The Social Stigma Argument Against Some Couples

I think it’s because his gripe comes from what he saw in three Pit threads in the past month or two. Many of us would have just posted it to the relevant threads (or possibly just the currently active one), but our OP is apparently of the posting school of thought that knows his ideas are so relevant and attractive that sometimes they just need new threads of their own to truly shine.

Where would you draw the line? You would draw a line, wouldn’t you? There are some things you wouldn’t do with your kids?

You really are too fucking stupid to breathe.

It’s not a matter of whether i would draw a line somewhere; it’s simply that comparing the social consequences of incest to eating children makes you appear as if you have absolutely no sense of perspective, no ability to draw any type of reasonable distinctions.

If i thought you were simply being hyperbolic, it might be worth engaging you, but your shrill idiocy in this and the other thread make clear that you have no interest in dealing with this issue rationally.

Why is it a non argument?, it doesn´t carry any weight at all?

I beg to differ, it does carry weight; and IMHO, it´s one of the things that added to the other elements of the issue tilt the scale to the “Incest > No” side.

I was actually just going to neglect mine, but since you put it on the table, yes, I’m going to sell them as chocolate babies. (SFW)

So the “serious adverse effect” is not having to differentiate between Dad and Grandpa? Hmm, that’s one less gift at Christmas, but one less thank-you card to write. Sounds like a wash to me.

Look, I’m not saying that there will be 3 kids in every class whose Dad and Uncle are the same guy, but I think you’re assuming a lot when you assume things like this will traumatize children. For all we know the subject may never come up, or the child may simply decide to accept his parents’ choice but not follow in their footsteps. Classmates or their parents might never recognize them. They could just be the Freaks of the Week and disappear in two weeks and live happily ever after.

What sort of stick is up your bum today mhendo? :smiley:

I think it is a perfectly valid question that AuntiePam poses. If the role of parenting is to nurture children physically, emotionally and culturally until they reach an age to become functional adults themselves, then teaching them by word AND action that it’s perfectly OK for daddy to be fucking his daughter negates all that.

If it is not vitally important to impart such mores, if our childrens’ lives and futures are so insignificant, then as she says, what ‘value’ do they have? We might as well sell or even eat them.

If you thought that wasn’t hyperbole, then you’re the idiot. You’re also the first poster in this thread who’s resorted to name-calling. I don’t think anyone in the other thread is doing it either, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

kambuckta, thanks – you explained it better than I could.

AudreyK, you make a good point, but what’s the implication of a child accepting it? Will that son or daughter grow up to think it’s okay to have a sexual relationship with their parents or with their children? If they reject it, will they reject their parents? Will they have any guilt associated with that?

Jesus fucking Christ!

Does the concept of consent not even occur to you people? We’re talking about two consenting adults here. And not even borderline adults; the younger person in this relationship is comfortably middle-aged. If you can’t tell the difference between that and selling or eating a child, there’s really no use even talking to you about this.

Also, your whole argument, especially the way you use the phrase “daddy…fucking his daughter”, seems to be trying to imply that this is a relationship of coercion or undue influence. Even the judge in the case, who sentenced these two after they were found guilty of breaking the law, conceded that there was no evidence of any such coercion or unwilling participation in the relationship. You can try all you like to equate this with some 35-year-old man fucking his 14-year-old daughter, but it’s not the same thing.

As for the question of mores, to argue that taking a neutral position on incest negates all the other physical, emotional, and cultural nurturing that we do for children is absolutely ridiculous, the height (or nadir, perhaps) of simplistic argumentation. It also assumes that these children will not, as they grow older, be able to appreciate and understand the uniqueness of their parents’ situation, while also appreciating and understanding that incest is still frowned upon in society, and that it’s not something that should be encouraged.

It’s not like “Do as i say, not as i do” is an unusual weapon in the parental arsenal. My mother made sure that my sister and i knew not to smoke, even while she went through a pack a day when we were kids. I’m not equating smoking with incest, only arguing that there is no reason to believe that the simple fact of their parents’ incest will somehow leave these children physically, emotionally, or culturally unable to cope in the world.

I’m not arguing that people shouldn’t feel “icky” or uncomfortable about this. It pushes some of my ick buttons as well. But the “string 'em up” mentality is pretty over the top.

The only real problem (as opposed to “thing i find icky”) that i see with this whole arrangement is that the children might have to suffer some additional societal scorn, especially while they are still kids. But on that score, i’m in complete agreement with the OP that this sort of societal censure is not, in and of itself, sufficient reason to rail against the choices of consenting adults.

And as I’ll say yet again, you can shove your notion of ‘consent’ where the sun don’t shine when you are talking about a parent/child relationship regardless of their frigging age.

The family of origin dynamics, however fractured over the years, were still in some sort of operation when these two first started having sex (lets assume it was only in the past ten years or so, rather than when she was fifteen and first reunited with her father). No way on earth can that consent (from either party) be considered anything other than a very poor justification for their selfish and sick desires.


Actually, i think it’s worth making more of this point.

The shrill harpies seem to think that, if we condone this particular, highly unusual set of circumstances, we’ll send the message that incest is fine and will, in a few years, be overrun by children who can’t tell the difference between their uncles and their fathers.

Even those of us with a “live and let live” attitude to this case have, virtually unanimously, declared that the idea of incest (for us) tends to gross us out, and that we would never even consider it, social taboo or not. And the vast majority of people feel this way regarding their own behavior.

