How do you justify gay marriage without justifying incest?

[Loss Leader]

As for genetic defects, etc, is it illegal for mothers to drink and smoke during pregnancy? Because if it isn't (and you don't think it should be), there's something seriously wrong with outlawing incest based on the possibility of "birth defects."

I didn't say anything about birth defects. I was talking about the need for a child or teen to have a psychological safe haven, a place where he or she is sheltered from the psychosocial demands of the outside world. It is from this shell that a teen can emerge, experiment with adulthood and scurry back when it becomes too overwhelming. It is imperative for the proper psychological development of children that there be no sexual demands placed on them in the home. Anything that weakens the incest taboo, including allowing marriage between consenting adult relatives, is too dangerous to children.

See Malinowski.

 

[plumjam]

Are you suggesting that the Elektra complex is a myth?

Very good, Darth.
That gets a nomination.

 

[ponderingturtle]

OK, iff it's between consenting adults. As for children, well, we breed race horses to close relatives and look how well, um, er, nevermind. There is an increased risk for perpetuating non-desired traits; however, with modern medicine and technology we see a lot of high risk babies surviving today that wouldn't have a generation ago.

We let people with dominant mutations that are known to be the same and cause at least as many problems as incest is likely to cause marry and have children, some even promote it(I am talking about various forms of dwarfism, and little people of america).

The genetic health argument seems a very poor rational for the law now that we know so much more about genetics and can much more specificaly target such problems.

I don't see anyone pushing for a law outlawing breeding between people who have known genetic problems in common.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'd be willing to bet* that the ratio of loving, consensual relationships to abusive relationships is magnitudes lower for incestous relationships, even between adults, than for non-incestous relationships..

And if a different class of relationships was shown to have the same ratio's would you favor criminalizing it as well?

 

[articulett]

I think it's pretty well known that across the board.. given any sexual aberrancy of fetish... you are more likely to find men who engage in it or find it "no big deal" or risk a lot to indulge it than women... I presume that includes incest. Most men are not into incest-- but most promoters of incest or those who "would do it' if it was "socially acceptable" are probably men. Men, by far, are the most likely perpetrators of unwilling incest and statutory rape incest.

But I'm not going to derail because you thought I said something I'm not saying. I think the smart people can figure out what I'm saying.

There are no female equivalents of this: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3896492.ece

And yet, we don't know how prevalent this "kind of thing" is... because we only know the cases that come to light for some reason.

But the thread was about incest versus gay marriage. The latter is not specifically forbidden by most states... the former is. Most state marriage laws allow marriage between 2 consenting adults who are not closely related. Gender differences are not specified in most states' marriage statutes... or, rather, they weren't. Relatedness was.

*note to self: put stupid people back on ignore... let the kiddies talk at each other.*

 

[Neally]

My personal belief is that the government should get out of the "marriage" business. All current marriages should be civil unions(a completely legal and secular based practice) and you can go and get "married" at your local church if you want to call it that.

I agree. Who and how many people in a union should be a personal decision, not a governmental one.

 

[Michael C]

There's an increased risk because they are likely to share the same recessive genes since they have half their genes in common... giving each recessive gene a chance a one in 4 chance of appearing in any given mating. But the odds are still better than 85% that the kids will be fine unless you know in advance both are carriers of something like sickle cell or cystic fibrosis... most people don't know what they are carriers for until an offspring has two copies of a recessive gene.

A cousin of mine married his first cousin. Their first child had muscular dystrophy. They were told that they had such and such risk (I can't remember what odds were named) that subsequent children would have the disease, but they were not prevented from having more children. In fact they did take the risk and had two more, who were OK. But those children might have had muscular dystrophy as well.

Should the law prevent such a couple from having children, when the risk of a particular genetic disease has been discovered? I'd say no. Certainly, if the reason for banning incest is to prevent the spread of this sort of genetic disease, then those who want to ban incest should also want to ban couples known to have a common genetic defect.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I think it's pretty well known that across the board.. given any sexual aberrancy of fetish... you are more likely to find men who engage in it or find it "no big deal" or risk a lot to indulge it than women... I presume that includes incest. Most men are not into incest-- but most promoters of incest or those who "would do it' if it was "socially acceptable" are probably men. Men, by far, are the most likely perpetrators of unwilling incest and statutory rape incest.

But I'm not going to derail because you thought I said something I'm not saying. I think the smart people can figure out what I'm saying.

There are no female equivalents of this: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3896492.ece

And yet, we don't know how prevalent this "kind of thing" is... because we only know the cases that come to light for some reason.

But the thread was about incest versus gay marriage. The latter is not specifically forbidden by most states... the former is. Most state marriage laws allow marriage between 2 consenting adults who are not closely related. Gender differences are not specified in most states' marriage statutes... or, rather, they weren't. Relatedness was.

*note to self: put stupid people back on ignore... let the kiddies talk at each other.*

Wow, Fritzl, eh? Way to take an outrageous and extreme case and pretend it's a blow against all men.

That's of course ignoring that you, as a matter of fact, wrong.

http://www.exfamily.org/index.htm

The family of god encouraged mothers and fathers alike to abuse their children.

 

[articulett]

Muscular Dystrophy is X linked and their male children would have been at risk no matter who she mated with. Spinal Muscular atrophy is recessive and if both partners carried the mutation, each offspring would have a one in four chance of passing it on. Tay Sachs is big in the Jewish Community (and much worse than muscular dystrophy or atrophy)--often people are tested and the "rabbi" determines who can and can't marry based on the tests.

I don't think the law has any business in who sleeps with who unless there is not consent or a minor is involved. I'm not against them giving incentives for people to act responsibly or in a manner that lessens risk to society (Don't have tons of babies the state will need to support and educate). I don't think any marriage between consenting adults should be prevented. If there are privileges associated with marriage--be it rights of survival or anything else-- then I don't think the government has any rights keeping consenting adults from engaging in it.

Personally-- peoples sex lives, like their beliefs, are things I'd prefer to them to keep to themselves. I'm all for everybody having every right and freedom allowed by law just so long as I don't have "witness" it or respect it. I think the government has no business being involved in victimless "crimes"... I do think they have a right to get involved when people (such as the polygamists in Utah) are spawning children that will be drawing from welfare and taxes and resources, and society, while spawning more who do the same.

I was a genetic counselor. I am for pre-implantation testing of embryos when people know what disease they are at risk for-- that means discarding embryos with the disease-- couples in your cousins' situation can ensure that they do not have another child with the disease. But a lot of religious people find that abhorrent too. I would feel worse knowing that I was bringing a child into the world with something like "
Battens disease" when I could have avoided implanting the embryo had I tested in advance.

I think states claim to ban incest for this supposed fear of harm to potential children... they used to do the same with mixed race couples... But I don't think this ban holds up. I'm also not sure how many closely related people wish they could get married, but can't.
Even if first cousin marriage is disallowed in one state, it's legal in others, and must, therefore, be recognized by all states if it occurred in a state where it's legal. First cousins share 1/8 of their genes in common. I don't know if there is a slew of people sharing more genes than that who desire to marry each other. I don't desire to marry anyone at present... no matter what their genetic combination or sex. But I cannot see why I or anyone should have any say over whom consenting adults want to wed.

 

[articulett]

Wow, Fritzl, eh? Way to take an outrageous and extreme case and pretend it's a blow against all men.

That's of course ignoring that you, as a matter of fact, wrong.

http://www.exfamily.org/index.htm

The family of god encouraged mothers and fathers alike to abuse their children.

I'm not trying to make a claim against all men... just noting that incestuous urges appear to be more prevalent in males... the Oedipus complex more prevalent than it's opposite. In fact, I made it a point to say that I realize most men are not incestuous... but most perpetrators of unwanted incest are men. Why don't you hear what I'm actually saying instead of derailing further? You do understand the difference between these two statements, don't you? If not, I need to put you on ignore with the other slow folk.

Is anyone seriously contending that women are just as likely as men to desire or engage in or coerce "incestuous" relationships? You have got to be kidding me. I guess you think they are as likely to kill people and rape and be pedophiles and murders too?

Look, I know most men are nice, law abiding people-- but the most vile and monstrous of human beings are also men. Having a Y chromosome puts men (in general) on the more extreme ends of the bell curve in some situations-- good and bad. If you are hearing more than that or taking it personally, the problem is in your head-- and I can't fix that.

The post was about incest... Darth derailed with an assumption that I thought the "Elektra complex" is a myth. It didn't follow from what I said. Moreover, I think anyone would say that the "Oedipus Complex" is a much more recognized "complex"-- mythological or not... based on a good reason. I don't know any females that are turned on by their brothers or fathers... I have heard guys say things about 1st and 2nd degree relatives, that I find icky. I know multiple females molested by relatives... I don't know any men that have that problem. I suspect this is more likely than not for most people.

I think the number of female incest perpetrators who are not "victims" is relatively small compared to the males. Perhaps you have statistics I'm unaware of... I have no idea if there are a slew of females that would be signing up for marriage of if incestuous marriages were legal... I suspect you'd see the Polygamous men going for it and convincing their nieces that god wants it... but I just don't see a lot of women saying, "yeah... I can finally marry my creepy Uncle!"

 

[ponderingturtle]

What is the chance that an incestuous relationship started out as a consensual pairing of two adults, free from duress or overreaching?

How does that chance compare to the chance that a homosexual relationship started out as such?

The possibility of allowing a home environment where children are preyed upon by more mature, sophisticated and sexually secure adults outweighs whatever freedoms are denied to incestuous but otherwise consenting adults.

And this is why Woody Allen needs to spend a very long time in prison.

 

[Lonewulf]

I will support articulett in saying that, yes, males do seem to have a higher tendency for fetishes than females from what I've seen. I'm not sure if you'd count "incest" as fetishism, as that sounds more like a relationship issue than a fetish, but I dunno.

For instance, I find it hard to find other females that share my own personal fetish, even though the males are so prevalent I assume any of the online "females" to automatically be males in the circles I run.

But other than that, i don't know enough to support her on any other of her claims.

 

[Darat]

"How do you justify gay marriage without justifying incest?" - Easy - show them a photo of my brother.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I will support articulett in saying that, yes, males do seem to have a higher tendency for fetishes than females from what I've seen. I'm not sure if you'd count "incest" as fetishism, as that sounds more like a relationship issue than a fetish, but I dunno.

I wonder is anyone going to bring evidence to back this assertion or are we just going to take the anectodes?

I don't think that it is not a supportable idea, the statistics of how many men cheat vs women who cheat, would lead to some ideas that are workable that would explain that.

 

[articulett]

And this is why Woody Allen needs to spend a very long time in prison.

Yes, I don't know of anything more related than a first cousin paring that was consensual-- though I know of males who will say it was... but the females tend to differ. I think it's like pedophilia... the perpetrator has a vested interest in seeing his victim as "asking for it" or "enjoying it" or "consenting" and can manipulate accordingly.

I would want to hear from a woman specifically arguing for the right to marry a close relative before I would even imagine there are women out there who would be "fighting for" such a right.

I don't think forbidding a marriage license to such couples is likely to produce much outcry from any women... probably not a lot of men either. I don't think government sanctioning has much to do with whether incest occurs or not.

Woody Allen's attractions are none of my business. It appears the adults were consenting--
It's icky... but lots of people are attracted to things I find icky.

 

[Lonewulf]

I wonder is anyone going to bring evidence to back this assertion or are we just going to take the anectodes?

I didn't even realize I needed to. It's a pretty well-known reality.

But hey, if you're right and there is just as many females as there are males in all fetishes, that would be great. I'd LOVE to find more women that share my fetish. When you find them, tell them to stop hiding, okay?

I don't think that it is not a supportable idea, the statistics of how many men cheat vs women who cheat, would lead to some ideas that are workable that would explain that.

Uh. "Fetish" doesn't mean just "have sex" or "cheat on people" or "want to have sex with people". You do know that, right?

 

[ksbluesfan]

I don't have a huge problem with incest between two consenting adults as long as they make it impossible to have children together. It's not my thing, but neither is homosexuality. I don't have a problem with polygomy either as long as all parties are consenting adults. For me, one wife is all I can handle.

 

[articulett]

I wonder is anyone going to bring evidence to back this assertion or are we just going to take the anectodes?

I don't think that it is not a supportable idea, the statistics of how many men cheat vs women who cheat, would lead to some ideas that are workable that would explain that.

What evidence... that perpetrators of unwanted sex crimes including incest or more likely to be men? What evidence would you consider sufficient-- crime statistics? people killed during crazy sex acts? Incest convictions? Gender of people who pay for incest scenarios (via porn or hooker reenactment?) -- a survey of how many people scream "who's your daddy?" during sex vs. "who's your mommy?"?

And what does that have to do with the OP again? This was a Darth derail. I never made the claim that we are arguing, but yes, I do think it's obvious that males are more likely to be attracted to "forbidden" fruit than women... and I think there's a pretty strong evolutionary algorithm behind that too.

 

[ponderingturtle]

What evidence... that perpetrators of unwanted sex crimes including incest or more likely to be men? What evidence would you consider sufficient-- crime statistics... people killed during crazy sex acts? Incest convictions?

Consider the sex of those who write all the homosexual incestuous fanfiction.

There have been some who argued here that the conviction rate of when boys are abused by older women is much much lower then when you reverse the sexes.

THis is all unsuported by good evidence. Why is wondering if reality reflects common knowledge something you seem to be against?

 

[articulett]

Last chance... what exactly are you asking for evidence of and what would you accept as evidence... and how does this relate to this thread?

I stated an opinion. I don't care if you share that opinion. I think there's plenty of evidence to support my opinion, but I can't even tell what you are saying... much less what sort of evidence you would find acceptable if anything. It sounds like you are offended by the notion that men (in general) are more likely to engage in coercive incest than women... you just can't fathom that anyone could think this... is that right?

If I can't figure out what the hell you are saying, I'm not going to play along... okay? I'll let you converse with those who understand you and whom you can understand... Just answer my questions simply and I'll try and oblige--otherwise I feel drawn into a larsenesque derail.