Incest in a lift

Who hasn't had sex with their sister in an elevator? Heck, I'm originally from rural North Carolina, where cousins are for practice.

Not only do I not find this depraved, I don't even find it disturbing, although that might be because I didn't view the video of these two goobers nekkid.
 
H'ethetheth said:
Sure you can. On the other hand, I can, in a similar vain, choose to comment on any comment on any aspect if any commenter has chosen to comment on it.
Click to expand...
OK, I thin....Wait, what?

Challenging my comment for being off-topic is off-topic. The more so because I was not off-topic. You are slightly more virtous than someone who makes a grammar or spelling comment. ...slightly.


H'ethetheth said:
So...anyway, is it more or less depraved if it is or isn't true?
Click to expand...
Anything imaginary is less depraved than a real thing.


H'ethetheth said:
No. I post on this forum specifically to argue with you, but so far it has been a bit hit-and-miss.
Click to expand...

Don't give up, I think you are close to perfecting your method. :)
 
caniswalensis said:
OK, I thin....Wait, what?

Challenging my comment for being off-topic is off-topic. The more so because I was not off-topic. You are slightly more virtous than someone who makes a grammar or spelling comment. ...slightly.
Click to expand...
Ah! Now we're getting somewhere.
What I contend is that your question may be on topic, but it's not very interesting to talk about, because the answer is "yes". Which, in my defense, I did admit before um... topicking you off.

caniswalensis said:
Anything imaginary is less depraved than a real thing.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, except that part of the OP is a request for imagined situations that are more depraved than the one in the article. None of those have to be real.
 
Last edited:
Travis said:
I don't see how this is depraved at all. Depraved would imply that sex was forced or coerced. This seems to have been consensual sex which I have nothing against. What is "icky" is just a value judgement largely based on your own background.
Click to expand...

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/depraved

I don't see that "depraved" requires any element of coercion. However since we don't know the full facts of the case, and what we do know is that the party who ended up on the sex offenders register is the older party, the male, and was suggested to pay for the act then I wouldn't be so quick to rule out any element of coercion.

I'm with you on moral relativism, but I wouldn't say that's in any way specific to this case. Pretty much any time one person judges another we can say that their opinion is subjective. Certainly with regard to the "sex in public" aspect of this case it's easy to cite examples such as the tahitian natives encountered by James Cook's crew who had no such taboo. I struggle to find an objective reason why such a taboo should be in place and yet it is relatively common, the accepted concensus and indeed law in both our cultures even if it is often flouted. I'd happily call sex in public a little bit depreaved though I'm persoanblly happy with a little bit of depravity so perhaps I don't see that as a harsh criticism.

Sex between siblings on the other hand is a far more universal taboo. Again there are pockets of society when the taboo is commonly flouted but here we can see an objective reason why the taboo should persist: inbreedingWP Here the victim is the potential offspring of the union. Responsible family planning can reduce the risk of such offspring occuring but only drastic measures can eliminate it entirely. Knowing what method(s) of contraception were used (if any) would affect how depraved we'd consider this sort of act to be. However the genetic argument alone is not enough to justify the law prohibiting incest. That would be verging on Eugenics and we know that's a bad thing from argumentum ad Hitler (and pages upon pages of other arguments off topic for this thread) Instead it would seem that the long held justifications for prohibiting cosanguinous relationships exist mainly to place a ring fence around the predetory relationships that characterise many but not all examples.

Another identifiable harm would be the 11 year old under their care being abandoned in a dangerous place as part of this pursuit. Lets not overlook that. Eleven is probaly old enough to be at a train station on their own but forsaking a duty of care with which they'd been entrusted, in order to take part in an illegal activity is still pretty repugnant.
 
Last edited:
H'ethetheth said:
Ah! Now we're getting somewhere.
What I contend is that your question may be on topic, but it's not very interesting to talk about, because the answer is "yes". Which, in my defense, I did admit before um... topicking you off. .
Click to expand...
I reject your subjective evaluation of the discussion value of my question. My own subjective opinion is that the question is central to the issue at hand.

H'ethetheth said:
Well, yes, except that part of the OP is a request for imagined situations that are more depraved than the one in the article. None of those have to be real.
Click to expand...

I should hope not. I read the Op's question as retorical. I have a long list of imaginary situations that are quite depraved, but they are only more depraved than the scenario outlined in the article if that story is also imaginary.

Some of the features of these imaginary scenarios are:

Vacuum cleaners
Trained monkeys
Rubber clothing
Escalators
Persons with one or more missing limbs
Monkeys with one or more mising limbs
Peanut butter
Peanut butter jars
Ecclesiastical raiment
fluorescent light bulbs
Rubber monkeys
Platform shoes & genitals
Horses
Saddled persons
Saddled monkeys
Monkeys on escalators
 
Ocelot said:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/depraved

I don't see that "depraved" requires any element of coercion. However since we don't know the full facts of the case, and what we do know is that the party who ended up on the sex offenders register is the older party, the male, and was suggested to pay for the act then I wouldn't be so quick to rule out any element of coercion.

