Jump to content

What makes incest wrong?


Renegade

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I agree with both you and Leafless.

I disagree with you, Rue, and Leafless. Simply put, morals and the determination of "right" and "wrong" are subjective personal choices. Even if YOU don't have a moral code which uses "harm" as a means of determining morality, it doesn't mean that Drea is incorrect if she does.

There is no correct answer. What is moral for one person is immoral for the other.

The rule of law cannot be based only on whether actual harm occurs from the breach of the law, since law is the cornerstone of public order.

You are correct that it is not only "harm" which is a determining factor for law, but for laws which don't prevent "harm" there must be some other compelling justitication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incest for me necessarily means there is a power imbalance that prevents free consent in the relationship because of a distortion of feelings because of that power imbalance.

For a father and child, perhaps, but for two siblings of equal age? Where is the power imbalance there? Why are you sure a 16 or year old girl would not freely consent to sex with a 16 year old boy - who happened to be a sibling, or a 25 year old woman with a 26 year old man for that matter?

With incest with due respect, it is impossible for it to be consensual because by its very definition it comes about from using familiarity from another relationship that was non sexual to now take the same trust earned when it was non sexual to provide a rationalization for engaging in sex.

How is that different than people who were friends for years, and now decide to have sex?

However with all the incest relationships I have come across no one came to me and said they were happy. They were either raped or they were now having a crisis from having been the molester/abuser.

Uh, and just who would EVER come to a therapist who is happy about themselves and their life history? I mean, by definition, those who have sex with siblings (or have had it in the past) and are quite content about that aren't going to see therapists. And that could be, and likely is, the overwhelming majority of them.

You know it is probably the most difficult thing one will come cross as a family mediator/lawyer-it is very hard to stay calm and neutral. A person who rapes their child who then must be addressed which

This is irrelevent to the topic. Did you include it for its emotional value?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with you, Rue, and Leafless. Simply put, morals and the determination of "right" and "wrong" are subjective personal choices. Even if YOU don't have a moral code which uses "harm" as a means of determining morality, it doesn't mean that Drea is incorrect if she does.

There is no correct answer. What is moral for one person is immoral for the other.

You are correct that it is not only "harm" which is a determining factor for law, but for laws which don't prevent "harm" there must be some other compelling justitication.

You would go and make an excellent point. Enjoyed it. Not an easy issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay uhm! What other definitions of incest are out there actually? Are we all talking about the same definition? Where did the topic change ? Did I miss something ?

Here are the Canadian Criminal code sections for incest. (also to be read in conjunction with sexual assault, s.273, domestic violence, s.264,5, consent, s.153(2) and 3 and the other sections in the code as to general child abuse-all these sections tend to be inter-related)

151 Sexual Interference - Every person who, for a sexual purpose, touches, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of a person under the age of fourteen years is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

152 Invitation to Sexual Touching - Every person who, for a sexual purpose, invites, counsels or incites a person under the age of fourteen years to touch, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, the body of any person, including the body of the person who so invites, counsels or incites and the body of the person under the age of fourteen years, is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

153(1) Sexual Exploitation - Every person who is in a position of trust or authority towards a young person or is a person with whom the young person is in a relationship of dependency and who

(a) for a sexual purpose, touches, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of the young person, or

(B) for a sexual purpose, invites, counsels or incites a young person to touch, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, the body of any person, including the body of the person who so invites, counsels or incites and the body of the young person,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

153(2) Definition of "young person" - In this section, "young person" means a person fourteen years of age or more but under the age of eighteen years.

Incest is another form of child sexual abuse. Incest is sexual abuse of a child by an adult that is closely related to the child.

155(1) Incest - Every one commits incest who, knowing that another person is by blood relationship his or her parent, child, brother, sister, grandparent or grandchild, as the case may be, has sexual intercourse with that person.

155(2) Punishment - Every one who commits incest is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

155(4) "brother", "sister" - In this section, "brother" and "sister", respectively, include half-brother and half-sister.

Edited by Rue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The definition of incest used by the conventional medical and psychological communities is sexual intercourse or relations of any form of sexual activity between closely related persons, especially within the nuclear family.

So in the above definition the close relationship does not just have to be a blood tie, it could be through adoption as well.

For example, a child raped by an adopted father with this therapeutic model is considered to suffer the same emotional and mental and physical injuries as would a blood child.

The criminal code deliberately defines incest as occuring between "closely related" individuals precisely because it follows the above concept, i.e., that for their to be incest, it does not have to solely be based on blood lines. In law an adopted child or a biological child are not distinguished. They are considered the same.

