Incest between consenting adults...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Devolution said:
No, but you can make it a clean kill. And one can argue the utility of eating. What's the utility in raping animals?
Click to expand...

Uh... the stimulation of the pleasure center in the brain? The flood of dopamine that is released upon orgasm?

I suppose we don't technically need sex... just like we don't technically need fun.

Also, you can have gentle sex with the cow. I mean, you probably won't, but you can.
 
Devolution said:
No, but you can make it a clean kill. And one can argue the utility of eating. What's the utility in raping animals?
Click to expand...
The only common reason to eat a cow in a first world country is that it makes them feel good. Same with raping them.

I'm sure that a cow doesn't care if it's murder is going to be clean or not.
 
HiResDes said:
cow-03.gif
Click to expand...

She's askin' for it or something.
 
lol @ people mad at "sister bangers" then arguing in defense of for cow rape as if they're pointing out a meaningful false equivalency. this thread has gone off the rails.
 
Teh Hamburglar said:
lol @ people mad at "sister bangers" then arguing in defense of for cow rape as if they're pointing out a meaningful false equivalency. this thread has gone off the rails.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of some of the ludicrous things people were spouting in opposition of gay marriage...Though I'm not equating them.
 
lol @ people mad at "sister bangers" then arguing in defense of for cow rape as if they're pointing out a meaningful false equivalency. this thread has gone off the rails.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not comparing the two things together. I'm trying to see how far down the rabbit hole incest-gaf will go.
 
Dat incest defence force.

No it shouldn't be legal. The children will be much worse off.

Control your self and get a normal gf/wife instead of putting your kids at huge risk.
 
Enco said:
Dat incest defence force.

No it shouldn't be legal. The children will be much worse off.

Control your self and get a normal gf/wife instead of putting your kids at huge risk.
Click to expand...
What if people are consenting and adults, and don't plan on having children?
 
Enco said:
Dat incest defence force.

No it shouldn't be legal. The children will be much worse off.

Control your self and get a normal gf/wife instead of putting your kids at huge risk.
Click to expand...

Should drinking/smoking/taking drugs while pregnant be a criminal offence, what about a couple with the same hereditary disease trying to have a child, should they be arrested?

Incestuous couples should not have children no, but there's no reason for an Incestous relationship to be illegal.

I do not condone incest, or other things like the usage of hard drugs, but I don't think it's the governments place to decide what consenting adults can do with their own bodies.
 
Enco said:
Dat incest defence force.

No it shouldn't be legal. The children will be much worse off.

Control your self and get a normal gf/wife instead of putting your kids at huge risk.
Click to expand...
So if either me or my gf suffer under a genetic disease we aren't allowed to make a kid?
 
1. incest is wrong cause it's gross - not nearly as gross as ugly people fucking. or fat people fucking.

2. incest is wrong cause it leads to retarded babies - not every couple has children. if you really don't want retarded babies, don't let people with genetic diseases have kids.
 
sarcastor said:
1. incest is wrong cause it's gross - not nearly as gross as ugly people fucking. or fat people fucking.

2. incest is wrong cause it leads to retarded babies - not every couple has children. if you really don't want retarded babies, don't let people with genetic diseases have kids.
Click to expand...

Can't facepalm hard enough.
 
sarcastor said:
1. incest is wrong cause it's gross - not nearly as gross as ugly people fucking. or fat people fucking.

2. incest is wrong cause it leads to retarded babies - not every couple has children. if you really don't want retarded babies, don't let people with genetic diseases have kids.
Click to expand...

u dum
 
1. Ugly, fat siblings should never have sex under any circumstances.
2. Genetically deformed or impaired siblings should never have under any circumstances.
3. Ugly, fat, genetically or impaired deformed siblings . . .
 
I may not like it but it should be legal. It's not my place to tell adults how to live their life as long as they are not hurting anyone else.
I also think they should be able to have children. If you say that they should not have babies because the child may have some deformity/horrible disease, then why do we allow people with other hereditary diseases to procreate? Why is it OK to pass down, let's say, haemophilia but not disease X? Where do you draw the line?
It's unfair that unrelated couples can have children, even though they may have a high chance of passing down unwanted conditions, while related couples are forbidden from doing so no matter what the chances of having an unhealthy baby are. Either regulate it for everyone or no one.

I want those that oppose incestuous relationships on the basis of health issues to answer two questions.
1.) Do you think we should forbid couples with a high chance of passing down -insert medical conditions- from having babies. If so, which medical conditions should be on the black list?
2.) Should we pass a law that demands women live as healthily as possible during their pregnancies?
 
I don't care about incest between adults, as long as they use protection so their kids do not need to suffer for it.
 
To me it's pretty much the same as some sick fetish like shit-sex or whatever. It's fucking disgusting, I don't want to think about it, I don't want to get near it, and fuck no do I not wish to perform it.

But it's not my business if somebody else is into that stuff.
Just, y'know, don't shake my hand or anything.
 
Socreges said:
I think it's more poor wording on his part. Context makes them distinct, imo. The Westermarck Effect is a product of genetic defects not being good for business. Thus our biology has put a 'block' on that activity. I'm not so sure that this can be made analogous to homosexuality. It's not just about 'majority rules'. There's more going on. Not to mention that with incest there is a choice. With homosexuality there isn't.
Click to expand...

Apparently I misread his post, but (and this coming from a queer who is not particularly interested in incestuous relations), the comparison to homosexuality stands. Biology has put a block on Incestuous behavior in a similar way to how it puts a block on homosexual behavior. The majority are not inclined to it in either case. In some fraction of the population, for whatever reason, sexual development is different and they become inclined towards sexual behavior that isn't appealing to the majority. In both cases you can read the fact of their difference as evidence of pathology, but in both cases you'd simply be using an impoverished naturalistic morality in order to put a fig leaf over your unjustified taboos.

Incest may be more profitably compared to bisexuality, in that, so far as I am aware, the socially discouraged attraction is not exclusive. And we do not limit our activism for queer rights to only exclusive homosexuals, and for good reason.


JokerOfSpades said:
I'm sure that's not what he's saying.

But, I am interested to know - female human, male animal... what's the case there?
Click to expand...

Same argument against older female, below the age of majority male. An erection isn't consent, nor even is active penetration, if the being in question is categorically unable to consent. Both children and animals are categorically unable to consent. The bigger question is why the rape of animals is a grave moral crime while their murder can be condoned to attain the pleasure of eating meat, but the thread's been derailed enough as it is.

One point that I don't think has come up in the course of the conversation enough is the power dynamics that often accompany incestuous relationship. Parent-child is problematic for similar reasons that something like professor-student is, though the power dynamic is significantly stronger in the case of incestuous relationships. Sibling-sibling can similarly fall afoul of power dynamics if it is don eat the behest of parents (apparently, it happens).

So while incest may be okay in the abstract, it is in practice most often accompanied by other factors that make the relationship immoral. That's not enough to categorically condemn it, but we should at least acknowledge that the circumstances that we're discussing are pretty rare.
 
Odrion said:
Alright you sisterbangers, why can't someone shag a cow?
Click to expand...

It's been stated before, but in the interest of a thread bump I'll say it again: an animal cannot consent.

"Consent". Dude, it's in the title of the thread.

Amibguous Cad said:
One point that I don't think has come up in the course of the conversation enough is the power dynamics that often accompany incestuous relationship. Parent-child is problematic for similar reasons that something like professor-student is, though the power dynamic is significantly stronger in the case of incestuous relationships. Sibling-sibling can similarly fall afoul of power dynamics if it is don eat the behest of parents (apparently, it happens).

So while incest may be okay in the abstract, it is in practice most often accompanied by other factors that make the relationship immoral. That's not enough to categorically condemn it, but we should at least acknowledge that the circumstances that we're discussing are pretty rare.
Click to expand...

I like to think I addressed the issue of coercion in the OP - that is, coercion can exist in any type of relationship. We assume coercion in the case of incest because many of us cannot comprehend why someone would want to have sex with a family member, just as many cannot comprehend why someone would want to have sex with someone of the same gender, or a different race. It doesn't handwave instances of coercion in incestuous relationships - it merely points out that there's no reason to single out incest in this regard. At least when both participants readily acknowledge that it's consentual.

I think we can all agree that the circumstances being discussed are quite rare, but worthy of discussion nonetheless.
 
Amibguous Cad said:
Same argument against older female, below the age of majority male. An erection isn't consent, nor even is active penetration, if the being in question is categorically unable to consent. Both children and animals are categorically unable to consent. The bigger question is why the rape of animals is a grave moral crime while their murder can be condoned to attain the pleasure of eating meat, but the thread's been derailed enough as it is.

One point that I don't think has come up in the course of the conversation enough is the power dynamics that often accompany incestuous relationship. Parent-child is problematic for similar reasons that something like professor-student is, though the power dynamic is significantly stronger in the case of incestuous relationships. Sibling-sibling can similarly fall afoul of power dynamics if it is don eat the behest of parents (apparently, it happens).

