PDA

View Full Version : Incest



IdleRich
09-04-2008, 09:54 AM
This is a strange story

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/07/australia

A number of things worth mention here I think. Firstly, I understand that it's quite common for close relatives who have never met each other to become sexually attracted to each other when they finally do (even to the extent that two formerly hetero-sexual brothers have been known to become sexually involved) - why is that? Is it because basically people are attracted to people like them? This case is especially strange because some people are claiming that the father and daughter did actually know each other so this may not be relevant but still I think it's worth mentioning.
Secondly, the judge has ruled that they meet but may not have sex. To me it seems very odd that courts are still trying to rule on what people can get up to in the bedroom. I guess here the taboo is strong and also the ostensible reason (to prevent "inbred" children) may be valid but what if the people involved can no longer have children or have chosen to be sterilised? Maybe it's just simpler to rule that relatives can't have sex than to rule that they must not have children as that seems to point to enforced sterilisation or enforced abortion.
Anyway, what I'm asking really is, should incest be illegal and if so why? And also is there a difference between sex between siblings and sex between parent and child?

STN
09-04-2008, 10:03 AM
In Batailles Eroticism he puts forward the idea that if two siblings have a kid it is no more likely to have the problems associated with inbreeding than if two people who are unrelated do. He says that the taboo exists because in a society where incest is prevalent the incidence of problems increases dramatically (i.e. as each generation becomes more and more closely related the likelihood of problems increases).

I always found this a tad suspect myself.

zhao
09-04-2008, 10:18 AM
yeah as great a thinker as Batailles is i don't think he is any kind of medical authority?

(i was an only child. but have always wondered what if i had a sister who is really hot... guess i'll never know)

STN
09-04-2008, 10:24 AM
yeah as great a thinker as Batailles is i don't think he is any kind of medical authority?

(i was an only child. but have always wondered what if i had a sister who is really hot... guess i'll never know)

Only people who don't have siblings that match their sexual orientation ever think this, as far as I know...

STN
09-04-2008, 10:29 AM
Obv I'm talking about zhao's hypothetical foxy sister here, not quibbling with him about Bataille, on whom I think he is correct.

IdleRich
09-04-2008, 10:37 AM
"Only people who don't have siblings that match their sexual orientation ever think this, as far as I know..."
I reckon that's probably true... but no sisters for me (only a brother who seems to have taken to calling himself Mr Bottom) so I'll never know for sure.

IdleRich
09-04-2008, 10:52 AM
"I always found this a tad suspect myself."
Maybe so but even if the children are guaranteed to end up like Prince William is that any reason to prevent relatives having sex as long as they are safe? Is the automatic revulsion that most people feel to this something to do with an evolutionary desire to increase diversity of genes? In an age where procreation does not necessarily follow sex is this prohibition still reasonable?

noel emits
09-04-2008, 11:14 AM
(only a brother who seems to have taken to calling himself Mr Bottom)
It's always the families that suffer.

mr_bottom
09-04-2008, 11:18 AM
no sisters for me (only a brother who seems to have taken to calling himself Mr Bottom).

i've caught you checking me out before tho. and licking your lips.
er, or maybe there was just some food on my back?

noel emits
09-04-2008, 11:28 AM
Is it because basically people are attracted to people like them?
Some people are attracted to those that look like them, others are attracted to people that look very different and I think the split is quite even*. Might be quite a different psychological process that underlies this as well - I think if people really thought about it it would seem a bit narcissistic and odd. Is the fascination actually coming from looking at a sort of mirror of yourself as a hot chick or whatever tosses your salad? Surely genetically speaking diversity is better?

Maybe it has something to do with quantum entanglement?

*Pretty sure there was a sort of TV show / survey in the UK about this a few years ago.

IdleRich
09-04-2008, 11:33 AM
"Some people are attracted to those that look like them, others are attracted to people that look very different and I think the split is quite even."
Well, I didn't necessarily mean look like them but I take your point. I certainly think most people don't like to think that they are attracted to people that are just like them (although maybe I'm wrong, lonely hearts columns are filled with people seeking those with similar interests) but is that really the case? Must admit I've never seen a study of that that I can call to mind.
The phenomenon of separated relatives being attracted to each other to a statistically unlikely degree, I've read about it several times but I haven't got a link - has anyone else heard of it?

noel emits
09-04-2008, 11:42 AM
Well, I didn't necessarily mean look like them but I take your point.
Ah yes of course. It does still stand, I say 'look' because the survey I remember concentrated on doing some computer analysis of faces.

I certainly think most people don't like to think that they are attracted to people that are just like them (although maybe I'm wrong, lonely hearts columns are filled with people seeking those with similar interests) but is that really the case?
I think some people are. Others find themselves with or looking for people that offer a balance to their personalities. Not a judgment, just an observation. Yes, it would help to see some studies.

zhao
09-04-2008, 12:59 PM
it always kinda bugs me to see couples that look like brother and sister. just a little... ewww.

but i guess i have dated girls that look like they could be my sister too.

but my idea is to have children with someone that looks very much unlike me.

STN
09-04-2008, 01:15 PM
"but my idea is to have children with someone that looks very much unlike me."

i'm up for it if you are.

Mr. Tea
09-04-2008, 01:18 PM
"but my idea is to have children with someone that looks very much unlike me."

i'm up for it if you are.

This could be your lucky day!

http://www.dissensus.com/showthread.php?t=7557

zhao
09-04-2008, 01:18 PM
"but my idea is to have children with someone that looks very much unlike me."

i'm up for it if you are.

age location medical history family background education income please.

zhao
09-04-2008, 01:20 PM
come to think of it. i don't think i'm ready JUST yet. give me a few years? will you wait for me? (if you really loved me you would)

swears
09-04-2008, 01:21 PM
I reckon that's probably true... but no sisters for me (only a brother who seems to have taken to calling himself Mr Bottom) so I'll never know for sure.

Mr Bottom/Brown neon is your bro? OMG, THE PLOT THICKENS

I think the revulsion factor has something to do with overfamiliarity, like when couples married for years go off sex. And there's nothing more "familiar" than spending your entire childhood with somebody and seeing them pee the car on long trips or pick their nose and eat it.

IdleRich
09-04-2008, 05:31 PM
"Mr Bottom/Brown neon is your bro? OMG, THE PLOT THICKENS"
Well, I knew that Mr Bottom was my brother but with an incredible lack of penetration I didn't realise that Brown Neon was too until Nomos pointed it out.

tryptych
09-04-2008, 06:03 PM
[I]
I think the revulsion factor has something to do with overfamiliarity, like when couples married for years go off sex. And there's nothing more "familiar" than spending your entire childhood with somebody and seeing them pee the car on long trips or pick their nose and eat it.

This is the mechanism that stops people becoming sexually involved with their families - it's a form of reverse imprinting called the Westermarck effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westermarck_effect#Westermarck_effect) and it holds true for non-blood relations raised together in their early years. As the Wikipedia article notes, this is contra-Freud.

I think the revulsion is in part to do similar disgust reactions - there's no real reason why people should be revolted by rotting meat, shit, etc - other than being in close proximity can lead to sickness, but the revulsion produced can be intense. So it seems for the idea of sexual relations with your close kin. I don't know for a fact the statistics for congenital defects of 1st generation inbreds, but I imagine it wouldn't take that high incidence for evolutionary pressure to create similar feelings of disgust.

As for references about "Genetic Sexual Attraction" which is what Idle_rich is talking about:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2003/may/17/weekend7.weekend2

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/28/germany.familyandrelationships

Google for more - I'm a bit reluctant to dip into this at work! I don't know how much published scientific evidence there is though for it, although there seems to be plenty of anecdotal stuff.

Personally, I don't think that such prohibition is reasonable anymore - in abstract terms. In practice, I would imagine that non-consensual incest vastly outnumbers the consensual kind, and there would be an argument that any loosening of the prohibitions might make such things harder to differentiate between. Similar to arguments over the arbitrary choice over age of consent - it's a balance between freedom and protecting individuals.

Mr. Tea
09-04-2008, 07:54 PM
Well, I knew that Mr Bottom was my brother but with an incredible lack of penetration

Just as well really, given the subject of this thread.

zhao
09-04-2008, 07:58 PM
Just as well really, given the subject of this thread.

incest - brothers - penetration - mr. bottom - brown neon :eek: