Indeed I do. Over the years I have put a lot of thought to these (and other) questions as I realized at a young age that the impositions we place on others are often a result of our own internal dilemma and nothing else. Who am I to decide what may or may not be right or wrong for another human, or group, of human beings?
I have read many accounts of incestual families that report that they were very happy to engage with each other in such a manner, and that when there was mental or emotional trauma it was almost solely related to the intervention of other parties that caused it (a disgusted aunt, a disgruntled neighbor, an angry lawmaker, etc). Of course, this is discluding the obvious (and frequently highlighted) examples where the actions were not welcomed or appreciated by one of the parties involved.
In other words, if two (or more) family members were happily engaging in intercourse together, and nobody was there to tell them it was wrong, or berate them, punish them, etc. then where would the harm come from?
The idea that somebody in an incestual relationship *must* be damaged mentally or emotionally, seems absurd to me. We need to put aside our own personal bias and ask ourselves how much of this damage is caused by the actual act of giving or receiving physical pleasure, and how much is caused by the internal and/or external conflict that arises from a society that abhors the notion and its players that often have a knee-jerk reaction to it?
I believe in libertarian ideals. So long as no one is harming another, what they do behind closed doors is their business.
Of course, in this issue as with others, harm can come in many forms, and some not so readily apparent as others; though it could be argued that it is the people who intervene in these situations that are causing the most harm, or the people who cannot bring themselves to understand that two (or more) people who love each other (whether familial or not) wanting to also give pleasure to each other, may not be as 'sick' or 'disgusting' as they have been raised to believe (at least to the 'offending' parties involved).
As far as the argument of children who are byproducts of incestual relations being at a higher risk of genetic deformity, people tend to forget the fact that recessive genetic 'mutations' can lean in both directions. In other words, while your chances of unfavorable mutations go up, so too do your chances of *favorable* mutations (perhaps the real reason the "Royal" bloodlines likely desired to "keep it in the family"?), and you have just as much chance of creating a supra-human as well as a sub-human.
Not saying this is great news as the chances of deleterious genes arising are still great enough to warrant taking protective measures (or at the very least, having a full-panel DNA done to determine risks vs rewards), but the information is there and this aspect of such a coupling tends to be oft-overlooked.
Quite honestly, if I believe that two family members are engaging in intercourse with each-other, so long as it seems like they are both happy I will keep my distance from the scenario, as I believe my own (and, of course, others) intervention is likely to be the precipitative factor in any damage that may occur.
P.S.: Also, I believe Freud was a hack (and a certifiable whack-job). Jung was a far more credible psychologist IMO.