So while incest may be okay in the abstract, it is in practice most often accompanied by other factors that make the relationship immoral. That's not enough to categorically condemn it, but we should at least acknowledge that the circumstances that we're discussing are pretty rare.
Click to expand...

So if the woman just lies there naked, doing nothing, and the animal is penetrating...? Or if a child rapes an older woman, she'll get arrested?

And a child cannot consent for reasons of maturity and development. And zoophilia is, while looked down upon, legal in a few US states and in other countries. Pedophilia/stat rape is not.
 
I'm inbred :D . I wouldn't mind first cousin fucking. It just so happens that all the women in my family are completely uninteresting and uninspiring. I guess I've been inadvertently saved from one more uphill battle.
 
I think it's creepy as hell, but I don't have any moral issue with it. Assuming it's truly mutually decided. If it's a case of some sort of mental conditioning from a parent or older sibling, I'd have an issue with that.
 
Deified Data said:
It's been stated before, but in the interest of a thread bump I'll say it again: an animal cannot consent.

"Consent". Dude, it's in the title of the thread.



I like to think I addressed the issue of coercion in the OP - that is, coercion can exist in any type of relationship. We assume coercion in the case of incest because many of us cannot comprehend why someone would want to have sex with a family member, just as many cannot comprehend why someone would want to have sex with someone of the same gender, or a different race. It doesn't handwave instances of coercion in incestuous relationships - it merely points out that there's no reason to single out incest in this regard. At least when both participants readily acknowledge that it's consentual.

I think we can all agree that the circumstances being discussed are quite rare, but worthy of discussion nonetheless.
Click to expand...

There's more to it than that. Power dynamics are an inseparable part of at least some family dynamics, in the sa,e way that they are an inseperable part of how people with different ages interact, and power dynamics can vitiate consent. Still, it is not true of every incestuous relationship, and as you say, statistical correlation with bad stuff is hardly justification for the legal and social penalties associated with it.
 
Amibguous Cad said:
There's more to it than that. Power dynamics are an inseparable part of at least some family dynamics, in the sa,e way that they are an inseperable part of how people with different ages interact, and power dynamics can vitiate consent. Still, it is not true of every incestuous relationship, and as you say, statistical correlation with bad stuff is hardly justification for the legal and social penalties associated with it.
Click to expand...

Well said. It goes without saying that incest is abnormal, and it's natural to look for perverse explanations for such behavior. In many instances, that attitude is safely warranted. But in some, I can't help but feel, it's as simple as mututal affection and attraction.
 
I was debating whether or not to post in this thread, because I wasn't sure I could accurately convey my opinion on the matter without sounding like the incest defense force. I'll give it a shot though.

Incest is one of those things that's best not talked about. I rarely take this stance on social issues, but there is a close to zero chance that society will ever accept it. Cases between consenting adults are so rare, and so often kept under wraps, that the subject never gets brought up. In this day and age, where people actually openly discuss sex, it's one of the few things that's still considered taboo, and will likely remain taboo. There are good reasons for it, but it being "disgusting" is not a good reason. I find many things disgusting that other people might find beautiful, so who am I to force my opinion on others. From an emotional perspective you can't always pick who you fall in love with, and while I don't believe in "true love," I know that there are situations where the attraction between two people is strong enough to transcend social norms.

All that said, cases of consenting adults in an incestuous relationship should not be flaunted or talked about. It's a private matter best left to the people involved, and no one else. All precautions should be taken to avoid procreation, and marriage should be dealt with carefully or not at all.

Normally this wouldn't even be a subject I'd think about, but I recently read a book dealing with this issue that changed my perspective. Forbidden by Tabitha Suzuma deals with this exact issue of two "adults" (teenagers, in this case) who are brother and sister and have fallen in love. I'll recommend it on the grounds that it's a beautifully-written novel, but if the idea of sibling incest absolutely repulses you and your mind will never be changed, there's no reason for you to like it. I also won't recommend it if you don't like sad books. I didn't want to like the book, I didn't even want to read it at first. But curiosity won in the end, and I wasn't disappointed. It made me wonder, is it really so wrong?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

What is the best animes for adults
2 3
102
5K
rubik's dude replied
what is the best fanservice free animes for adults
37
1K
-Minsc- replied
what do you think of Disney Adults?
2
81
4K
diffusionx replied
Adults and friendships
48
4K
jason10mm replied
Extremely Normal and Well Adapted Adults Go to COSTCO to Buy Pokemon Cards (for their kids, of course)
2
93
5K
GateofD replied
Top Bottom