I'm with you on moral relativism, but I wouldn't say that's in any way specific to this case. Pretty much any time one person judges another we can say that their opinion is subjective. Certainly with regard to the "sex in public" aspect of this case it's easy to cite examples such as the tahitian natives encountered by James Cook's crew who had no such taboo. I struggle to find an objective reason why such a taboo should be in place and yet it is relatively common, the accepted concensus and indeed law in both our cultures even if it is often flouted. I'd happily call sex in public a little bit depreaved though I'm persoanblly happy with a little bit of depravity so perhaps I don't see that as a harsh criticism.

Sex between siblings on the other hand is a far more universal taboo. Again there are pockets of society when the taboo is commonly flouted but here we can see an objective reason why the taboo should persist: inbreedingWP Here the victim is the potential offspring of the union. Responsible family planning can reduce the risk of such offspring occuring but only drastic measures can eliminate it entirely. Knowing what method(s) of contraception were used (if any) would affect how depraved we'd consider this sort of act to be. However the genetic argument alone is not enough to justify the law prohibiting incest. That would be verging on Eugenics and we know that's a bad thing from argumentum ad Hitler (and pages upon pages of other arguments off topic for this thread) Instead it would seem that the long held justifications for prohibiting cosanguinous relationships exist mainly to place a ring fence around the predetory relationships that characterise many but not all examples.

Another identifiable harm would be the 11 year old under their care being abandoned in a dangerous place as part of this pursuit. Lets not overlook that. Eleven is probaly old enough to be at a train station on their own but forsaking a duty of care with which they'd been entrusted, in order to take part in an illegal activity is still pretty repugnant.
Click to expand...

I fail to see any definition of "depraved" that should cover this unless it can be established there was some coercion.
 
caniswalensis said:
I reject your subjective evaluation of the discussion value of my question. My own subjective opinion is that the question is central to the issue at hand.
Click to expand...
Very well, we shall have to agree to refuse to agree.

Actually, I accede defeat. I've just realized that as my answer to the OP is exactly the same as the answer to your question, the OP would thus not be interesting to talk about by my own standards. I'll retract my criticism and congratulate you on the injection of a fascinating sub-topic.

Well played, sir.

caniswalensis said:
I have a long list of imaginary situations that are quite depraved, but they are only more depraved than the scenario outlined in the article if that story is also imaginary.
Click to expand...
So your opinion is that real situations are always more depraved than any imagined situation?
 
Travis said:
I fail to see any definition of "depraved" that should cover this unless it can be established there was some coercion.
Click to expand...

You don't find anything morally corrupt in abandoning and child under your care in order to facilitate a crime?

You don't see that having sex in a public place deviates from what is considered moral or right or proper or good. Even though it's been pointed out that it's a crime.

You don't see that having sex with a sibling deviates from what is considered moral or right or proper or good. Even though it's been pointed out that it's a crime.
 
Ocelot said:
You don't see that having sex in a public place deviates from what is considered moral or right or proper or good. Even though it's been pointed out that it's a crime.
Click to expand...

Aerosmith said it was okay!
 
Ocelot said:
You don't find anything morally corrupt in abandoning and child under your care in order to facilitate a crime?
Click to expand...
Well, look at it this way: It may have facilitated the crime of sex in public, but if they hadn't abandoned the child it would have been a much worse crime.

ETA: In fact, I would definitely call that depraved.
 
H'ethetheth said:
Very well, we shall have to agree to refuse to agree.

Actually, I accede defeat. I've just realized that as my answer to the OP is exactly the same as the answer to your question, the OP would thus not be interesting to talk about by my own standards. I'll retract my criticism and congratulate you on the injection of a fascinating sub-topic.

Well played, sir.
Click to expand...
Aw, no fun. :)
H'ethetheth said:
So your opinion is that real situations are always more depraved than any imagined situation?
Click to expand...

Yes, because they actually happened. If a thing only takes place in the realm of the mind, it has no power to affect the real world. Much like the chupacabra or the theory of Atlantis.

For example, if a man day-dreams of having carnal knowledge of an amputee monkey, which he has tied to an escalator in such a way that the moving steps give his monkey’s pert bottom a deliciously languid spanking, while they man wears a rubber schoolgirl outfit and is being watched by a horse that has had it’s genitals smeared with peanut butter, that is fairly far out there. However, being imaginary, it is far less drastic, shocking & depraved than a man that just has plain old vanilla sex with a monkey for realsies. The amputee monkey, the horse, and even the peanut butter do not exist outside of the man’s mind. There is nothing to be affected. But in the real world scenario, both the monkey & the man have been affected, for good or ill, and must learn to live their lives within this new paradigm.

It is the willingness to truly affect yourself and the rest of the world that exponentially ramps up the depravity.
 
Last edited:
bluesjnr said:
Not according to the OP. But never mind that, I'd like to know why the ability to bear offspring becomes a marker?
Click to expand...
Possibly because incest can lead to genetic abnormalities if the sex results in children. So, while neither of the 2 people involved is harming the other, they could produce a child that may have long term medical issues.

If one or both of the parties were "fixed" it might not be as big a deal.

(Not necessarily saying I agree or disagree with that sentiment, but there is at least some reasoning behind it.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom