Incest

Pinkie-Dawn

Pinkie-Dawn

Vampire Waifu
    • 9,528
    Posts
    12
    Years
    We all know what incest is; it's when you have a love interest in one of the members from your family bloodline. It's one of the biggest taboos in not only society, whether your sibling is blood-related or not, but also in biology, because of how in-breeds can mess up your baby's genes. However, despite all of this, incest relationships has become legal in certain states and countries, and it is becoming a popular plotline in anime/manga such as My Little Sister Can't be this Cute and most recently Game of Thrones from our own western culture, which is starting to concern me the more it's used often in stories, because it seems like they're going against scientifically proven studies regarding the dangers of in-breeding. Needless to say, those who are for incest they have their counterarguments these studies, saying that bad genes for our infants can happen to any type of relationship, not just incest. This of course traps me into an internal struggle on who's side was right all along. Do you guys think the counterarguments have a point, or is incest still wrong regardless?
     
    The only time I feel like I have a legitimate ethical case against incest is in power imbalanced relationships, such as older/younger relationships. With familial power dynamics at play, it becomes a risky relationship that makes me worry for the sake of the younger person.

    As far as genetic abnormalities, I'm not going to go out of my way to look them up but I remember finding studies that stated the risk is not actually that great; regardless, if I feel comfortable banning incest due to any risk, I would have to feel comfortable banning anyone with a genetic disease from reproducing as well. Then I would have to define genetic disease - is dwarfism, with its own culture and life, worthy of banning? Deafness? I would rather not ban anything at all than ban all those with hereditary diseases from reproducing.
     
    To put my opinion simply, live and let live. It's kinky in a way, I suppose, though.
    Not exactly my cup of tea, but whatever.
     
    Morally, it completely depends on the culture. In some cultures cousin/cousin is very normal, even sisters and brothers in some. But seriously, you can't argue that the chances of genetic disorders or health issues aren't bigger. Genetic diversity predicts health and there can't be anything less diverse than incest. I understand what people who disagree are trying to say, it's like smoking causes cancer but not every smoker will get it, it's just a much bigger chance and a risk, but still.
     
    Interfamily relationships are not something new. They are a recurring theme from the earliest of writings. Probably the most famous is the bible story of Adam and Eve and their children who were the progenitors of the human race. If the story were to be believed, the entire human race is a product of incestuous relationships. Of course, it's just a story, and no serious biblical scholar would say the story of Adam and Eve should be taken literally.

    Incestuous relationships, though, are not as uncommon as some might think. In quite a few states marriages between first cousins is permitted. And although they do not happen frequently, they do happen.

    For me personally, I think what matters most is that the couple is happy. Of course there are concerns of a power imbalance, but that same concern exists in every other relationship regardless. It is only the particulars of the couple's situation that is different. Abuse within a relationship does not need there to be a close familial tie.
     
    I shouldn't need to preface this with the fact that I find the idea of incest disgusting, but whether I think something is disgusting and whether I think it is ethically tolerable are two different issues.

    The three primary points of ethical concern here are romantic love, sex, and children (none of which necessarily imply any other and, in my opinion, should be treated differently under the law). Is there any ethical problem with romantically loving a family member? I can't think of any reason why there should be. Is there any ethical problem with having sexual relations with a family member, provided it is not for the purposes of having children? I can't think of any reason why there should be, though it would be party to the same considerations as any normal sexual relation would be (issues of consent still apply, for example).

    Finally, is there any ethical problem with having children with a family member? That's probably the most contentious question, but to be honest, I haven't seen sufficient evidence to suggest that there's a meaningful increase in genetic issues with children of incest. Either way, arguing that people should or should not enter into a relationship based on how their children may or may not turn out is essentially an argument in support of eugenics, which is something I do not support.

    I don't see any problem with incest other than I personally find it disgusting, but my personal tastes are not the principles upon which the law should be based.

    Alessi_sys said:
    Interfamily relationships
    Click to expand...
    Intra*
    Interfamily would be just a normal relationship, I think.
     
    (Oh snap you beat me to this. I was thinking about making this thread earlier today.)

    While growing up I did go with the mentality that incest is wrong and that it just shouldn't occur. It's super taboo, super bad when reproduction is involved, and just generally seen as a gross thing. But as I grew up I started to realize that there really isn't any harm in incest as long as the pair is willing on both ends and aren't producing any offspring. Because obviously offspring from a genetically related pair could have many, many issues. There's no reason in the world to put kids into that kind of situation.

    I don't care how much you love your brother or your sister, reproduction should always be out of the question in this sort of pair. If you want to be with your sibling, your cousin, your uncle, your aunt, whatever dude. Just don't set up any babies for a bad life full of complications.

    So to this subject I say, love is love. If you want to be with em, that's cool.
    Just don't be irresponsible. That I do not agree with.
     
    I don't really see incest itself as being such a bad thing. I fail to see exactly how it is morally wrong, or why it has become such a taboo. If two people, regardless of whether they are related or not, want to do certain activities together and possibly create offspring, then why should anyone at all get in their way?

    People say it causes bad genetic diseases and all that sort of stuff, but in reality it doesn't. The only problem concerning that with incest is it gives you a higher chance of giving your children a double-dose of any bad diseases you might have. It won't cause any bad genes that aren't already in the parents to magically appear. In fact, if you don't have many bad genes, it might just be the best way to prevent your offspring from getting anything serious. And in prehistoric times, for early homo sapiens, incest was pretty much the only way to survive.

    I can't imagine how you would go about starting an incestual relationship in this day and age though. I mean, I would certainly never be one to ask my siblings if they want to roll in the hay with me. My sister isn't even attractive to me anyways. :P
     
    Incest is probably one of the most natural things in our society, it's just been frowned upon because people have built it up to be something big and disgusting. Taking peoples facts from previous posts, incest is very healthy biologically. I know I was/still am attracted to my cousin because she's pretty attractive. Basically being sexually attracted to someone in your family is kinda like being attracted to part of yourself and is one of the closest things to an "other half" that you'll get. I think it's totally fine, but even with my thoughts I won't pursue them, I won't however look down on other people who do.
     
    As a breeder of livebearer tropical fish (fish that give birth to live young rather than lay eggs) it is often desirable to breed within the family in order to "fix" a certain trait that is desirable in the fish. It could be the colour or the shape of their fins, or size of their body. Whatever the trait we can accentuate it by selectively breeding with others within the same gene pool. Once we fix that strain we can then spread it around by introducing new genes to the mix until the strain is fixed again. We do this until every fry that is produced shares all the same traits. As the gene pool increases, those traits are then shared with the new stock. This is how when you go to a pet store and look at all the varieties of fish, you will see all these fancy colours and shapes. Almost none of the fish you see there are wild-type fish. They've all been selectively bred to bring out the most desirable traits.

    The same is true with any breeding program of livestock. A breeder will select an animal based on the desirable traits and breed it with one that share similar traits, often within the immediate family line. In this way the traits are fixed and will carry on with future offspring. So this fear of problems occurring should we produce offspring with someone in our immediate family would only really be justified if there is an undesirable genetic trait shared by one or both persons that could be passed on to their offspring. Our science is advanced enough that it can be determined if we carry a gene within us that could cause problems down the road.

    The same would be true with human beings. We are, after all, just mammals, and the same principal would apply to us as it would with a horse or a dog or cat.
     
    I think manatees are having this problem of interbreeding... same thing applies to us. It's not good. Additionally to messing up the baby's genes, it's also a sin.
     
    BadPokemon said:
    I think manatees are having this problem of interbreeding... same thing applies to us. It's not good. Additionally to messing up the baby's genes, it's also a sin.
    Click to expand...

    The problem with manatees is that their population is so small the available gene pool if extremely limited. This isn't so with human beings. There's 7 billion of us. With that kind of diversity problems with inbreeding are quite reduced, so much so that the occasional pairing between close family relations would rarely, if at all, produce any noticeably negative effects. The only exceptions to this would be when one or both carries a gene that increases the chance that they might inherit a genetic disease, or if only family pairings occur for multiple generations.

    As for it being a sin, that only applies to those who believe it is a sin. In some cultures it's not only accepted but common that first cousin and second cousin marriages take place, but also is expected.
     
    Fun fact:

    More U.S. States allow first-cousin marriages than allow gay marriages.

    I can't tell if that's funny or sad. Or both.
     
    Mario said:
    (Oh snap you beat me to this. I was thinking about making this thread earlier today.)

    While growing up I did go with the mentality that incest is wrong and that it just shouldn't occur. It's super taboo, super bad when reproduction is involved, and just generally seen as a gross thing. But as I grew up I started to realize that there really isn't any harm in incest as long as the pair is willing on both ends and aren't producing any offspring. Because obviously offspring from a genetically related pair could have many, many issues. There's no reason in the world to put kids into that kind of situation.

    I don't care how much you love your brother or your sister, reproduction should always be out of the question in this sort of pair. If you want to be with your sibling, your cousin, your uncle, your aunt, whatever dude. Just don't set up any babies for a bad life full of complications.

    So to this subject I say, love is love. If you want to be with em, that's cool.
    Just don't be irresponsible. That I do not agree with.
    Click to expand...
    This position (which is probably the prevailing position in society), that people shouldn't be allowed to breed for fear of creating flawed children, is the definition of eugenics. If that's what some of you believe, hey, whatever. I just want you all to be aware of what you're implicitly supporting.

    This position is also based largely on old, unclear, and usually errant data. From what I understand, excessive inbreeding can sometimes cause problems (mutations seem more likely to form in family trees with low genetic variation, and while mutations can be positive or negative, they're quite often negative), but as far as I know, there's very little potential for problems within just one generation, and this is even more true if they're not direct family. And even for direct family, I recall recent numbers have suggested that, while there is a statistically significant increase in genetic disorders and diseases, the increase is almost trivial within one generation (think something like a consistent 1% increase in such problems).

    I admit that I no longer have the data I'm referencing, though, so don't push me for it.
     
    They tried to beat it into my head that incest is an evil thing and that I was a bad boy who allowed himself to be possessed by the devil but that didn't stop one of cousins and me to sneak off somewhere and lay down together. We didn't do anything just cuddled. And no, while I was attracted to her when we were younger, I'm not into incest.
    That said, I don't feel like there are any moral reasons that it is wrong other than the childbearing one. I treat the issue of incest the same way I do gay marriage: If they love each other then let them love each other.
     
    Last edited:
    An abnormal Cybran said:
    They tried to beat it into my head that insect is an evil thing and that I was a bad boy who allowed himself to be possessed by the devil but that didn't stop one of cousins and me to sneak off somewhere and lay down together. We didn't do anything just cuddled. And no, while I was attracted to her when we were younger, I'm not into insect.
    That said, I don't feel like there are any moral reasons that it is wrong other than the childbearing one. I treat the issue of insect the same way I do gay marriage: If they love each other then let them love each other.
    Click to expand...
    I think you mean "incest." An "insect" is an arthropod in the class "insecta." In other words, a bug.
     
    Funny how this thread is started while probably the most "incest" cour of anime history airs =D
    Mahouka, WIXOSS...

    Anyways, I don't really have anything against incest, I just don't really like the term being used for any sibling love... incest only happens when sexual attraction and acts start happening.
    I mean... if they marry, they don't need to change their surname... okay, this was kinda bad but... you know...
    And if I were to compare something that was mentioned in this thread, incest is more natural than gay marriage.
     
    It's not my cup of tea, but hey...live and let live, no?

    It's also interesting to note that a lot of today's horror films bring up incest as something that causes genetic mutation. Perhaps that is why so many focus on such a con, when it simply isn't true in most cases.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top