Incest

[thepikaqueen]

After a recent role-play experience I had mixed with me not being able to sleep, I decided to make this thread.
So, the question is simple, what's your take on incest? By incest I don't mean a father or mother having a sexual relationship with their child, I mean something along the lines of a brother and sister.
We're considering that both these people are legal adults (over 18) and are having a consent relationship with a brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or a cousin (not including any cousins aside from first cousins as they aren't directly related in any way or are hardly related).
"sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other."
Is apparently googles definition. Do you agree with this? Do you think that this is wrong and disgusting, or that two people that love each other should just be able to love each other?

 

[MonMarty]

I don't have a problem with it from a legal perspective, but they probably shouldn't try to reproduce as that has a high chance of leading to birth defects due to a genepool deadlock.

 

[Laach]

From a scientific standpoint, I can understand why this would be unhealthy for the long term. At the same time from an emotional perspective, I feel that if you try to stop this kind of love, it will damage the people involved more than if they were allowed to love in the first place. And to combat the gene-pool debate, adoption has always been an answer.

That's about all I have to say about the subject.

 

[Mecharic]

I personally don't think that the law has a right to deny someone marriage to a close relation, though in such a situation I do think that the couple should adopt a child or 4 rather than reproduce, since it wouldn't be fair for the children if they were born with a genetic defect brought on by recessive traits exposed by inbreeding.

 

[Dworvin]

The Law actually does not have a say in it... If the two wan't to be together they can just live together and be happy, get fixed and have adopted children. really no issue with it.

 

[Malocchio]

I, personally, find incest completely... taboo. Perhaps it's due to my upbringing but if I was to have an older brother and sleep with him, or marry him, my family would quickly disown me. Sure, whatever, love /is/ love; but you were both born to the same mother and raised in the same family... Erm, no... That's just my opinion, so don't get offended. Freedom of speech and whatnot.

 

[DipliPsychi]

*rednecks* *rednecks everywhere*

Click to shrink...

Don't even go there, Just Don't. Really Offensive. Crossing the line. Stop.

 

[dragonixsparton]

*rednecks* *rednecks everywhere*

Click to shrink...

Yeah no, it did not happen there first. Just stop.

 

[BulbousDevourer]

I find it disgusting and I have no idea why it's becoming as accepted as it is. It's just....no.

 

[Thaurdaer]

I normally try to stay as open to things as possible, but the mere thought of this is just woefully wrong, in my own opinion.
Regardless, I will not try to stop those with other views, for anyone has a right to their own opinion.

 

[Annju]

This started way back when. Kings had children with their sisters, all in hopes for a male heir if their "wife" or other mistresses couldn't produce a boy.
It happens, and it isn't just in certain areas, or cultures. It really is everywhere. In all honesty, it shouldn't matter, yes it isn't healthy, and children should not be produced from this type of relation ship. However that doesn't mean it's all terrible and awful and bad.

There's multiple ways for it to work out, adoption being a great place to start when it comes to a couple wanting children. Marriage is also something that is only proved by a piece of paper, now a days, digitally too, but its so much more than that.

I've spewed my opinion enough I think, and it is just that, an opinion.​

 

[Waminer]

I think everyone here is looking at this from a very black and white perspective. One camp believes they are champions of a new era of free choice. The other respond with the common reactionary disgust to this relationship. In reality you must consider that even if both parties are over the age of minority should it really still be considered consensual? Would all of you championing free choice be so quick to defend the rights of the individual if a young 18 year old girl were pressured by her family to have sex with her bread-winning uncle?

If a older brother who a younger sister looks up to as a role model and leader pressures the younger one to preform sexual acts, is that really consent? I do not think so as ultimately if you replaced "Older Brother" with father and "Younger sister" with daughter whom in a usual relationship have the same sort of respect/aged based hierarchy and the vast majority of those that are currently for the legalization of incest would be against it in that situation. The reason they would be against it is because of the power and sway a parent holds over their child which would make any consent given invalid. I fail to find a difference between a influential older brother and father in terms of any role they fulfill excepting their difference age and which in this case (With both parties over 18) should make no difference.

Therefore it seems only logical that you even if you disagree that the possible harm in does against any child born of this union should be illegal and if you get over the natural disgust felt over this that you should still disagree with this on the basis of consent. As it clearly violates the rights of the junior individual because of the familial pressures, hierarchical pressures, and in many nations the religious and societal pressures on said junior partner to bow to the authority of the senior invalidating any consent they have given.

 

[Laach]

I think everyone here is looking at this from a very black and white perspective. One camp believes they are champions of a new era of free choice. The other respond with the common reactionary disgust to this relationship. In reality you must consider that even if both parties are over the age of minority should it really still be considered consensual? Would all of you championing free choice be so quick to defend the rights of the individual if a young 18 year old girl were pressured by her family to have sex with her bread-winning uncle?

If a older brother who a younger sister looks up to as a role model and leader pressures the younger one to preform sexual acts, is that really consent? I do not think so as ultimately if you replaced "Older Brother" with father and "Younger sister" with daughter whom in a usual relationship have the same sort of respect/aged based hierarchy and the vast majority of those that are currently for the legalization of incest would be against it in that situation. The reason they would be against it is because of the power and sway a parent holds over their child which would make any consent given invalid. I fail to find a difference between a influential older brother and father in terms of any role they fulfill excepting their difference age and which in this case (With both parties over 18) should make no difference.

Therefore it seems only logical that you even if you disagree that the possible harm in does against any child born of this union should be illegal and if you get over the natural disgust felt over this that you should still disagree with this on the basis of consent. As it clearly violates the rights of the junior individual because of the familial pressures, hierarchical pressures, and in many nations the religious and societal pressures on said junior partner to bow to the authority of the senior invalidating any consent they have given.

Click to shrink...

Hmm~ You make a good point. That would indeed be a real issue in that situation. But still, how much longer must the minority suffer for the sake of the whole? You cannot deny that some instances of true incest love appear every once and a while. I do not believe that the minority must be kept unhappy for the majority to continue to exist in it's solitude of happiness.

 

[Sven_Tu]

I think everyone here is looking at this from a very black and white perspective. One camp believes they are champions of a new era of free choice. The other respond with the common reactionary disgust to this relationship. In reality you must consider that even if both parties are over the age of minority should it really still be considered consensual?

Click to shrink...

While the rest of your post does make sense, I think you're reading too far into it as I feel the premise of the debate is specifically about the situation where there is indeed legitimate consent on both sides.

 

[Waminer]

While the rest of your post does make sense, I think you're reading too far into it as I feel the premise of the debate is specifically about the situation where there is indeed legitimate consent on both sides.

Click to shrink...

Is it not valid to say that the entire premise of a consensual incestuous relationship which you state this debate is grounded in is itself based off of a fantastical non-existent concept because of the pressure and hierarchy within a familial structure creating a situation where any consent given should be treated as if it was coerced?

 

[Sven_Tu]

Is it not valid to say that the entire premise of a consensual incestuous relationship which you state this debate is grounded in is itself based off of a fantastical non-existent concept because of the pressure and hierarchy within a familial structure creating a situation where any consent given should be treated as if it was coerced?

Click to shrink...

...
Actually, pretty much, yeah. That's what I felt the debate was about if you wish to put it that way, a fantastical, though I prefer hypothetical, situation. However, I don't necessarily agree with the implication that the pressures and hierarchy that you describe are absolutely inherent in every situation such that consent without coercion is not at all possible.