[QUOTE=Fuji]
AFAIK the taboo against incest is far wider and more prevalent across the world than the taboos against ingesting controlled substances.
[/QUOTE]
Does that make it right? Show me from first principles where acts between consenting adults are morally wrong. Just because it is a snap judgement based on evolution and culture rather than culture alone does not mean that it is not yet another symptom of people wanting to control other people’s lives.
[QUOTE=FriarTed]
I’m not surprised by the amount of people who aren’t disturbed by this. In ten years, they may well be in the vast majority here and a slight majority in society. Then, the debate will be about consensual sex between a 21 y/o offspring & a mid-30s parent who were never separated.
[/QUOTE]
How do you figure that?
[QUOTE=Bosstone]
Save the approbation
[/QUOTE]
approbation \ap-ruh-BAY-shuhn, noun:
[QUOTE=acsenray]
approbation \ap-ruh-BAY-shuhn, noun:
And once more for good measure: :smack:
Err…that was a typo. I left off the dis-. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
[QUOTE=Ludovic]
Does that make it right? Show me from first principles where acts between consenting adults are morally wrong. Just because it is a snap judgement based on evolution and culture rather than culture alone does not mean that it is not yet another symptom of people wanting to control other people’s lives.
[/QUOTE]
Way to totally miss my point. I was merely responding to your assertion about “the same type of people”, which is a demonstrably false assertion.
[QUOTE=Kayeby]
To add insult to injury they gave poor little Celeste a name that rhymes with “incest”. The limericks almost write themselves.
[/QUOTE]
I think they should have named her Patherpucker.
Regards,
Shodan
It’s hard to figure where I do stand on this, but I think the only reason I’m willing to let them be consenting adults about it is that I think society’s incest law needs to be about imbalance of power and not just about relatedness.
In response to the example upthread–if said 18-yr-old is able to support herself, and not being effectively bribed into the relationship, I’m ambivalent. As they say in the pro-choice community (of which I’m also a part), it’s her body and her choice at that point.
I’m trying to picture this kid as school, first grade, beginning of term, during “get to know all your fellow students” time.
“So, Celeste, how many brothers and sisters do you have?”
“I’m not sure how to answer that question…”
This is as good place as any to post my rant.
Harboring a personal opinion about whether or not the behavior of another person is right or wrong isn’t a fucking crime, people. Nor is it morally objectionable in and of itself.
Frankly, the part of this thread that actually pissed me off was the blithe assumption on the part of my fellow Dopers that having an opinion regarding whether or not a given behavior is right or wrong is, in itself, wrong. Ludovic, I’m picking on you here in specific, although you’re not the only one.
What the fuck is wrong with you that you patently believe that having an opinion that someone else is doing something wrong makes me, by definition, complicit in “a snap judgement based on evolution and culture”? You seem totally comfortable having snap judgements about other Dopers just for expressing an opinion that isn’t “anyone can do whatever they like and that’s okay”.
For the goddamn record, I read the link in the OP and thought to myself “Well, that’s remarkably icky and what they’re doing is wrong”. I thought that because I, personally, have thought the matter through. Using critical thinking skills and everything.
As it happens, there are solid biological and cultural reasons for people thinking incest (particularly incest between parent and child) is just flat-out wrong. A strong incest taboo is historically probably one of the few even marginally functional ways to prevent (or at least minimize) isolated population inbreeding. And it hasn’t been that long (historically speaking) since it was commonplace for people to live their whole lives within 10 miles of their place of birth. That sort of thing tends to limit the available gene pool if there’s no drive to go out of the community to bring in new people. While close breeding in a family tree might not automatically lead to “zomg, your baby will be deformed for sure!”, it does increase the chances of - particularly when it takes place over generations.
A parent-child inbreeding situation is even worse from a genetic standpoint. A parent-child inbreeding situation means that, by definition, the parents of a resultant child will share at least 50% (and probably more, actually, since most people have at least some genetic overlap - 50% is the *best case scenario * for a parent-child breeding) of their genetic material. That concentrates the hell out of undesireable recessives (if there are any). Genetically speaking, sibling incest (taking this as a comparison because full siblings share the next-highest average rate of genetic overlap - and discounting breeding between twins) is nowhere near as unfortunate - since there’s a solid chance that even full siblings will share less than 50% of their genetic material with each other (granted, it might be higher, but chances are actually reasonable that full siblings share less than half - each will get half of each parent’s genetic material, but which half that each sibling gets will be different, and random variation comes into play in a big way here since it’s a 50/50 chance for each individual gene locus being the same copy between full siblings). Moreover, there’s no convenient way of knowing (outside full-on genetic mapping) the degree of genetic overlap between full siblings. It’s technically possible that it’s zero (or no greater than the genetic overlap between unrelated strangers). Unlikely, but possible. This is not the case in parent-child incest. In the case of parent-child incest, the genetic overlap is *at least * 50%, and almost certainly higher. That means that, on average, any child of such a mating would have approximately 75% genetic overlap with the grandparent-parent.
It’s a disaster from a sociological standpoint, too. Parent-child incest fucks with the established power dynamic of the family unit - hell it essentially destroys it. It blurs the expected roles of family members. And, frankly, there is a tremendously strong cultural incest taboo across the board. It’s such a strong taboo that it’s more than possible that a family unit engaging in incest will face ostracism and other assorted social stigma.
If it were just this lady and her dad quietly living together, fucking each other, and going about their life without cluing in the population at large and involving nobody but each other in their behavior, I’d still say it was wrong and nasty - but other than worrying about their mental state that they’re okay living their lives in a constant state of violating one of the primary social mores of their society (much as I’d worry about someone who lived their live in a sexual relationship with their dog, for example - or who felt the need to eat human flesh on a regular basis), I wouldn’t have anything to say. It would fall into my mental category of “iieeewww, that’s nasty, but it’s not hurting anyone (except possibly themselves) so it’s none of my business”.* However, in this situation, that’s not what they’re doing. They’re willfully and apparently deliberately procreating - and exposing her children and his grandchildren (to clarify, the children from her previous relationships) to the same social stigma they’ve decided to live with. They’ve additionally exposed their children (the kids they have together) to increased biological and genetic hazards, in addition to the social stigma, all so they can get their rocks off the way they want to.
That makes them selfish fucks in my book. In Australia, it apparently makes them criminal selfish fucks.
Pick another cultural more to ride your “can’t we all just be tolerant of each other’s differences” horse with, bub. The incest one has a logical and functional basis - it’s not irrational and arbitrary, unlike some other cultural mores that spring to mind.
*Lots of things fall into this category for me. Like scat fetishists and furries and the aforementioned people who have sex with their pets (although that’s more dicey from an animal-cruelty standpoint) and people who eat raw fish and cooked okra. Everyone has things that make them go “iieeeeewww, but none of my business, thank Og.”
Someone on the first page thought of Chinatown.
Me, my brain went to Lot and his Daughters.
I know this is just plain wrong, but if either of them was totally hot I would find this more understandable. But they are both seriously fug. Ick factor 10.
[QUOTE=NightRabbit]
I’m not arguing that it’s illegal or isn’t. I’m astounded by people saying, “I’d have no problem with it, except for the effect on the child”. As if, were there no child involved, this sort of thing is fine as long as it occurs privately.
ETA: Whoops! Just realized that last point didn’t refer to me. But my other point still stands. Are you arguing that it’s “okay” for reunited parents and children to engage in incest past a certain age, that there’s no power balance going on, and that older parents have no responsibility to their adult children?
[/QUOTE]
And are you arguing that a 31-year-old woman has no responsibility for herself, but is a helpless victim of the bestial urges of a man she never related to as father? :rolleyes:
I think you just lowered the glass ceiling a foot or two, dear.
I had a dear internet friend who was very supportive of me during some very dark days of my life. She was in her mid-50s at the time I knew her, which would have been about ten years ago now. She was adopted and spent some time tracking down her birth family. She found a brother a couple of years older whom she had never previously met. They did meet and they fell in love. She was well past menopause so there is no possibility that she will produce any genetically suspect offspring. Her choices were to deny her feelings and her happiness in deference to some social custom or taboo or to live out her life in a happy and loving partnership. She chose love, and I have a hard time condeming her for finding a loving relationship with someone, even if that someone had the same birth parents.
Not an exact analogy to the current situation but I wanted to offer it into the mix anyway.
There’s the default “eww” factor for me, too. Beyond that, though, I don’t think it’s anyone’s fucking business but their own. Nor could I imagine mustering up the outrage one must have to start a Pit thread about it.
Dad is quoted in the article as saying “the sex is fantastic.” I can’t get my head around that. Did the reporter ask or did he volunteer it? Either way, sharing this information with the public shows a disconnect with social norms that’s almost as off-kilter as the act itself.
[QUOTE=ShelliBean]
So do you think she gets pissed when he points out “that’s not the way your mom did it”?
[/QUOTE]
Yikes! 
Though it does touch on my earlier post, which has pretty much gone ignored. What if he really really really loved her mother but there were separated for some tragic reason like he was shipping out to Vietnam or going to Ivy League State or something, and decades later he meets a woman who is the almost-exact double of his long-ago and now dead lost love?
Just speculating, of course.
I would be interested in the background of the daughter and her motives. IMO, I think the dad is trying to convince himself that since he wasnt around his daughter while she was growing up (and who knows, maybe he didnt even know about her) then there really isnt this father-daughter mindset. He thought it was wrong at first - so what changed his mind other than his penis?
I hate to say this, but I think the daughter is manipulating her dad. Let’s just hope he snaps out of it because I’m thinking the daughter may be too far gone and will need years of psycho therapy. Speaking of which, I dont think jail will do anything helpful but lots of mental therapy might be in order. Speaking of which, why are the kid(s) still at home???
Wonder how long before the kid gets brought in for a three-way. Not that there’s anything wrong with that!
[QUOTE=OtakuLoki]
I am aware of that and said so in my original post in this thread, but the odds of such problems for closely related persons are much greater than for most unrelated persons.
While Wikipedia says that 40-60% of congenital defects have no known cause, I think that when dealing with a couple this closely related, I’m not being unreasonable to ask for proof that the specific defect wasn’t genetic, before I drop my assumption that it can be linked to the consanguinity of the parents. I’ll admit part of that is because I’m taking that 40-60% figure as being based on all incidents through the population.
[/QUOTE]
I thought I read somewhere that cousins produce more defects that closer blood relations do. Anyone got a stat?
[QUOTE=Kalhoun]
I thought I read somewhere that cousins produce more defects that closer blood relations do. Anyone got a stat?
[/QUOTE]
given the (relatively) rare incidence of either, I would suggest that any data, if available may not be particularly helpful (unless the difference was something like ‘a magnitude of ten’)