A discussion on the impact of incest in your life

I've noticed threads on homosexuality and various other sexually related taboos, but there doesn't seem to be one covering my current situation. I posted in COMMS and got the green light to post here.

Certain members of my family (not me, but I'm sure you've heard that one before) have confessed to having a incestious relationship. Something they say they are unable to control.

While this isn't illegal, and it totally consentual, its not exactly dinner room table dicussion. "Bobby, how is your sister doing?" - it just doesn't sound right.

What I'd like to understand, either from your personal experiences, or your own point of view is how do you think an open incestious relationship is likely to affect my family.

Do you think it should be tolerated, or stopped immediately ?
Would you treat someone differently because you knew their family was involve in such a relationship ?

Thanks for your comments, and please try and keep this thread family-friendly.

UB

 

It is funny you mention this thread. On VH1, they have been running their "I Love The 80's" show, which is a one hour show dedicated to a specific year of the 1980's. During it, when they are discussing 1983, they go in lengths about Return of the Jedi, and the allegations of incest that could well have happened between Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia. Mostly about the kisses the two have had...the poster of A NEW HOPE with Leia clinging to Luke's leg and stuff like that. They had CarrotTop mocking Lucas, because if Lucas had all this stuff planned out way back when, why even show a hint of something that could easily have gone extracurricular between Luke and Leia?

 

Are you sure it isn't illegal? I thought incest usually was (though I am no expert). An issue here is that apparently consensual incestuous relationships can be a disguise for a much more oppressive relationship, especially between father and daughter or older brother and sister. It could be that one of your family is actually being abused even though they say they are not.

EDIT: After a quick search on the internet, it looks like incest between blood relatives is indeed illegal in the UK.

 

Incest is wrong.

Any sexual relationship can result in pregnancy, and absolutely no child should be born into such a situation. Furthermore, any child produced by an incestuous sexual encounter, runs a much higher risk of abnormalities.

Incestuous relationships are usually relationships built upon psychological damage. It frankly just isn't normal for members of the same family (when they've known each other a long time*) to feel sexual attraction toward one another, and that can be caused by emotional/mental problems which have manifested themsleves in such a strange way.

(* = I say this, because I concede that it would be possible for, for example, that a brother and sister parted at birth might meet later on, and not knowing they're siblings, meet and have sex. It isn't normal, of course, not right, but at least the sexual attraction (at first) could be accounted for).

Consensual incest is very frequently just a cover for an abuse relationship. A daughter might say she 'wanted it' from her father/uncle, in order to save him from trouble, or because she can't bear to see him in a bad light. A son, similarly, might pass off some sort of sexual encounter with an aunt as consensual, when he was bullied into it.

Incest should be illegal, for several reasons. Firstly, because it presents a serious health risk to any child born of it. Secondly, because any child born of it would face extreme social castigating, were it to become public knowledge. Third, because participants might be suffering from emotional/mental damage which would cause them to take part in it. And fourth because participants might be suffering from an abuse and covering it with the excuse of a consensual incestuous relationship.

There are more reasons, of course.

- Scarlet.

 

Scarlet's hit the nail squarely on the head.

 

what do y'all define as incest? Does a cousin w/ cousin relationship count? Where do we draw the line? I personally think that anything beyond that the line shoudl be drawn at the 1st cousin line.

 

Yeah, I say 2nd and 3rd cousins just for good measure.

I mean, genetically, marrying your 2nd cousin isn't really that bad, your genetic material has been filtered through plenty of other people before you, sharing only one great grandparent in common. But still, just to be safe! Fourth cousins should be the safe rule.

 

Reminds me of a line from Grand Theft Auto - "I swore, i thought she was my second cousin!". And another, "my Mother's my sister!"

With incest, it would be way too easy for a family member to cover up abuse, and pass it off as consentual.

 

Well, it appears that most people here have a negative opinion on the whole incest debate. However, no-one really seems to have a valid point other than its "wrong". True, there is always the possibility of pregnancy in any heterosexual relationship, but what you've missed is a homosexual incestious relationship. How does a homosexual incestious relation fit in ?

Furthermore, not all loving relationships need to involve sex. Hence it certainly is feasible to have an incestious relationship without the worry of pregnancy.

I also don't agree with the direct link between incest and abuse. Why can't an incestious relationship be a fully constentual, highly rewarding loving relationship ? Child Abuse and incest are two entirely separate issues, and in the interests of this debate I'd appreciate it if you kept them separate.

I'm still interested in your opinions on the jokes and fun-making comments I might receive if my friends find out about the relationship. We're all just people, why shouldn't we be allowed to express ourselves as we feel as long is no-one is being hurt.

I applaud the previous posters for keeping this debate family-friendly and not dissolving it into jokes or sarcastic comments.

UB

 

The point wasn't so much that all incestuous relationships are necessarily abusive, but if incestuous relationships were socially or legally permitted, it would provide far too much cover for the relationships which are abusive (and I'm not lying in saying that the vast majority of incestuous relationships are not consensual).

Furthermore, I think it requires some degree of mental/emotional damage to participate in an incestuous relationship. It just goes against human instinct to feel about a family member in that way. That's where the phrase "I think of you like a brother/sister" comes from.

I'd like to concede that there are instances where non-abusive, relationships exist between family members which aren't caused by mental/emotional damage, but these are not healthy relationships. A relationship with a family member is not socially acceptable, and never, ever will be. Nor could they ever be comfortable or productive relationships. And even if one could be made to work for a while for the mutual benefit of its participants, it should still not be allowed. Why? Because the vast majority are extremely unhealthy, and to allow one would to open up a lot of vulnerable people, especially children, to abuse and psychological damage.

- Scarlet.

 

What TSB said in both his posts.

1) A child should never be born in such a situation. Physically, there is a much higher chance of 'bad genes'. Emotionally, it is so unaccepted that the child will be shunned.

2) As TSB pointed out. If it were legal, it could easily hide abusive relationships.

3) It would disrupt families. With lovers, emotional problems can happen that tear you apart. Sure it happens with 'normal' family emotions as well, but adding sexual and romantic tension would compound that. I know my siblings will always be there for me and I don't have to worry about some romantic emotion to come in the way the way I have to worry about it with platonic friends.

 

Wasn't one of the US Presidents (I keep thinking Roosevelt but that may be wrong) married to his second cousin? Which is legal under US law, btw. And recent reports have shown that even first cousin marraiges don't harbor the genetic dangers orginally thought.

 

True, Ariana, first-cousin marriages aren't as dangerous as first thought. I think there have been quite a number of people who have married their second or third cousins and some even their first.

Depending on your culture, first or second marriages may or may not be accepted. Social stigma can be a very hard thing to deal with.

 

Furthermore, not all loving relationships need to involve sex. Incest is kind of defined by sex isn't it? You already have a loving relationship with your family members so it is only if that relationship becomes sexual that it becomes incest. By the way, what are we talking about here - cousins? brother and sister?

I feel way out of my depth with this thread.

 

No, I don't think incest equals sex. You can certainly have sexual encounters, but not ones that involve intercourse.

The feeling in this thread continues to centre on abusive, illegal relationships. It worries me that the only picture in your heads is one of a father abusing a daughter, or perhaps an aunt abusing her nephew. I really wanted to move away from those sort of abusive relationships.

I did mention previously about homosexual incest (which no-one picked up on), and also relations between say brother and sister, which are really an extension of sexual experimentation.

I read an old article that discussed incest, and interesting it said that although father-daughter relationships were the ones most frequently reported in the literature, there was a higher abundance of brother-sister relationships. It also stated that these child/young adults came to no harm, and moved onto a suitable extrafamilial partner after a period of time. (This article was published in Medical Science, Volume 23, 1983, p245-)

We go on holidays together, we watch movies together, we've known each other all of our lives. Whats wrong with having our first limited encounters with a sibling ?

Remember, its often said that you should keep your virginity for someone you love - isn't this the a great idea ?

UB

 

No, I don't think incest equals sex. You can certainly have sexual encounters, but not ones that involve intercourse.

Try learning the definition of incest:

in·cest (nsst)
n.
1. Sexual relations between persons who are so closely related that their marriage is illegal or forbidden by custom.
2. The statutory crime of sexual relations with such a near relative.

The very definition relies upon sexual relations. Incest is about sex.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Ok, now picture it this way. You have kids, do you want them "experimenting" with their sexuality on each other? I know I wouldn't. There is a place for different types of love, and I do not believe romantic and familial love should be confused or intermingled. Heterosexual OR homosexual (because yes, I picked up on your comment about homosexual incest, but I don't really see how it's different in this case besides the obvious pregnancy issue)

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

The very definition relies upon sexual relations. Incest is about sex.

I think he's talking about other types of sexual relations besides straight intercourse...like oral, anal, etc.

 

Try learning the definition of incest:

Try reading my post where I said no intercourse. [rolls_eye.gif]

Try to keep this dicussion family friendly, thanks.

UB

 

Try to keep this dicussion family friendly, thanks

Leave the moderating to the moderators.

 

I would worry if there is a significant age difference between you and your sibling, that would imply co-ercion. You sound young as well which worries me. I would think very carefully about continuing with this relationship, for all the reasons above and more, it could end up hurting you and your family. It is also illegal. But if none of that is an issue for you, then fine, we're not cops or counsellors here. But is this really an issue for serious debate? It sounds to me more like you want to get some kind of reassurance by testing your views on an anonymous noticeboard.

 

Try reading my post where I said no intercourse.

Where in my post did I refer to intercourse? I stated (as is found in the definition) relations.

That would include the sexual "encounters" you refer to.

Like I said, go and learn the definition again.

Try to keep this dicussion family friendly, thanks.

I was. I kept my post (and this ine as well) to the strict defintions of the words and used no language that you could not use in front of a child of any age.

Kimball Kinnison

 

I'm not talking about me, I am talking about another family member. Please remember this ok?

Sorry Knightwriter, I didn't mean to sound like a moderater, I just didn't like his words.

I feel from people's posts here that an incestious relationship would be a bad thing, and I should perhaps tell my family member this. Its just hard if you truely love someone and have such feelings for them.

Are you sure its illegal for a brother and sister to experiment if they are both over the legal age for consent? Its maybe illegal to get married, but I don't think you go to jail for having sexual (but not intercourse) with your sister.

thanks everyone for being so honest

UB

 

You seemed to hint you were involved in your first post, and these lines also suggested that you were talking about yourself: We go on holidays together, we watch movies together, we've known each other all of our lives. Whats wrong with having our first limited encounters with a sibling ? But I apologise for misinterpreting you. Although, to be honest, I am surprised that you are not more troubled by your relatives' behaviour. I'm not a lawyer but a quick look on google.co.uk suggests that incest is illegal at any age in the UK (which is where wombles usually come from).

 

Are you sure its illegal for a brother and sister to experiment if they are both over the legal age for consent? Its maybe illegal to get married, but I don't think you go to jail for having sexual (but not intercourse) with your sister.

Again, incest involves (illegal) sexual relations with a close relative. Sexual realtions is not limited to intercourse, but includes other sexual activities as well.

You seem to be trying to rationalize it away as long as it's not intercourse. That is not the case.

Kimball Kinnison