[QUOTE=Sobotnik;47801041][URL]http://www.aaets.org/article31.htm[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
[quote]Incest is "any use of a minor child to meet the sexual or sexual/emotional needs of one or more persons whose authority is derived through ongoing emotional bonding with that child."[/quote]
Well if they define it like that then sure incest will be primarily abuse, but I'm talking incest as in "consensual relationship between two adults who happen to be relatives"
Is there anything saying that's also mainly a result of abuse?
[QUOTE=EcksDee;47801194]Well if they define it like that then sure incest will be primarily abuse, but I'm talking incest as in "consensual relationship between two adults who happen to be relatives"
Is there anything saying that's also mainly a result of abuse?[/QUOTE]
It depends on the relatives. There's understandably a really big problem if a mother and son (both of them adults) are having sex, compared to say two distant cousins.
If you allow adults to do it, then you're effectively saying its ok for say a 40 year old father to have sex with his 16 year old daughter.
The other problem for the incest/abuse thing, is that it (much like rape in general) is significantly under-reported.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;47800932]It's immoral because most (and by most I mean almost all of them) incest has a power dynamic in which a parent abuses a child, or one sibling abuses the other. There is not really any consent.
Most of the time it is done in dysfunctional families as a means to assert power over the other, and rarely is there any consent. Most survivors of incestuous relationships also have higher risks for suicide, substance abuse, and other mental health issues.
It's different with normal relationships, because there two people (whatever their gender or sexuality) consent to having sex after having established trust with one another.
There is an exceedingly obvious problem with a parent or sibling abusing that trust, and in turn committing what is essentially rape.[/QUOTE]
You seem to be having a hard time realising that incest isn't inherently abusive. It can be an aspect of abuse but if incest was legalised, every single one of the cases you are talking about would still be illegal because no one is condoning the legalisation of sexual abuse. If a man is forcing a young woman to have sex with him from a position of power, that is rape, regardless of if they are related or not. If one person is molesting another, that is sexual abuse, regardless of if they are brother and sister. No one is condoning abusive behaviour, they're just against attributing that behaviour to everyone in a group, regardless of if they are actually taking part of it.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;47801144]
If both people know they are related before they begin however, that's a pretty bad idea to be going through with.[/QUOTE]
for what reason?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;47801166]Depends on if they know each other to be siblings beforehand. The default state is that siblings do not experience sexual attraction towards each other (however, if they don't know about their relatedness, they tend to experience it).[/QUOTE]
There isn't some DNA-bound factor that reduces attraction to those you logically know to be related. There's research suggesting that people are often more attracted to those related, if they didn't know they were beforehand. This is all societal; there is no magic default to the attraction. In most cases siblings would not be attracted to each other due to growing up together and knowing every detail about each other, good and bad. If they did happen to become into each other, that isn't something the parents could avoid except by shouting about how evil incest is.
Your argument is "incest is bad because sometimes it is bad"
[QUOTE=bitches;47801482]for what reason?
There isn't some DNA-bound factor that reduces attraction to those you logically know to be related. There's research suggesting that people are often more attracted to those related, if they didn't know they were beforehand. This is all societal; there is no magic default to the attraction. In most cases siblings would not be attracted to each other due to growing up together and knowing every detail about each other, good and bad. If they did happen to become into each other, that isn't something the parents could avoid except by shouting about how evil incest is.
Your argument is "incest is bad because sometimes it is bad"[/QUOTE]
What I'm getting from him is that willingly participating in incestuous activity stems from problems during childhood/mental illness/societal issues. You guys are just arguing in circles because the issue is deeper than what you guys are talking about.
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801512]What I'm getting from him is that willingly participating in incestuous activity stems from problems during childhood/mental illness/societal issues. You guys are just arguing in circles because the issue is deeper than what you guys are talking about.[/QUOTE]
"willingly participating is bad when it comes to this sexual behaviour because i say so and i say that the only reason bad things would be done is because of mental illness"
gee where have i heard this argument before
[editline]25th May 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=squids_eye;47801401]You seem to be having a hard time realising that incest isn't inherently abusive. It can be an aspect of abuse but if incest was legalised, every single one of the cases you are talking about would still be illegal because no one is condoning the legalisation of sexual abuse. If a man is forcing a young woman to have sex with him from a position of power, that is rape, regardless of if they are related or not. If one person is molesting another, that is sexual abuse, regardless of if they are brother and sister. No one is condoning abusive behaviour, they're just against attributing that behaviour to everyone in a group, regardless of if they are actually taking part of it.[/QUOTE]
quoting this as my response ahead of time for when you decide to strawman me
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801512]What I'm getting from him is that willingly participating in incestuous activity stems from problems during childhood/mental illness/societal issues. You guys are just arguing in circles because the issue is deeper than what you guys are talking about.[/QUOTE]
His source doesn't say anything like that.
It defines [B]incest as an act of abuse against a minor[/B] in the first paragraph, and you expect us to be surprised at the conclusion being [B]"incest is an act of abuse[/B]"?
Find some better sources, please. The one Sobotnik posted doesn't in any way support your point.
[QUOTE=bitches;47801526]"willingly participating is bad when it comes to this sexual behaviour because i say so and i say that the only reason bad things would be done is because of mental illness"
gee where have i heard this argument before
[editline]25th May 2015[/editline]
quoting this as my response ahead of time for when you decide to strawman me[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm saying that most people don't willingly have incestuous sex, because of deeper reasons. Why do you think people would do that, if it's not because of psychological/social factors?
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801553]I'm not saying it's good or bad. [B]I'm saying that most people don't willingly have incestuous sex, because of deeper reasons.[/B] [/QUOTE]
This is what you need to source
[quote]Why do you think people would do that, if it's not because of psychological/social factors?[/quote]
This is not an argument and it's not scientific.
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801553]I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm saying that most people don't willingly have incestuous sex, because of deeper reasons. Why do you think people would do that, if it's not because of psychological/social factors?[/QUOTE]
Literally every sexual fetish/preference can have the same thing said about it. Just because most people are one way doesn't mean that people who aren't should be stigmatised. It doesn't matter if they act a certain way because something in their brain is slightly different or their upbringing made them like that, as long as they behave in a way that doesn't bring harm to other people, why does it matter what they do?
[QUOTE=EcksDee;47801662]This is what you need to source
This is not an argument and it's not scientific.[/QUOTE]
[url=https://www.dropbox.com/s/h85j733qau3fg86/deviancy1.pdf?dl=0]Sexual Deviancy:Diagnostic and Neurobiological Considerations[/url]
[url=https://www.dropbox.com/s/oguwt68kr7fs96b/deviancy2.pdf?dl=0]An Integrative Theoretical Framework for Understanding Sexual Motivation,Arousal, and Behavior[/url]
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801770][url=https://www.dropbox.com/s/h85j733qau3fg86/deviancy1.pdf?dl=0]Sexual Deviancy:Diagnostic and Neurobiological Considerations[/url]
[url=https://www.dropbox.com/s/oguwt68kr7fs96b/deviancy2.pdf?dl=0]An Integrative Theoretical Framework for Understanding Sexual Motivation,Arousal, and Behavior[/url][/QUOTE]
Neither paper mentions incest once.
I agree with you on this though - non-consensual incest is wrong, and the most destructive form of abuse. I don't recall saying otherwise.
It's just that no one has presented anything which says the following:
"Consensual incestuous relationships between adults are more often than not results of prior abuse"
That's what people seem to be implying here.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;47801840]Neither paper mentions incest once.
I agree with you on this though - non-consensual incest is wrong, and the most destructive form of abuse. I don't recall saying otherwise.
It's just that no one has presented anything which says the following:
"Consensual incestuous relationships between adults are more often than not results of prior abuse"
That's what people seem to be implying here.[/QUOTE]
Incest falls under the category of sexual deviancy.
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801898]Incest falls under the category of sexual deviancy.[/QUOTE]
So does anal, bdsm, exhibitionism and everything else.
Just like incest, it can be abuse, and it can be consensual.
Where is the proof that shows that supposedly consensual incestuous relationships are a result of prior abuse.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;47801931]So does anal, bdsm, exhibitionism and everything else.
Just like incest, it can be abuse, and it can be consensual.
Where is the proof that shows that supposedly consensual incestuous relationships are a result of prior abuse.[/QUOTE]
And there are reasons which lead to subscribing to those fetishes. Why are you framing this argument so narrowly, when I have shown that there are plenty of other factors that lead someone to incestuous activity?
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801969]And there are reasons which lead to subscribing to those fetishes. Why are you framing this argument so narrowly, when I have shown that there are plenty of other factors that lead someone to incestuous activity?[/QUOTE]
With those papers that don't mention any words like incest, siblings, brother, sister or anything like that?
I'd rather my opinions be scientifically valid and sound before I join you in saying that consensual incestuous relationships are a result of abuse.
Where are you guys getting this information that consensual incestuous relationships stem from abuse?
It can't possibly be that two related individuals have a healthy lifestyle together?
I'm not for it, but I don't see how incestuous relationships have to be outlawed. If it stems from rape or abuse, then those are the issues with the relationship, not the fact that the relationship is incestuous.
Maybe I'm just biased because I'm the son of an ~incest baby~
[QUOTE=Valcor X1;47801969]And there are reasons which lead to subscribing to those fetishes. Why are you framing this argument so narrowly, when I have shown that there are plenty of other factors that lead someone to incestuous activity?[/QUOTE]
So abusive childhoods are responsible for homosexuality, and all fetishes?
Tell your brother/sister you want to fuck them and note the look they give you.
i dont think gay incest is as uncommon as you guys think
It scares me how some people subscribe almost religiously to the kind of "progress" that means everything that differs from the norm is the "way forward".
People said the slippery slope argument wasn't real, people still say that, but if we go back to the beginning of the fight for homosexual rights you'll see they were definitively not wearing chaps and spanking each other during their protests. Now we have people thinking they are born in the wrong body, be it that they think that they are in fact a woman, a dragon or a bleeding kitchen appliance.
And it is all praised by these followers of the progressive "church" because the ideology is based on praising ANYTHING that differs from the norm and calling the norm boring and bigoted.
Please don't assume that this means I hate gays or lesbians, or don't think they deserve some of the same rights as straight people, those aren't the people I mean to bash in this post.
at least they cant breed
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47806819]Now we have people thinking they are born in the wrong body, be it that they think that they are in fact a woman, a dragon or a bleeding kitchen appliance.
[/QUOTE]
And only one of those is officially recognised as a disorder, the rest is either laughed at or parody.
This is pretty sad to see a lot of weirdos here justifying incest to be honest.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47806819]It scares me how some people subscribe almost religiously to the kind of "progress" that means everything that differs from the norm is the "way forward".
People said the slippery slope argument wasn't real, people still say that, but if we go back to the beginning of the fight for homosexual rights you'll see they were definitively not wearing chaps and spanking each other during their protests. Now we have people thinking they are born in the wrong body, be it that they think that they are in fact a woman, a dragon or a bleeding kitchen appliance.
And it is all praised by these followers of the progressive "church" because the ideology is based on praising ANYTHING that differs from the norm and calling the norm boring and bigoted.
Please don't assume that this means I hate gays or lesbians, or don't think they deserve some of the same rights as straight people, those aren't the people I mean to bash in this post.[/QUOTE]
You've got it in reverse.
I say it's progress because it replaces traditions with something better.
Not because it replaces tradition with something, therefore it's better, therefore it's progress.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47807891]You've got it in reverse.
I say it's progress because it replaces traditions with something better.
Not because it replaces tradition with something, therefore it's better, therefore it's progress.[/QUOTE]
I haven't gotten jack in reverse.
The problem is that you (the progressives) always deem anything different from the norm to be better than the norm. Therefore all you are doing is diluting and slowly killing the norm.
There are plenty of people who disagree with you, and if those opinions are aired they are called bigots.
Today people are marching in parades shouting that they are "proud" of the fact that they bone other men in the arse or women proud of scissoring other women.
How is that an accomplishment? How is an environmentally gained psychological "fuck up" (At least evolutionary, unless it's some kind of built in crowd-control) something to be proud of?
I'll accept homosexuals, but I won't applaud them.
Video is pretty related:
[video=youtube;8FHJHjFWu94]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FHJHjFWu94[/video]
Fuck man, I'm bisexual heavily leaning on gay and how do you think I feel about a lot of it. I was pretty strong about a lot of activism when I was in highschool and the actions of activists pretty much woke me up from a lot of stuff. There's too much primarily identifying by something because people feel they have to, and defining their life around it. It's especially a problem within the Gay community as people fall into stereotypes from it and it produces some extremely bad and risky behavior.
Shit like this article from one of the main LGBT newspapers woke me up from a lot of it and basically told me that the fight was won and it was all about trivialities now on. [URL]http://www.advocate.com/politics/commentary/2011/09/27/oped-live-world-where-everyone-has-hiv[/URL]
[quote]Here’s a sentence I never thought I would write: I’m in favor of a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Not in the military, of course — those days are behind us — but in the bedroom. What I’m talking about, specifically, is HIV. And my point is that, at least when it comes to sex, we should talk about it less.
[B]It amazes me that in 2011, so many people still won’t sleep with HIV-positive guys.[/B][/quote]
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808021]I haven't gotten jack in reverse.
The problem is that you (the progressives) always deem anything different from the norm to be better than the norm. Therefore all you are doing is diluting and slowly killing the norm.[/QUOTE]
If the norm was good as it is, there'd be no need to change it.
The progressive view is to say parts of the norm (in this case, though certainly not a view shared by many progressives, that incest should be shunned) are bad, and thus we should change them. Not simply "we need to change everything that's normal because normal is by definition bad".
[QUOTE]There are plenty of people who disagree with you, and if those opinions are aired they are called bigots.[/QUOTE]
Which is obviously a matter of opinion.
And my opinion is that if you discriminate against homosexuals, or people who have incest, you are treating them unfairly and hence are a bigot.
[QUOTE]How is that an accomplishment? How is an environmentally gained psychological "fuck up" (At least evolutionary, unless it's some kind of built in crowd-control) something to be proud of?[/QUOTE]
Gay pride is about overcoming societal opposition. People are proud not to be gay, but to be gay despite homophobes fighting against them. "I'm here, I'm queer, get used to it" etc.
Also: Why even care about evolution? Homosexuality contradicts evolutional pressure to procreate, but where's the harm in that? It's not a defect in any [I]practical[/I] sense.
[editline]26th May 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Nikota;47808197]Shit like this article from one of the main LGBT newspapers woke me up from a lot of it and basically told me that the fight was won and it was all about trivialities now on. [URL]http://www.advocate.com/politics/commentary/2011/09/27/oped-live-world-where-everyone-has-hiv[/URL][/QUOTE]
Discrimination is never a triviality.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47806819]It scares me how some people subscribe almost religiously to the kind of "progress" that means everything that differs from the norm is the "way forward".
People said the slippery slope argument wasn't real, people still say that, but if we go back to the beginning of the fight for homosexual rights you'll see they were definitively not wearing chaps and spanking each other during their protests. Now we have people thinking they are born in the wrong body, be it that they think that they are in fact a woman, a dragon or a bleeding kitchen appliance.
And it is all praised by these followers of the progressive "church" because the ideology is based on praising ANYTHING that differs from the norm and calling the norm boring and bigoted.
Please don't assume that this means I hate gays or lesbians, or don't think they deserve some of the same rights as straight people, those aren't the people I mean to bash in this post.[/QUOTE]
clearly trans people are the same as those who claim to be fantasy or inanimate objects
nevermind how actual science supports the claim
nevermind actually talking to trans people to understand what they're going through
nevermind psychological studies into the mental stress caused by the condition
nope, clearly just those slippery slope progressives trying to ruin everything
given that you're actively shunning research in favor of upset fervor, not backed up by any argument but that you've heard it one way all your life, bigot is a really fair term for you
[QUOTE=Dez56;47807830]This is pretty sad to see a lot of weirdos here justifying incest to be honest.[/QUOTE]
Does it need to be justified in this case? They're never going to reproduce and it's not like they grew up knowing each other. Who gives a fuck?
I think many forms of incest have serious moral considerations (e.g. birth defects although I'm not entirely convinced that is a huge deal, abuse) but this is a special case in which no one should give a shit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
