Should Incest be banned?

[Tiberius]

The title says it all, really. Do you think there is a problem with incest (keeping the debate limited solely to individuals who are genetically closely related having sex with each other for fun rather than reproduction) that justifies it being banned? What reasons do you have for your position?

Bear in mind that I want to discuss the issue with regards to consenting adults. Naturally, I think a parent who has sexual contact with their young child is doing something that is harmful, but that is because it is sexual contact with a young child. Likewise any cases where one person is pressured against their will to be involved.

I also don't want to bring up the issue of genetic problems in any children that are produced. Birth control is easy, safe and effective. I'd like to keep it confined to the issue of the act of sex alone.

So please base your discussion on whether the people involved are consenting adults who are not being unduly influenced in any way whatsoever.

 

[HonestJoe]

So please base your discussion on whether the people involved are consenting adults who are not being unduly influenced in any way whatsoever.

You can't do that though. It'd be like asking why we have speed limits, but limiting the answer to the assumption that everyone are excellent and rational drivers with perfectly maintained cars.

I think the underlying reason for laws against incest are because of the known risks, both birth defects and undue influence. Those issues obviously aren't always going to be relevant but as with any restrictive law, it is a matter of balancing the risk and restriction. Allowing incest might be somewhat beneficial to a small number of people but would increase risk to others.

I think the other issue is that, rightly or not, if you're seeking to change a law in either direction, you need to make a stronger case than you would to keep it as it is. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Apropos of nothing, how hot is your sister?

 

[Brickjectivity]

What reasons do you have for your position?

Data on this is difficult to gather, but a hug from family should just be a hug. It shouldn't feel like a transaction. A feeling of being loved is central to our society. We each form an ego as we are growing up, and love is a recognition of us. It says "You are important." This is part of how we encourage each individual to care about themselves, and that in turn enables them to care about others and the world around them. Loving your world, caring about animals or people far away all begins with caring about yourself; because you can extend that care beyond your own body.

It is sad when a child does not have this kind of treatment when they are young of being a special person not because of what they provide but just from being themselves. On top of that should be added other valuations of themselves: abilities they have, practice they have done. They grow in valuing themselves and others. It is not good to grow up self hating. Therefore we can do a great deal of good simply by letting children feel loved for no reason at all.

We make it unthinkable that there should be sex in the family. It is our choice to do so for their benefit and for a more universal benefit. Who does not do this is criminal. They have broken the social bond. It is a mistake, and they must immediately cease.

 

[Tiberius]

You can't do that though. It'd be like asking why we have speed limits, but limiting the answer to the assumption that everyone are excellent and rational drivers with perfectly maintained cars.

I don't think that's a valid comparison. No matter how well maintained the car, there is a limit to how fast it can go around a corner before physics sends it flying.

I think the underlying reason for laws against incest are because of the known risks, both birth defects and undue influence. Those issues obviously aren't always going to be relevant but as with any restrictive law, it is a matter of balancing the risk and restriction. Allowing incest might be somewhat beneficial to a small number of people but would increase risk to others.

As I said, I'm assuming that this is between fully consenting adults. And since birth control is easy, safe and effective for the most part, the issue of producing offspring isn't something I want to bring into this discussion. So let's assume that it's sex for fun, not for reproduction. I'll amend my OP to reflect this.

I think the other issue is that, rightly or not, if you're seeking to change a law in either direction, you need to make a stronger case than you would to keep it as it is. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I think the case that two consenting adults want to have sex is plenty good enough.

Apropos of nothing, how hot is your sister?

I'm an only child.

 

[Tiberius]

Data on this is difficult to gather, but a hug from family should just be a hug. It shouldn't feel like a transaction. A feeling of being loved is central to our society. We each form an ego as we are growing up, and love is a recognition of us. It says "You are important." This is part of how we encourage each individual to care about themselves, and that in turn enables them to care about others and the world around them. Loving your world, caring about animals or people far away all begins with caring about yourself; because you can extend that care beyond your own body.

It is sad when a child does not have this kind of treatment when they are young of being a special person not because of what they provide but just from being themselves. On top of that should be added other valuations of themselves: abilities they have, practice they have done. They grow in valuing themselves and others. It is not good to grow up self hating. Therefore we can do a great deal of good simply by letting children feel loved for no reason at all.

We make it unthinkable that there should be sex in the family. It is our choice to do so for their benefit and for a more universal benefit. Who does not do this is criminal. They have broken the social bond. It is a mistake, and they must immediately cease.

I don't see why ANY sex should be considered transactional. In fact, I think any sex that IS transactional like that is somewhat problematic.

Also, I am talking about only consenting adults. I'm not talking about a kid, and I'm not talking about an adult who goes to bed with a family member to gain affection that they were lacking during their childhood.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don't see why ANY sex should be considered transactional. In fact, I think any sex that IS transactional like that is somewhat problematic.

Don't ask me about sex, and sometimes it is a gift. Point is, it is strongly influenced by our characteristics how we look, and by desire. If I desire sex, and someone gives it to me there has been a transaction in the sense that sex is a judgment. Not just anyone will have sex with me, because they have to judge me first. They have to decide if I am good enough for them, decide if I am right for them, decide if I suit them. Do they want me? Do they not feel like it? This is a transaction, because it is a judgment. Just because I offer it freely does not mean I will be accepted. Am I clever? Am I fun? Do I have a zit? Oh, man I have a zit don't I?

Also, I am talking about only consenting adults. I'm not talking about a kid, and I'm not talking about an adult who goes to bed with a family member to gain affection that they were lacking during their childhood.

Thanks for clarifying, because 'Incest' can mean so much worse than two consenting adults.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, because it's demented. The end.

 

[dybmh]

Banned? Like how?

I wouldn't judge people for doing it. It's none of my business. The religious issue seems irrelevant for the thread. Although if a couple seems, I don't know, fixated on that specific aspect of their relationship, and is repetively putting that forward and bringing it up in conversations, making sure everyone knows "Hey, Hey, we're related" followed by some groping and a big wet kiss, that's different. Then I would probably start judging.

 

[YmirGF]

The title says it all, really. Do you think there is a problem with incest (keeping the debate limited solely to individuals who are genetically closely related having sex with each other for fun rather than reproduction) that justifies it being banned? What reasons do you have for your position?

I am deeply disturbed by the idea that incest could be OK given that it is a condition that results from maladaptive behaviours. It is simply not possible to put a happy face on incest.

Bear in mind that I want to discuss the issue with regards to consenting adults. Naturally, I think a parent who has sexual contact with their young child is doing something that is harmful, but that is because it is sexual contact with a young child. Likewise any cases where one person is pressured against their will to be involved.

Well thank goodness you rule out diddling kids, at least you are not too far gone down this rabbit hole of degeneracy -- yet.

I also don't want to bring up the issue of genetic problems in any children that are produced. Birth control is easy, safe and effective. I'd like to keep it confined to the issue of the act of sex alone.

Heaven forbid we talk about OBVIOUS reasons why incest is not a great idea.

So please base your discussion on whether the people involved are consenting adults who are not being unduly influenced in any way whatsoever.

My brain is going wild on this one. The twisted power dynamics that would make this OK are mind-numbing. Your very last words here simply would never happen, as there are always power dynamics at play in interpersonal relationships.

 

[Shaul]

Family dynamics and interactions are complex, as anyone with a family probably knows. Within a family there are also hierarchical power dynamics. Nor can one ever completely "divorce" from a family. One can separate from your family, perhaps, but familial ties are immutable andph they psyche knows no physical distance. Sexual relations within a closed system, such as a family is a potent recipe for conflict, contention and pain. There are 8,000,000,000 people in the world. Restricting the number of potential sexual partners to 8,000,000,000 minus the members of your immediate family is not much of a restriction. Any "good" that could come from incest is far outweighed by potential harm including harm to non-participants. Incest is not justifiable.

 

[YmirGF]

Yes, because it's demented. The end.

One day, I may learn to be concise. Well said.

 

[Jimmy]

Wow

 

[Quintessence]

I couldn't care less what fornicating humans do with each other and who they do it with, just so long as it doesn't involve me in any capacity whatsoever. It's gross no matter who and what is involved, and its not my business.

The only sense in which I would pass anti-fornicating laws would be for population management. And in that spirit, there's a very strong justification for banning ALL fornicating these days.

 

[mangalavara]

Do you think there is a problem with incest (keeping the debate limited solely to individuals who are genetically closely related having sex with each other for fun rather than reproduction) that justifies it being banned?

When it comes to consenting adults who are genetically closely related having sex with each other for pleasure or sensual and emotional fulfillment, I don’t think a legal ban on it is necessary. This is because none of the parties is a victim and that the deed does not harm wider society. If the two consenting adults feel, after the deed, that they’ve negatively impacted their familial relationship by having sex, that is their own issue considering that the sex was consensual.

I think that any two adults who are genetically closely related, who are thinking about having consensual sex together ought to consider any possible consequences. Many people who are friends have their friendship negatively impacted by having consensual sex together. The impact would probably be worse for the genetically closely related pair.

 

[dybmh]

My brain is going wild on this one. The twisted power dynamics that would make this OK are mind-numbing. Your very last words here simply would never happen, as there are always power dynamics at play in interpersonal relationships.

Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. And maybe there's a natural revulsion to this whole topic which is contributing to this. When I say natural, I mean that literally. Maybe someone will correct me, but, as far as I know there is a natural ( physiological ? / psychological ? ) aversion to this.

That said, isn't it possible to postulate / consider a healthy happy relationship that is identitcal in each and every way to other healthy happy relationships with one exception: they happen to be close siblings?

I'm uber-optimistic, so, I can almost always imagine any situation with puppy-dogs, rainbows, champaigne, and roses. But even if I put that down, temporarily, without any religious doctrine influence, I cannot fathom the problem with this on a universal scope.

Thoughts?

 

[Soandso]

Yah, no. The risks are too great to allow incest to be legal. People absolutely get pregnant when they have sex - even when they are being extra careful. Protection is never 100% without medical intervention or birth defect, and those are extreme circumstances that the vast majority of people won't be in

This doesn't even include the awful situations of incest between parents and their children... I don't think there is a more perfect example of grooming

 

[dybmh]

Protection is never 100%

Vasectomy+Tubal-ligation? ( please forgive me, absolutes like 'never' and 'always' trigger me. )

 

[Soandso]

Vasectomy+Tubal-ligation?

Ah, read the second half of that

without medical intervention or birth defect

 

[Soandso]

Vasectomy+Tubal-ligation? ( please forgive me, absolutes like 'never' and 'always' trigger me. )

You're good! I'm the same way

 

[Estro Felino]

Unfortunately incest has always existed...in the history of mankind.
But people have always done anything to conceal it. And successfully, most of the times.
Maybe psychologists can give an answer to what favors it in certain families under certain conditions.

I can also disclose an anecdote from my experience: being raised in a small town, where there were no secrets, they told me that two twins, two handsome teenage boys who were identical twins, had sex with each other.
Someone had even caught them red-handed in the locker-room.

When it deals with straight sex, problems can arise: because of what biology tells about children born from siblings etc...