Legality of incest?

Post Reply New Topic

That may well work but only if they don't look alike.

No pun intended?

If it is between two consenting, rational adults where one is not clearly or unhealthily dominant (ie: to the point of abuse), it should be legal.
If it is between a parent and a child, it is going to be nearly impossible for there to be any semblance of equality in the relationship, and is much more difficult to defend.
I don't give a crap if twins or siblings of close age get with each other as long as they're reasonable, mature people.
There is no sufficient reason that it should be illegal for (for example) two twins separated through adoption or some other means who meet as adults and fall in *that* kind of love to be with each other. It rubs us as weird because evolution has kept alive more people who have found it weird. Its about the same as making it illegal for two people to marry if they are both carriers for a genetic disorder which may affect their children or grandchildren. Incest is basically the same risk in the long term. Genetic diversity for the win--but don't make it legally mandatory.

From what I understand the ick factor apparently comes from ones own experience where the body assess people you grew up with from a young age as non suitable choices as mates, which is biological instinct with the point of creating diverse genetics. A long line of incest can create problems, but a single generation will rarely create any issue at all, and really lots of people have issues and have no relation to incest at all. It just seems that people jump on putting themselves into the persons shoes, and feel that relations with their own family sound disgusting, and as that starts run into culture which then makes a general rule that relations with family is taboo.

I guess I too find the idea of relations with my family would be disgusting, perhaps that biological thing with people you grew up with, perhaps some of the conditioning cultures rule of it being wrong, being told repeatedly it is wrong. But I remember hearing a story about where a woman ended up with a relation with her father, the stinger being that the father was never actually in her life, and they did not even know when they were related when they started. Now the couple got in big trouble because the law says it is illegal, there has been lots of uproar over it, reasons mostly given are genetics, chances are that genetic similarities are what originally attracted themselves to each other. But hey they love each other, and saying that it is wrong seems so against other parts of society that says love is the most important, it is not like he is taking advantage of each other, to me it almost looks like Romeo and Juliet. By the way Juliet was 13 in Romeo and Juliet, how awkward does that sound?

I keep myself socially isolated, as a matter of personal preference.

Being socially shunned? Well, I certainly know what that is like. It isn't so bad, if you want social isolation.

If an incestuous couples loves each other, then the social isolation should be fine. Who needs anyone else?

Even to the point of people and officials being actively hostile?

I am not aware of any society that prohibits sexual relations between first cousins, and societies that prohibit marriage between cousins are the exception to the rule China, Philippines, the Koreas, Taiwan, some US states, Croatia, Serbia and Bulgaria are the only jurisdictions I know that ban it, while the rules in Romania and India depend upon the religion of the parties. So, from that perspective, I believe that your rule is too broad.

But I also believe that your rule is too narrow, because it excludes legal relationships. A stepfather, for example, commits incest when he has sex with one of his stepchildren--even though there is not genetic relationship with them, whatsoever.

I see two public policy objections to incest: first is the increased risk of congenital disorders in offspring. (This is why double cousins and cousins related through identical twin parents should be considered separately from true first cousins). In practice, however, this risk can be managed--or at least mitigated--through in utero genetic screening and prenatal evaluation.

The second is, to my way of thinking, much more important: the potential for abusive or exploitive relationships. People who live in close familial relationships with each other develop important levels of trust. There is significant potential for emotional damage if a sexual relationship between two members of the same family were to go wrong. You can break up with a spouse or a lover. But it's much harder to break up with your family.

I think the other point is that the closer the relationship, the more likely it is to be far more difficult to break up with someone. Breaking up with a second or third cousin is much less difficult than breaking up with your brother, for instance.

I don't think there's anything wrong with incest. It's disgusting that it's illegal, but there are very deep reasons for its prohibition, and most people find it easier and more comforting to construct "rational" arguments to justify their strongest gut reactions rather than to seriously question them.

.

Indeed - though I think there can be an awful lot wrong with even consensual incest. It's better off just to make it illegal as there are too many reasons to avoid prohibiting it.

^ This.

In many countries, the age of consent is 16 or younger (14 in Germany). Without laws against incest, there would be a lot of cases of pseudo-consensual (coerced consensual) sex between juveniles and their parents or older siblings. There are already way too many cases of sexual abuse in family environments as it is.

I think that some Christians will invoke the "Original Condition" doctrine and propose that, incest having been a property of the "Original Condition" of the first family, anything other than incest would represent a "perversion of the original condition", and therefore be wrong.

At least that's how the argument seemed to go in another thread.

The ick factor doesn't even enter into it for me. Incest is an ethical problem for the same reason that teacher-student and doctor-patient relationships are seen as unethical. It is all about the dynamics of power, control, trust and dependency.

In theory, I'm fine with two adult siblings having a consensual sexual relationship. But in practice, by far the most common form of incest is sexual abuse or coercion of younger family members that are in no position to resist or refuse.

Woody Allen, with his wife and adopted daughter



They have a couple of adorable daughters (who were also adopted).



The circle of life?

Last edited by pandabear on 31 Jan 2012, 6:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Are you trying to make a powerful case against incest with that photo pandabear?

Consensual incest between adults shouldn't be a crime (even though I don't agree with it) but I can see why it remains illegal regarding family rape & sexual abuse.

Although the fact that it's legally acceptable to marry your first cousin but not have a relationship with a step-sibling (when there is no bloodline connection) is a flawed concept.