they way they live at home but it comes as a surprise to the rest of the family.  Think about your reaction if you were the parent/grandparent or sibling/in-law/niece or nephew/cousin of the incestuous foursome. 

Again, think about it but you don't have to respond.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Incest
« Reply #40 on: July 07, 2012, 10:58:19 AM »
No Will, the problem is there is no way to "break up" from the brother.  Once more, sexual tension has invaded a family dynamic.

Offline Will

Re: Incest
« Reply #41 on: July 07, 2012, 03:20:02 PM »
The point you were making seemed dependent on the participants being at a "tender age," and living together.  It is absolutely possible for grown adults to "break up" with family; people do it all the time.  Would a messy end be something to consider before diving into sex with someone you already have a familial relationship with?  Of course, but that's the same sort of thing people have to consider when they think about hooking up with close friends.  I don't see a difference.  I actually have friends I'm closer to than family.  It wouldn't be illegal for me to start a relationship with them, regardless of the sexual tension it caused among the rest of our very close friends.

And I don't believe a possibility of coercion is enough to make something illegal.  What about D/s relationships?  That's about as ripe for coercion and abuse as it gets.  And yet it's legal.  Because the opportunity for abuse is not a crime; actual abuse, on the other hand, is.

Offline Serephino

Re: Incest
« Reply #42 on: July 07, 2012, 03:47:53 PM »
Exactly.  We're mostly talking about adults here.  I know several people who have very little if it all to do with their biological family, so one is not forced to be around them once one is 18 and living on their own.  Hell, I'm not entirely sure my family remembers my existence now that I'm not living with my mother. 

Let's say you have a father/daughter relationship.  The parents are divorced.  The daughter grew up living with her mother, and possibly didn't even see her father all that much growing up.  As an adult she decides she wants a relationship with her father, and for some reason it turns sexual.  Then it doesn't work.  If she is an adult, even if she still lives with her mother, she can very easily go back to not having a relationship with her father, just as she did growing up.  If the girl's mother never even knew about the sexual aspect to begin with, nothing even has to be explained. 

Even if you have that 'tender age' scenario' things might be unpleasant for a while, but living together would not be a permanent situation.  Even if the older brother doesn't go off to college, the girl will turn 18 eventually.  And if it's really that bad, there is always emancipation.  My boyfriend's sister was looking into it when I met him, she just never got off her ass and did it.  It isn't exactly if they'll be stuck together the rest of their lives.  Also, what if it works out and they don't want to break up?

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Incest
« Reply #43 on: July 07, 2012, 05:57:22 PM »
Well, for one I was working off the scenario set forth by Serephino.  My argument does not rely on “tender” ages but was instead to simply show how the example put forth by someone else is not so innocent.  That Serephino suggested the sister in the scenario proposed emancipate herself if the situation with her brother gets that bad is a prime example of why incest should not be allowed.  The coercion aspect is not what makes the situation illegal.  Though coercion is enough to make society frown on boss-coworker relationships and in some situations make them illegal.  I have listed multiple reasons why incest is to be frowned upon from health reasons to disruption of family dynamic.  The government does pass laws to protect what it sees as an essential part of society, which is the family. 

Children stay at home for many years after reaching adulthood.  That is one of the hallmark portions of the healthcare law passed by Obama was to keep children on their parent’s insurance for an extended period.  Children and other family members rely on each other long after reaching adulthood.  Potential disruption of that family dynamic would be catastrophic to the child and to the family as a whole.  A son or daughter relies on their parents.  Muddying those waters with sex would be a bad idea.

Yes, close friends have sex and can lead to regret.  Once again, you can break up with your friend but not really your relatives.  Certainly children stop talking to their parents, relatives don’t contact each other but the state is not going to purposefully allow a situation to occur with such potential for family disruption.

Offline Torch

  • Pay no attention to the woman behind the curtain/Trieste's sarcasm buddy
  • Suspended
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Location: USA
  • Gender: Female
  • "Soul meets soul on lovers' lips." P.B. Shelley
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Incest
« Reply #44 on: July 07, 2012, 09:08:36 PM »
And I don't believe a possibility of coercion is enough to make something illegal.  What about D/s relationships?  That's about as ripe for coercion and abuse as it gets.  And yet it's legal.  Because the opportunity for abuse is not a crime; actual abuse, on the other hand, is.

Not exactly. People are arrested and convicted of assault all the time for engaging in consensual BDSM. In many jurisdictions, assault even with consent, is a crime.

And no state or appellate court in the US has allowed consent as a defense for assault in BDSM cases.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2012, 09:11:07 PM by Torch »

Offline Will

Re: Incest
« Reply #45 on: July 07, 2012, 10:01:40 PM »
Not exactly. People are arrested and convicted of assault all the time for engaging in consensual BDSM. In many jurisdictions, assault even with consent, is a crime.

And no state or appellate court in the US has allowed consent as a defense for assault in BDSM cases.

D/s may or may not have anything to do with the BD and SM portions of the BDSM acronym.  I'm not talking about whips and chains here; I'm talking about lifestyle power exchange.

Yes, close friends have sex and can lead to regret.  Once again, you can break up with your friend but not really your relatives.  Certainly children stop talking to their parents, relatives don’t contact each other but the state is not going to purposefully allow a situation to occur with such potential for family disruption.

Grown adults are no more forced to interact with their family than any other people.  If I want to disrupt my family, that's my right.  And I don't have to sleep with any of them to do it.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2012, 10:04:39 PM by Will »

Offline Torch

  • Pay no attention to the woman behind the curtain/Trieste's sarcasm buddy
  • Suspended
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Location: USA
  • Gender: Female
  • "Soul meets soul on lovers' lips." P.B. Shelley
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Incest
« Reply #46 on: July 07, 2012, 11:16:35 PM »
D/s may or may not have anything to do with the BD and SM portions of the BDSM acronym.  I'm not talking about whips and chains here; I'm talking about lifestyle power exchange.


I'm more than fully aware of that. However, the fact remains there are physical aspects of BDSM which are considered against the law.  Many lifestylers are unaware of this and falsely rely on consent to protect themselves.

Even in a power exchange relationship, if any activities can be classified as assault (and assault can have a very broad definition within the law), consent is irrelevant when it comes to being prosecuted.

In that respect, a D/s relationship can be considered illegal.

Offline Will

Re: Incest
« Reply #47 on: July 08, 2012, 12:09:17 AM »
I'm more than fully aware of that. However, the fact remains there are physical aspects of BDSM which are considered against the law.  Many lifestylers are unaware of this and falsely rely on consent to protect themselves.

Even in a power exchange relationship, if any activities can be classified as assault (and assault can have a very broad definition within the law), consent is irrelevant when it comes to being prosecuted.

In that respect, a D/s relationship can be considered illegal.

Again, you're talking about specific activities that may or may not be involved.  It is perfectly possible to have a D/s relationship without participating in any activities for which you could be prosecuted.

You are right that many people have too much trust in themselves, in their partners, and in the law, and believe that consent will keep them safe.  That's bullshit.  I personally can't believe people have casual BDSM relationships and encounters.  It's seriously nuts.  That's a little off-topic, though, I think?

Specific instances of abuse should be prosecuted.  Situations - between adults, that is - which might lead to abuse really shouldn't.  That's my opinion.  I mean we're talking about adults here.  We have to take responsibility for our own choices at some point, and let others do the same.  We all have countless situations like that in our lives, with people who have some perceived authority over us.  You can't make one illegal and just leave the rest.  It's nonsensical.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2012, 12:10:34 AM by Will »

Offline TheyDontKnowIBurn

Re: Incest
« Reply #48 on: July 08, 2012, 12:48:15 AM »
My big thing? It's too easy for the elder in a situation, (ie- parent, aunt, uncle, etc) to assert an unhealthy level of authority, or to even sway the younger in childhood. Yes, I am saying brainwashing, but less horror movie and more emotional dependency or mental manipulation.

I don't personally have a problem with cousins, or hell, even siblings, but is it okay to set a law saying that one form of incest is alright and one is wrong? It just seems to me that would cause more problems than help.

Offline Caitlin

Re: Incest
« Reply #49 on: July 08, 2012, 02:47:36 AM »
Allow me to describe the scenario in more detail.

Your parents/in-laws rent a house at the beach for a family vacation.  They have three children who along with their spouses and their children will be joining them.  Betty is their daughter and married to Nate.  Julie and Mark are Betty's and Nate's daughter and son.  Betty and Mark share a bedroom and Nate and Julie share another.  This is they way they live at home but it comes as a surprise to the rest of the family.  Think about your reaction if you were the parent/grandparent or sibling/in-law/niece or nephew/cousin of the incestuous foursome. 

Again, think about it but you don't have to respond.
I think I'm confused... You meant that they'd be my uncle/aunt/newphew/niece, but there is a direct blood relation between them? I thought you meant they were uncle/aunt/nephew/niece towards each other.

As I said earlier in the topic, I'm against direct blood relationships that result in children, though there are some exceptions where I find it understandable. Either way I don't think it's up to me to judge others, but I wouldn't marry a woman who is the result of such a relationship. I want healthy offspring and to me the chances for genetic defuncts increase too much in that case. I'd have far less issues marrying a woman who is the result of a niece/ nephew relationship, especially if that relationship was an exception, rather than a common occurance.

As far as the specific situation you described, I think I'd be shocked that something like it occurs in my family, but I wouldn't comment on it any further or discuss it with anybody. I also wouldn't start treating them any differently, though it'll take me a few moments to get used to the new situation. It's their life and their choice.