Incest

[Theodore]

I recently had a conversation about incest with a good friend of mine. She and her brother were molested by their father and one of their moms boyfriends while they were growing up. Until she spoke with me about it she had always felt guilty about it and really bad. Her father and the boyfriend she hates, but she had always had a close relationship with her brother and enjoyed the sexual relationship they had. This made her feel guilty because society and Christianity says incest is wrong.

I told her that while what her father and the boyfriend did was wrong and she was right to feel anger at them, it was okay for her to enjoy what happened with her brother. What makes incest wrong in my mind is not the fact that someone is having a sexual relationship with a family member but the risk to any offspring of such a union. What her father did was wrong not because it was her father but for the same reason it was wrong the boyfriend did it, it was child abuse.

Since this conversation with her she no longer beats herself up because she enjoyed what happened with her brother, she does not want to sleep with him again but she does not regret what happened in the past.

While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business. Right or wrong?

[anthony]

Hi Theodore,

Right.

Welcome to OL.

[Theodore]

Thanks. whYNOT glad im not the only Heinlein fan here. For those who want to know more about what I told her http://howardfamilies.blogspot.com/2012/06/incest.html here is a longer version of the reasons I gave her.

[anthony]

Oh, being a Heinlein fan isn't unusual here. It might be one of the few

areas of commonality in a decidedly uncommon line up of minds.

Re: your "cup of tea" remark, I'm wondering if you're British?

If so - and possibly even if not - you'd know of the Scottish sci-fi writer

Iaian M. Banks, an all-time favorite of mine.

[Theodore]

Oh, being a Heinlein fan isn't unusual here. It might be one of the few

areas of commonality in a decidedly uncommon line up of minds.

Re: your "cup of tea" remark, I'm wondering if you're British?

If so - and possibly even if not - you'd know of the Scottish sci-fi writer

Iaian M. Banks, an all-time favorite of mine.

no I'm not British but I do use British aphorisms and I say certain words the British way. I have seen mr banks works but have always been afraid of them, I made the mistake of reading about him and finding out he is a socialist. I try never to read anything about any author. Is he any good and is it worth reading?

[anthony]

Socialist? Have no fear! First, like many people, writers have mixed premises.

It's hardly likely to pollute one's mind, or anything. Also, don't you think that

all novels concern a single protagonist - so are individualistic by nature?

But mainly, Banks portrays memorable characters and heroes, surmounting

challenges rationally, and quite heroically. If anything, I'd say his sci-fi

contains the benevolent universe principle, and are largely Romanticist.

And you will not find a more powerful imagination. His plots and descriptions

are breath-taking.

[Selene]

While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business. Right or wrong?

Incest, like nepotism is fine, as long as you keep it in the family...

[Brant Gaede]

While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business. Right or wrong?

Incest, like nepotism is fine, as long as you keep it in the family...

Circular reasoning?

--Brant

[Selene]

While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business. Right or wrong?

Incest, like nepotism is fine, as long as you keep it in the family...

Circular reasoning?

--Brant

Family circle...?

[Theodore]

While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business. Right or wrong?

Incest, like nepotism is fine, as long as you keep it in the family...

LMAO wow thanks thats great I will have to remember that one.

Family circle...?

Jerk?

Ok now that I got my juvenile out.

whYNot

I both read and listen to audiobooks and some of the books I read are... Painful. Take Orson Scott Card. Everything other than Enders game and Ender's shadow that he has written should be burned, erased from every computer in the world, and purged from every mind (BRAIN FLOSS!). Books like music can and does affect ones thinking. It doesnt mean I dont read books from authors I disagree with, it just means that I am very careful when I do. For example I just finished the first book of the Uplift Saga and when he starts talking about Altruism as a positive trait in humanity it made me want to scream. The same thing goes for another book I finished 2 days ago (Moral Animal by Robert Wright). What makes books like Moral animal so insidious is the package dealing and the intentional mis-defining of terms.

Back to the subject at hand. Kinda surprised I havent received more feedback on this one.

[Brant Gaede]

Incest seems to breed more incest, but I think the taboo is hard-wired into our brains. Moral: just don't get started.

--Brant

[Mikee]

Back to the subject at hand. Kinda surprised I havent received more feedback on this one.

"While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business."

Right. Nothing controversial here.

-Mike E.

also a Heinlein fan.

[caroljane]

Back to the subject at hand. Kinda surprised I havent received more feedback on this one.

"While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business."

Right. Nothing controversial here.

-Mike E.

also a Heinlein fan.

Back to the subject at hand. Kinda surprised I havent received more feedback on this one.

"While incest is not my cup of tea what two consenting people do is none of my business."

Right. Nothing controversial here.

-Mike E.

also a Heinlein fan.

Oy! Just because I forcibly adopted several sibs on OL does not mean I want to abuse anybody!

Usually.

Carol

Easily offended

[Mikee]

What? Where is the offense?

Obviously the context of this statement was not meant to imply adults vs juveniles as the consenting "people", quite the opposite. If it helps in my opinion I would toss Sandusky and his wife in the can for life.

[caroljane]

What? Where is the offense?

Obviously the context of this statement was not meant to imply adults vs juveniles as the consenting "people", quite the opposite. If it helps in my opinion I would toss Sandusky and his wife in the can for life.

No, no... no cross tread was intended... I was only in banter, sorry. You never offended me.

Easily offended was a joke, I am nearly impossible to offend.

[Mikee]

Okay, you're sure then? I'm too literal to understand what you're saying much of the time, my fault. So, you love Heinlein too? [VIQ].

[Selene]

Can you describe what it feels like to be "in banter?"

[caroljane]

I like#einlein a lot. I see now two sides of an edifice, two I see are blue. I aspire to be a Fair Witness.

In banter, O dear. It feels like -- I feel like sayin --- pure impulse.

Sorry, if appropriate.

[Theodore]

Incest seems to breed more incest, but I think the taboo is hard-wired into our brains. Moral: just don't get started.

--Brant

Brant I find your assertion that the taboo is hard-wired interesting. After reading both Time Enough for Love and To Sail Beyond the Sunset I was really challenged to think about this subject and do some research on it. Before I was very apathetic about it and without any real opinion. Now I am for legalizing it, I find it absurd to make Incest illegal simply because it is tradition. Now that I have done research on the topic I have seen the hard-wired theory crop up a lot. It doesn't flesh out however. First because incest does happen, second because there is NO definition of incest. Every culture, time, and society, all define incest differently. Even here in the States what is incest in one state might not be incest in another. "Incest" is a deep social program.

In nature incest is quite... natural. What makes the animal man any different? As I posted on my blog the difference between man and other animals is that man as a rational being saw the consequences of incestuous breeding and thus took steps to prevent it. However with modern contraception's that point really is moot. Sex for pleasure has been decoupled from sex for procreation, given that what objection could be raised?

Mikee

Let me clarify. My distinction is not quite "adult" vs "Juvenile" because these terms are poorly defined. I said before that what my friends father did was wrong and child abuse yet what her brother did was not. The difference is more than just age and maturity. This is a rather complex subject but I will try to keep it short. A 7 year old and a 4 year old who play with each other in a non abusive manner is alright with me. A 18 year old who plays with a 4 year old however is not. For me the importance is the maturity of mind. Here is a better way of putting it a healthy 14 year old who sleeps with a mentally retarded 23 year old is abusive, where as if he sleeps with an eleven year old he is not.

The idea of age restrictions has always appeared contrary to reality to me, and since discovering objectivism it appears doubly unjust. The invention of age restriction on sexual behavior is a modern christian invention with no basis in reality. This does not mean that I think it is morally right for "adults" to be sexually active with children. but the key terms there are children and adults.

Does that make sense?

so yes I do think there should be laws protecting children from abuse, I also do not think they are capable of making a rational decision to be sexually involved with adults. However children are sexual beings, so I find it ridiculous when a 8 year old has to register as a sex offender for the rest of their life for slapping a 7 year old on the but.

[Brant Gaede]

Before legal, what is illegal?

--Brant

[Mikee]

Mikee

Let me clarify. My distinction is not quite "adult" vs "Juvenile" because these terms are poorly defined. I said before that what my friends father did was wrong and child abuse yet what her brother did was not. The difference is more than just age and maturity. This is a rather complex subject but I will try to keep it short. A 7 year old and a 4 year old who play with each other in a non abusive manner is alright with me. A 18 year old who plays with a 4 year old however is not. For me the importance is the maturity of mind. Here is a better way of putting it a healthy 14 year old who sleeps with a mentally retarded 23 year old is abusive, where as if he sleeps with an eleven year old he is not.

The idea of age restrictions has always appeared contrary to reality to me, and since discovering objectivism it appears doubly unjust. The invention of age restriction on sexual behavior is a modern christian invention with no basis in reality. This does not mean that I think it is morally right for "adults" to be sexually active with children. but the key terms there are children and adults.

Does that make sense?

so yes I do think there should be laws protecting children from abuse, I also do not think they are capable of making a rational decision to be sexually involved with adults. However children are sexual beings, so I find it ridiculous when a 8 year old has to register as a sex offender for the rest of their life for slapping a 7 year old on the but.

Theodore,

I'm comfortable with your initial post because you explained the context of the behavior of everyone involved. But can't say I could give blanket approval to your examples above because of the lack of context. Basically I agree with your point of view. I believe in minding my own business and "no harm, no foul". As far as incest being natural, I've never felt the slightest attraction to my sister though one of my first cousins and I were attracted to each other (we played around a little until my aunt took notice and kept us separated), I think I got an overdose of testosterone in my DNA. Or maybe it's from reading Heinlein from an early age...

Missed your initial entry at OL, but welcome. I don't keep up so I miss things often.

-Mike E.

[Theodore]

Mikee,

That was part of my point. I am not comfortable with blanket acceptance or condemnation of something outside of context. I do not believe rules of conduct are universal

[Mikee]

Mikee,

That was part of my point. I am not comfortable with blanket acceptance or condemnation of something outside of context. I do not believe rules of conduct are universal

Okay. Agreed.

[Theodore]

Before legal, what is illegal?

--Brant

Not quite sure what you mean but i will guess and try to answer. If I misunderstood the question please let me know. Illegal means punishable by "the authorities."

In the specific case of incest what is a crime is the incest, not the harm it does (if any) to someone else. I say if any because not all incestuous offspring are defective, I do believe if the child is defective then the parents of the incestuous relationship should be punished for playing Russian roulette with a third parties life.

[Brant Gaede]

Before legal, what is illegal?

--Brant

Not quite sure what you mean but i will guess and try to answer. If I misunderstood the question please let me know. Illegal means punishable by "the authorities."

In the specific case of incest what is a crime is the incest, not the harm it does (if any) to someone else. I say if any because not all incestuous offspring are defective, I do believe if the child is defective then the parents of the incestuous relationship should be punished for playing Russian roulette with a third parties life.

Legal is action sanctioned by law. Illegal means behavior that's against the law. No law means no illegality.

--Brant