Edited by Rue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So based on this information i can conclude that there are at least 2 different definitions for the subject of incest. Wich means that not all pp on this forum are basing arguments about the same definition. Some are arguing against pedofilea and some argue against or for consentual intercourse between bloodrelated adults of around tha same age.

Well I'm against pedofilea but I cannot see anything wrong about consentual sex between adults bloodrelated or not of around the same age. I canot see how that can have anything to do with inbalance of power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So based on this information i can conclude that there are at least 2 different definitions for the subject of incest. Wich means that not all pp on this forum are basing arguments about the same definition. Some are arguing against pedofilea and some argue against or for consentual intercourse between bloodrelated adults of around tha same age.

Well I'm against pedofilea but I cannot see anything wrong about consentual sex between adults bloodrelated or not of around the same age. I canot see how that can have anything to do with inbalance of power.

O.k. Jean. Yes one type of incest could be pedophile incest while the other if between adults would not be pedophile incest.

Where I respectfully disagree with you (and I understand your position is based on the principle of allowing consenting adults free choice) is that I believe it is not possible to come to the decision of incest based on free thought.

I believe necessarily incest is connected to a relationship that preceded it becoming sexual and that preceding relationship necessarily because it is familial deals with trust and with trust there is power and this trust and power from the preceding relationship necessarily distorts the ability to make a free choice when it moves to a sexual one.

If you are close to someone in your family it is based necessrarily on trust. To cross the line and turn it sexual necessarily alters the trust.

Nothing healthy can come from an incestuous relationship because sooner then later issues from the preceding relationship come out and they lead to feelings of guilt, resentment, anger, betrayal.

I can not thing of a single instance in societities where incest was not a taboo (i.e., Pacific Island societies) where the incest did not lead to social instability and serious health issues.

I agree with you that a forced incestuous relationship is in a different category then a consensual one. True. But I also believe even the consensual ones, while they may not immediately seem to be causing harm, are and in fact may be a cover for repressed feelings or confused feelings unrelated to the actual sexual relationship.

I would go so far as to argue that if I have been in any relationship where someone trusted me to give them guidance and they looked up to me and felt safe with me, and then for what-ever reason I choose to turn that relationship into a sexual one, even on consent-the longer I was in a position of trust, the more likely the sexual relationship will break apart with anger and resentment because the love was not based on natural equality but authority. Sex and authority is a lethal mix. It leads to abuse.

I do appreciate some believe that what two consenting adults do is their business and for the most part I agree. But I think incest like violence is a reason for society to have a law prohibiting it.

Sure I do not doubt an adult may consent to another beating them during sex. It doesn't mean society should remain silent. Certain behaviours have consequences to all of society.

No I do nto want to go around preaching morality. I am a corupt bastard. I am in no position to claim what is right. But on this one, I do think we all should say NO, its not acceptable for any of us just like murder is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can not thing of a single instance in societities where incest was not a taboo (i.e., Pacific Island societies) where the incest did not lead to social instability and serious health issues.

Egyptian pharoahs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

British Royalty?

Geroge Bush? A little to much inbreeding perhaps? - It's a fact as with race horses that when you inbreed you get a super animal - but in time their are limits and instead of getting the best genetic value - nature plays a trick and you suddenly get the worst - the Egyptians created "Horaces" or demi-gods though inbreeding...they got some amazing creatures but if you notice eventually the skull size and shape became that of a createn.. So you ask what makes incest bad? - Well I would say that lazyness and convenience begets loosers. You do not if you are any sort of great primative - get lazy and hang out in the village and breed with the same townsfolk for two hundred years - if you are any sort of man of power - you walk over the hill and the mountain and get yourself a wife - going for your cousin or sister or daughter just shows wormyness....you want some good product genetically...you have to work for it. Incest is the lazy olafs form of breeding...unless you are a king - then you can have retarded kids and put them on the royal pension..ha - who started this bizarre thread anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cuote" With incest with due respect, it is impossible for it to be consensual because by its very definition it comes about from using familiarity from another relationship that was non sexual to now take the same trust earned when it was non sexual to provide a rationalization for engaging in sex"

I believe that there are lots of cases of incest that come from relationships where there was no actual familiarity preceding the sexual relationship. U should take a good look at factual information about this. There is nothing wrong with research data. It's there so we don't have to make up our own.

I believe that at the one end u are concerned about issues that u cannot really prove they actually exist. These cases of non consensual adult incest that u are talking about are impossible to judge. It is impossible to really understand why they happened if one was not in the mind of the ones that did it at the moment they did it. What u are dealing with is more like the trauma that was left over from the sexual encounter. The side effects of the prior action on these people.

At the other end u are ignoring the issue of blood related people without prior familiar relationship that encounter each other later in life, fall in love and have sex with each other. I do not blame u for not looking at that because this seems to be one of the issues that are not looked at in the therapeutic community and. The issue seems to be terribly underreported and underrated. Maybe this is because nobody wants to see it. Maybe it being an issue of taboo. So it’s like dancing tango around a dead body pretending it is not there and arguing about the things u acknowledge being there.

U are looking at the problem from a therapeutic world which apparently never deals with the other side of the story for the simple reason that these people that do have consensual incest, which did not have a prior familiar relationship with each other, do not have any or little left over negative effects about the decision they made consensually. They do not feel raped, they do not feel guilty, they don't even see the sexual relationship as incest. This is because these people experience the action as totally natural. These groups of people simply do not go to the psychologist or the therapist. If they do go to the therapist it might be because of confusion of how to deal with their environment while dealing with the profound affection they feeling for each other. Or maybe they want an insight from the outside world about the way they feel in the inside of their minds and souls.

Those are the facts and I think u should look at them closely if u really want to see the others side of the incest medal. Actually it has more sides than a medal only. However I can understand how coming from the same facts why u can find it a weird situation when two people that have had familiar relationship all their lives suddenly desire each other sexually. According to the information that I have this almost never happens. And If it happens it does not happen naturally I think. I can see how these people themselves would have lots of issues and guilt about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bible says that incest is anything that consist of sexually relations with your Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, Son, Daughter, Uncle, Aunt, Nephew, or Neice. I don't want to start a debate of whether it's right or wrong, just wanted to make it clear where some people might get their notion of incest. Interesting enough that the Bible omits relations with first cousins as incest. So some countries and laws contain cousin love as incest, even though books such as the Quran, Torah, and the Christain Holy Bible and related text omit it as being incest, which are considered major moral orginating text for the majority of people in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bible says that incest is anything that consist of sexually relations with your Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, Son, Daughter, Uncle, Aunt, Nephew, or Neice. I don't want to start a debate of whether it's right or wrong, just wanted to make it clear where some people might get their notion of incest. Interesting enough that the Bible omits relations with first cousins as incest. So some countries and laws contain cousin love as incest, even though books such as the Quran, Torah, and the Christain Holy Bible and related text omit it as being incest, which are considered major moral orginating text for the majority of people in the world.

It would be good to hear what is biologically wrong with incest. From a human technical point of view, what are the draw backs resulting from breeding with those that are very similar genetically speaking? Recently there was a well publizied case of a pair of twins seperated at birth who inadvertantly met and fell in love and married. To me it was a bit humorous. I imagined the couple on there first couple of dates..eg. "wow - you like peanut butter chocolate chip cookies too?" and - "pink is your favorite colour?" - not to mention that perhaps they were also predisposed to liking pickled herring.

From what I understand - from my own back ground of being Ukrainine - with a bit of Nordic blood and some old Golden Hord tossed in for good measure - and - some ancient Judaic Christian blood and possibly some Turkish....what I did notice is that I rarely get ill and am not a victim to certain illness that say pure bred Asians or Anglos are victims to. It must mean that when you mix up the genetics or create mutts - that you get stronger and brighter persons, that the best comes out from all the different family lines. I had a teacher that was quite racist and he taught us that the worst traits emerge when you mix the races.

I found that it was the opposite as I observed those of mixed race..that they were more attractive and smarter and stronger..so maybe natural law and divine law are against incest because it will lead to extinction - take Samolia for instance - just a huge family and they are identical in facial and bodily structure. From what I gather they do not do well. It's better to mix it up - Jews and some Arabics are so inbreed that they are quite nuts...if you have not noticed that after 50 years Israel can not find peace - maybe they should leave the house and stop breeding with their second cousins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recently there was a well publizied case of a pair of twins seperated at birth who inadvertantly met and fell in love and married. To me it was a bit humorous. I imagined the couple on there first couple of dates..eg. "wow - you like peanut butter chocolate chip cookies too?" and - "pink is your favorite colour?" - not to mention that perhaps they were also predisposed to liking pickled herring.

Did you read the opening post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a teacher that was quite racist and he taught us that the worst traits emerge when you mix the races.

I found that it was the opposite as I observed those of mixed race..that they were more attractive and smarter and stronger.

Interesting point you made. It's funny that your teacher thinks one way, and you think the other. But personally I think it might just be a point of view. I mean unless they draw up some real statistics on this, who would ever know. (but really, I think almost all statistics people read about are all garbage...possible made up. Scientist my ass.) My point of view is that I don't think all this mixing stuff matters. I mean, you got ugly people everywhere, mixed or purebred, and you got genuises who might be half black & half chinese or who's parents might be cousins, I think it's all over the place. Who ever you love, and that's it.

Edited by Frankie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...