So what sort of dramatic social decline are we in for if we allow these very rare instances to pass without tarring and feathering the culprits? Are there really thousands, or even millions of brothers and sisters, or fathers and adult daughters out there just waiting for society to give the nod so they can jump in the sack together?

What does the child need to consent to? There’s nothing in the relationship itself that does the child any harm, that deprives the child of anything.

As the OP said, the damage allegedly done to the children in this case is merely a product of the very intolerance society has for the relationship. It’s pretty rich for the people doing all the scolding to then turn around and pretend to be concerned that their hectoring and disapproval will make life difficult for the kids.

Never picked you for wailing busybody. I guess we all have our particular bugbears.

It may be hard to discuss this rationally, given that (by my expectations), unlike interracial and gay relationships, 90-98% of incestuous relationships are probably not between “two consenting adults.”

You might be right that this is the reason.

I guess i would just like to think that people can tell the difference, and can separate the issues in this particular case from the more common instances in which there are issues of non-consent.

Neither i, nor anyone else in either of these threads, have ever suggested that incest between an adult and a minor should be condoned, and indeed we have made clear on multiple occasions that our tolerance for it applies only to cases in which both parties are consenting adults.

If it makes any difference, i would go even further, and argue that any parent-child consensual incestuous relationship that was found to have its origins in any type of inappropriate behavior while one party was still a minor should be stopped, and permanently banned.

For example, if a 20-year-old woman was found to be in a relationship with her 44-year-old father, and it was discovered that he had made advances or even inappropriate comments to her while she was a minor, then the relationship should be stopped, precisely because it is one in which the man “violated his daughter and used his position of authority to take advantage of her powerlessness” (the words of the judge in this case, describing what the Deaveses’ relationship was NOT).

The case we’ve been discussing, if not sui generis, is at least so unusual that we should be able to recognize that fact and discuss the case on its merits, rather than simly pretending that it’s exactly like every other incest case.

Another thought: barring truly unusual circumstances like the one that inspired this whole mess, I can’t help but feel that any incestuous relationship between a parent and child is forever tainted, consent wise, by the previous power imbalanced parental relationship. It’s the same reason why many folks instinctively wince when hearing about sexual relationships between teachers and students, even when the people involved are over the age of consent and are no longer directly connected by school.

I think you’re right, and this is a difficult issue. On the one hand, i think that once the child reaches adulthood, he or she should be left to decide what they want to do; on the other hand, i don’t like the idea of rewarding the parent for years of inappropriate use of his or her power in the parent-child relationship.

In such cases, i think the erring on the side of caution would probably involve a more stringent limitation on the types of permissible relationships. I don’t claim that this is an easy problem to solve, and i don’t have good answers for those situations; but this particular circumstance is different.

The parent/child relationship I am talking about is not about the younger children, but about the father/daughter in a sexual relationship, and how open and informed consent can never be a factor because of that initial relationship, regardless that the couple are well past the ‘age’ of consent so to speak.

I think you’ve misunderstood my post, or you’re just being thick today. You’re certainly grumpy. :stuck_out_tongue:

Support this position somehow.

Bolding mine.

Do you really think public opinion toward this sort of relationship is going to develop into embracing tolerance? Will we someday look back at the Deaves as brave pioneers who suffered greatly for their love? How 'bout the 24/7 sex slave/SAHM? Will the children of future families whose parents are liberated to engage in round the clock sex play without fear of society’s scorn look back on us and say, “thank goodness we don’t have to pretend we’re something we’re not these days!” Is this really no different from public opinion regarding interracial unions and smoking?

I think it’s dense to argue that the welfare of the children is of trivial significance in cases like these. In fact, the welfare of the children never was and still is not something to be taken lightly by interracial and/or gay couples. If a non-traditional family thinks the world is going to treat their kid kindly and that they don’t need to put in some extra work preparing the family for inevitable issues that will arise they should be beaten over the head with their own rose-colored glasses. I post as the soon-to-be adoptive mother of two interracial children.

You know, I think incest is wrong. I’m completely grossed out by it. And yet I can’t come up with a single *rational * argument as to why it’s more wrong than homosexual or interracial relationships.

Sure, there’s the danger of genetic abnormalities in the children. But it’s not as though we prevent people with diseases that they are almost sure to pass on to their offspring from reproducing. And yeah, there’s the cultural issues with the children, but if I disregard them in relation to homosexual and interracial relationships, I have a hard time justifying not doing the same in this case.

There are the “imbalance of power” issues, but I’m not sure that they don’t apply to a whole lot of relationships. In fact, there are plenty of people who would argue that the balance of power in an interracial relationship is always tilted towards the caucasian, and for that matter that the balance of power in any heterosexual relationship is always tilted toward the man. I don’t *agree * with those people, and I also can’t bring myself to assume that the balance of power in a parent/child relationship is automatically tilted toward the parent.

So, in closing… ew. I think it’s wrong, I think it’s icky beyond belief, I’m judging you very, *very * badly. But it’s not my place to interfere.

I think it’s rational to point out that incest twists the family structure in ways that homosexual (non-incestuous) and interracial and even polyamorous relationships don’t. There’s more to it than just balance of power like one would see in most any relationship; it seems to be a generational, hierarchical thing, and completely beyond the simple gentics issue. Some have argued that the taboo selects against inbreeding, but it wouldn’t do that very effectively if we didn’t have the family structures in place would it? I know my sheep don’t recognize any such family structure and the only thing between me and a fock of unhealthy mutants are really strong fences. Does anyone know how the incest taboo plays out in cultures where immediate family includes aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins?