How is incest any different from homosexuality?

[roguenuke]

There is nothing in your post that is anything more than opinion. Other's have a different opinion. Sex with my relatives or my neighbors is not my thin, so I have no opinion in the matter, but I understand people who do.

The dynamics of power is a bogus argument. Very few relationships consist of two (or more) exactly equal partners. Again, the operative term is consenting adult.

There are several cases outside of incest where we do not allow consenting adults to have sexual relationships due to undue influence or power imbalance. Teachers and students (particularly in high school even when student is 18), therapist and patient, guard and inmate. All adults, who is not for a recognized power imbalance or undue influence, would otherwise be able to consent to sex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[roguenuke]

Oh yeah - and in general - how about if it were incest between two homosexual siblings, when they were "consenting adults?" Or fraternal twins, to keep reproduction on the table. Would that be copasetic?

They still should have developed a familial bond, if raised together, that would make them averse to a sexual relationship. This bond can be circumvented, but generally that requires some sort of child abusers or undue influence, and it would have to happen over time. It doesn't necessarily have to be the sibling doing the abuse, but abuse is still generally going to be a factor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nota bene]

To be fair, you could ask the same about heterosexuality and incest. In fact, seems I remember reading or hearing somewhere that incest was not always so taboo and that sometimes royalty would inbreed so as so keep that royal blood "pure".

Yes, and this worked out tragically for the Habsburgs.

https://blog.23andme.com/ancestry/the-end-of-a-dynasty-how-inbreeding-doomed-the-house-of-habsburg/

 

[Masterhawk]

There are several cases outside of incest where we do not allow consenting adults to have sexual relationships due to undue influence or power imbalance. Teachers and students (particularly in high school even when student is 18), therapist and patient, guard and inmate. All adults, who is not for a recognized power imbalance or undue influence, would otherwise be able to consent to sex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

what about 2 similarly aged siblings or cousins?

 

[Hawkeye10]

I do believe we have our answer:

SWANSON: Yes, definitely true. Oftentimes, we see this type of abuse that is a serial type of relationship in families. And, you know, this whole process about feeling consensual, there was a reason you made this phone call. There was something in the back of your mind that said, this is not OK, and over years when this starts to happen, over time, we start to feel it`s consensual because we start to desensitize to those feelings that tell us that it`s not OK. And I`m thinking that`s probably what`s going on for you.

PINSKY: Did it feel like love to you, Christina?

CHRISTINA: Well, it`s strange because -- I mean, I have a love for my brother, and it had been so long since I had seen him. I mean, we were both inebriated which didn`t help. I don`t know. It just -- it felt -- it was my choice, is what it felt like.

SWANSON: Do you feel -- as much as it` consensual, is this something that when you think about it feels healthy to you?

CHRISTINA: Well, no. I understand it`s not healthy. I understand it`s not at all in line with what society says we should and shouldn`t do. I understand that.

PINSKY: By the way, Christina, I`m going to stop you. It`s not about society. It`s about what is healthy for child development and a child`s brain. It shatters the child`s ability to regulate.

It changes their sense of themselves. It changes their function in relationships. It changes personality function. It has massive effect.

So, kind of let`s wrap this up, Dr. Swanson, by saying treatment is imperative when someone is through something like this.

SWANSON: Definitely. When kids go through this incest with a family member, a sibling, they deal with anxiety, depression, lower self-esteem.

And, listen, it`s very hard to get close to people when you`re an adult because you don`t think it`s possible. You learn not to trust men. You learn not to trust relationships or give yourself and you feel damaged. So, you feel like the idea of having a healthy relationship is impossible.

What you`re wanting to do at this point -- and I would really advise you to do this and I think you would as well -- is seek out a specialized therapist who deals with --

PINSKY: Sexual trauma.

SWANSON: -- sexual trauma.

PINSKY: Yes.

SWANSON: In particular, the type of therapy you`re looking for is a cognitive behavior type of therapy.

CNN.com - Transcripts

Homosexuality is "loving who you want", incest is sexual trauma requiring therapy because the victim has been shattered . Earlier in the transcript they agree that if two sibs decide to do incest it can be assumed that at least one of them has been sexually abused by an adult.

Now the question I have is if a brother and an sister decide to do incest, I mean they both are hot for each other and do it, are they both victims of sexual trauma? It is just the girl because we can assume that it is the males fault just like we assume that and adult abused one or both of them?

Quacks like this make my skin crawl btw.

 

[maquiscat]

You have to be joking about "no victim." The very nature of family being so sexually intimate is like a boss and his employee being intimate - it's rife with exploitation potential

With a statement like this you need to be specific as to what you are counting as incest. Are you looking at bloodlines only? There have been plenty of cases of siblings and other blood related people getting married and even having kids, most with no birth defects, and not knowing till after years or even decades together, because they never grew up together. Zero exploitation potential here.

 

[maquiscat]

Just to answer the question itself at face value, the biggest difference is that incest is an action while homosexuality is an attraction that is not necessarily acted upon.

 

[maquiscat]

Oh, and one other question. Didn't the OP just say "incest" with no other definition? There's a huge difference between sexual relations between adult 1st cousins, for example, and between parents and their children. I think in some areas (not sure about any state in the U.S.) that includes step-parents, as far as being charged with the crime of incest.

Like many things the legal definition and the medical or actual definition are not the same. Some laws don't even look at the non-blood related as far as incest goes, while others treat legally related the same as blood related. I remember hearing about one case where a couple we're seeing each other, and through them, their single parents met (I think it was his mother and her father, but it's been too long). The parents married before the kids did and then the law of their location said they were not allowed to marry since they were now legal siblings.

 

[maquiscat]

because reared in the same household sets up a family dynamic which involves too many psychological components involving power and influence

it is not victimless, that is my point

incest between two consenting adults that are genetically closely linked can never be victimless due to the family dynamic

recently there was a case where a mother had given her son up for adoption and they had recently reconnected

they "fell in love" and wanted to marry...the victim here is the son, he will always be the son, the mother will always be the mother...husband and wife can't happen

You are either making a false statement or using a false premise. If the related people are not reared together, or per your example, reared by, then there is no family dynamic to begin with just as you showed with the first cousins. I am assuming that we are setting aside the genetic argument for the moment since you did not raise it. And indeed, I would say that it is a separate issue from the dynamic argument.

Why, in your example is the son the victim? Why isn't the mother? When they reconnected, did they do so as mother/son? I find this to be a very important factor in the issue.

 

[maquiscat]

Most sex does not result in babies, and in this time in history there is no reason to assume that birth control is not 100% effective if the partners so desire.

Especially if the couple are same sex or one or both are sterile.

 

[maquiscat]

incest can not be defined as such because victimization is involved

False. While I will concede that there are situations where this would be true, simply as a blanket statement this is not true at all. If the siblings did not grow up together, who is the victim and who is the one that victimized them? The same can be said of a father/daughter combo. If the mother took the daughter from him and they met years later not knowing their blood relationship, who is the victim and who victimized who? Even, better, and based upon your earlier statement, what if the sone knew and the mother didn't, is he still the victim? And please, don't try to play the age game, as relationship between couples with 20+ year age gaps are not rare anymore.

 

[maquiscat]

There are several cases outside of incest where we do not allow consenting adults to have sexual relationships due to undue influence or power imbalance. Teachers and students (particularly in high school even when student is 18), therapist and patient, guard and inmate. All adults, who is not for a recognized power imbalance or undue influence, would otherwise be able to consent to sex.

But these relationships are not banned for life. I am almost 30 years out of high school. i could easily meet an old teacher of mine, let's assume within her first few years of teaching when I was in high school. There is nothing that would disallow our relationship now. Are you saying we should be banned from a relationship now because of any potential influence she might have had over me when I was in high school?

 

[maquiscat]

I do believe we have our answer:



CNN.com - Transcripts

Homosexuality is "loving who you want", incest is sexual trauma requiring therapy because the victim has been shattered . Earlier in the transcript they agree that if two sibs decide to do incest it can be assumed that at least one of them has been sexually abused by an adult.

Now the question I have is if a brother and an sister decide to do incest, I mean they both are hot for each other and do it, are they both victims of sexual trauma? It is just the girl because we can assume that it is the males fault just like we assume that and adult abused one or both of them?

Quacks like this make my skin crawl btw.

Looking over the transcript I find no indication of the ages of the siblings when they had sex. No indication of whether they were raised together or not. She said they were both drunk. Given that I don't see where this is necessarily one victimizing the other. For that matter she could have been the one pressuring him. That call gave no important details at all.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Looking over the transcript I find no indication of the ages of the siblings when they had sex. No indication of whether they were raised together or not. She said they were both drunk. Given that I don't see where this is necessarily one victimizing the other. For that matter she could have been the one pressuring him. That call gave no important details at all.

Ya, I noticed that too but given stuff like this:

PINSKY: By the way, Christina, I`m going to stop you. It`s not about society. It`s about what is healthy for child development and a child`s brain. It shatters the child`s ability to regulate.

I was rather hoping that an off camera off transcript conversation had taken place before the second show, that the "experts" had information the rest of us dont.. The female did say that she had not seen her brother in a long time though, and that sounds like older. Maybe they were rambling off in the direction they wanted to go without listening to the caller or caring about her, they were certainly not at all interested in what she wanted to know, nor of her opinions on the event in question.

 

[maquiscat]

Ya, I noticed that too but given stuff like this:

I was rather hoping that an off camera off transcript conversation had taken place before the second show, that the "experts" had information the rest of us dont.. The female did say that she had not seen her brother in a long time though, and that sounds like older. Maybe they were rambling off in the direction they wanted to go without listening to the caller or caring about her, they were certainly not at all interested in what she wanted to know, nor of her opinions on the event in question.

That's what I got from it too. They were too quick to touch on what bad happens in, admittedly, most of the situations, that they never considered an actual non-abusive situation.

 

[Hawkeye10]

That's what I got from it too. They were too quick to touch on what bad happens in, admittedly, most of the situations, that they never considered an actual non-abusive situation.

Because they ruled it out, incest IS sexual trauma. I am pretty sure that victim culture does not allow for sexual trauma to exist that did not happen from abuse from another. Feel free to Google "sexual trauma" and see if you can find even one indication that this situation does not require an abuser, that they allow that it can come from self abuse. I looked few a few pages only, cause I am confident of what I would find of I spent the time to investigate.

 

[roguenuke]

what about 2 similarly aged siblings or cousins?

If raised together, in a healthy environment, should develop an aversion to a relationship with each other. This is shown to be the case even in completely non related people, even two people who were supposed to have a relationship later, get married as adults, when raised together, will develop this aversion. It has so far been found to only be circumvented when their is some form of abuse going on, dependent on age of children when they started being raised together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[_Sal]

You are either making a false statement or using a false premise. If the related people are not reared together, or per your example, reared by, then there is no family dynamic to begin with just as you showed with the first cousins. I am assuming that we are setting aside the genetic argument for the moment since you did not raise it. And indeed, I would say that it is a separate issue from the dynamic argument.Why, in your example is the son the victim? Why isn't the mother? When they reconnected, did they do so as mother/son? I find this to be a very important factor in the issue.

genetics can be set aside yes because it is simply a clear and demonstrated fact that the DNA exchange is simply too close and inbreeding while it may do little damage for a generation will eventually lead to disaster...I can't imagine anyone would try to argue in favour of that although it has been practiced throughout the centuries they did not have the knowledge available to them that we do today.

however having said that, the reason I said I have little problem with first cousins is because the DNA exchange is 25% which is not too bad

so back to family dyamics

the statement is not false, it is true regardless of whether or not people are reared together, once the knowledge has been gained that they are in fact close blood relations everything changes...

to begin with, they are obviously from the same gene pool...that's a given

the family dynamic immediately comes into play because there are ties and emotion involved...many adopted kids will seek out biological parents for medical history, and due to wondering, why was I given away

knowing someone is your biological parent changes their world significantly...kids will also search for siblings...the family dynamic can not be denied

blood family or chosen family...family is still family and therefore a dynamic is involved even if the dynamic is that an individual was given away and not reared in their biological family

 

[_Sal]

False. While I will concede that there are situations where this would be true, simply as a blanket statement this is not true at all. If the siblings did not grow up together, who is the victim and who is the one that victimized them? The same can be said of a father/daughter combo. If the mother took the daughter from him and they met years later not knowing their blood relationship, who is the victim and who victimized who? Even, better, and based upon your earlier statement, what if the sone knew and the mother didn't, is he still the victim? And please, don't try to play the age game, as relationship between couples with 20+ year age gaps are not rare anymore.

not false...true...there is a whole emotional component involved and that can never be minimized or disqualified

if there is no knowledge of the biological ties obviously there is no victimization

if there is knowledge the child will always be the child, even when an adult and is subject to manipulation due to feelings of abandonment

it is not about age, it's about hierarchy...

 

[maquiscat]

Because they ruled it out, incest IS sexual trauma. I am pretty sure that victim culture does not allow for sexual trauma to exist that did not happen from abuse from another. Feel free to Google "sexual trauma" and see if you can find even one indication that this situation does not require an abuser, that they allow that it can come from self abuse. I looked few a few pages only, cause I am confident of what I would find of I spent the time to investigate.

What in the transcript says they ruled it out? And the other question still remains, who is the victim and who is the abuser? Is there anything in the transcript that shows who initiated the sex? Could not both have in their inebriated state?

 

[cabse5]

Incest can produce offspring. Homosexuality cannot.

Anything else?

I'm too lazy to read every post on this thread. SIAP. The OP is referring to the probability of the legality of incest if same sex marriages are already legal with the rhetorical, "How is incest any different from homosexuality?" That is all.

 

[maquiscat]

If raised together, in a healthy environment, should develop an aversion to a relationship with each other. This is shown to be the case even in completely non related people, even two people who were supposed to have a relationship later, get married as adults, when raised together, will develop this aversion. It has so far been found to only be circumvented when their is some form of abuse going on, dependent on age of children when they started being raised together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is also circumvented when they are not raised together. Masterhawk's question does not give any implication of how they were raised, together or apart. Unless I am misreading this and you are only addressing for children raised together, and not considering raised apart for the purposes of how the aversion would not be present.

 

[roguenuke]

It is also circumvented when they are not raised together. Masterhawk's question does not give any implication of how they were raised, together or apart. Unless I am misreading this and you are only addressing for children raised together, and not considering raised apart for the purposes of how the aversion would not be present.

I'm only addressing children raised together, which basically should be the deciding factor. If they aren't, then there shouldn't be any penalty for them being together, even allowing marriage (although they should have genetic counseling).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[maquiscat]

the statement is not false, it is true regardless of whether or not people are reared together, once the knowledge has been gained that they are in fact close blood relations everything changes...

While I will not deny that most people, when they learn about a blood or legal tie existing, while mentally place someone in a "sexually avoid" mental zone, that knowledge must exist first. Incest is incest, whether or not you are aware you hold a family relationship or not. This is why your assertion that the family dynamic makes it abuse is false. Failure to know that it exist will mean that no abuse took place. Now for some a trauma might occur to one or both when discovered after the sex has occurred, but abuse is not present. And indeed because the natural aversion was never developed some may wish to continue the relationship like the couple in England with a daughter. Since both wish to continue, there is no abuse.

to begin with, they are obviously from the same gene pool...that's a given

Once again false. The family dynamic and the incest aversion comes from being raised together not any genetic relationship. So no it is not a given.

the family dynamic immediately comes into play because there are ties and emotion involved...many adopted kids will seek out biological parents for medical history, and due to wondering, why was I given away

knowing someone is your biological parent changes their world significantly...kids will also search for siblings...the family dynamic can not be denied

Indeed it can, because it might not be known. Your initial assertion was that it incest is not victimless. Unless you want to assert that both can be the victim and neither an abuser/victimizer, which is not what you post implies, then a lack of knowledge will make an act of incest victimless. Additionally, for many the legal tie might well mean nothing to both parties. Step siblings who were not so until after their mid-teens. Think of the Brady Bunch as a hypothetical example. While Cindy and Bobby would almost certainly develop the natural aversion, it is unlikely Greg and Marsha would. For a couple like that, it is possible for both parties to not put the step sibling in the avoid category and thus no victim or abuse.

blood family or chosen family...family is still family and therefore a dynamic is involved even if the dynamic is that an individual was given away and not reared in their biological family

Here you finally acknowledge chosen family, although that isn't exactly right either. I have a chosen family and most of the women I refer to as sisters, save my wife. Two of them I have been intimate with in the past, and our relationship has settled down to one of what we consider sibling hood. Whether you consider it as such is of course irrelavant. My wife would be my sister by dint of being sister to those I call siblings, as is one of my brothers and my sister, his wife. What you should be noting is both blood and non-blood family. The family dynamic is not genetic dependent, nor does a genetic link automatically create a family dynamic.

 

[maquiscat]

not false...true...there is a whole emotional component involved and that can never be minimized or disqualified

if there is no knowledge of the biological ties obviously there is no victimization

if there is knowledge the child will always be the child, even when an adult and is subject to manipulation due to feelings of abandonment

it is not about age, it's about hierarchy...

All this is exactly why this statement:

incest can not be defined as such because victimization is involved

Is false. Incest occurs whether or not knowledge is present, especially if they are blood related (noting the difference between actual incest and legal incest). The act of incest is independent of whether abuse/victimization occurs.