Would the gay incestuous relation between male or female siblings be bad ?

[Menelik_I]

The title question.

So apparently the more reason minded people would say that the Hagsbourgs would be a good scientific argument against incest, but what if the couple was gay (male-male or female-female) and therefore there would not be any risk of genetic cluster, would such relation be immoral or bad ?

As for the more religious minded, I would ask them why they are being homophobic about 2 kids who just are affectionate of each other.

Discuss.

[fkizz]

Yes because it corrodes the family structure. Asides from genetic there are further points to be against incest.

For example, a child having sex with his/her parents might help to corrode the family hierarchy. In many societies the existence of the familiar nucleus is what holds the society together.

Incest, regardless if gay or not, always changes the family role. And families lasted strong until XXI industrialized modern era for several reasons, one of them being it is an extremely useful tool of social organization, cohesion, aswell as a good support and life improvement of those involved.

Brothers are suposed to have a certain type of relationship and to help each other out in certain ways throughout life, and such type of incestuous bonding may destroy the intended basis of a brother/brother sister/sister relationship.

Not to mention another of the risks: incest occurring with a few individuals in the family might shame the family pride and hurt other family members, threatning coesion. Psychological damage might also ensure for both the practitioners and other family folk who find out. Even those who think it seems honestly totally ok to do it and seems a good idea on the moment, maybe 1 month or 1 year after the guilt can be overwheling, or the recurring thought of having done something warped.

And last but not least: there are billions of other people in the world, why go after your sibling.

[justicar5]

it would be squicky, and require much much brain bleach.

[Macunaíma]

If there are no physical problems involved and they love each other, why not?

[The Dude]

My problem with fkizz's reasoning is that I don't believe in such a thing as an "intended relationship". Intended by who?

[fkizz]

My problem with fkizz's reasoning is that I don't believe in such a thing as an "intended relationship". Intended by who?

Intended by this 3: Genetics, Civilization, and Psychology (see Westmark Effect).

[The Dude]

Intended by this 3: Genetics, Civilization, and Psychology (see Westmark Effect).

1) Homosexual incest as discussed in this thread doesn't result in offspring, which makes genetics as the only objectively valid argument against heterosexual incest a moot point.

2) Civilisation is subjective. It's nothing but the name we've given to our collective set of rules and laws that temper and govern our urges. These rules and laws are arbitrary from start to end. It could've been any other set decreeing any other sort of behaviour and we'd still have called it civilisation.

3) The psychological argument is exceptionally flimsy, because the effects of incest would vary from person to person. It's important to understand that not only does our distaste for incest spawn from irrational gut feeings (that are nevertheless entirely valid), a disposition towards it is spawned from exactly the same sort of irrational drive.

[Savoyard]

As socially liberal as one can be, you can't deny that brother and sister aren't there to be romanced.

[The Dude]

As socially liberal as one can be, you can't deny that brother and sister aren't there to be romanced.

Exactly what are they there for? The inbreeding argument is the only relevant one when it comes to incest. Beyond that I reason it's no different from any other type of deviant sex act between consenting partners.

Also if we're talking incest in terms of pure sexual behaviour then romance often doesn't even factor into it. That said, most great dynasties in human history were the product of incest and they possessed more wealth and power than most people living "as intended" ever will. Obviously we care more about what should and should not be than pragmatism does.

[Enzo]

I guess not? I wouldn't feel comfortable in their presence though.

[chriscase]

I think there are a couple more arguments against sibling affairs. We are rehashing the same line of thought now in several threads, but in a nut shell, asymmetrical power dynamics would be one, and distortion of access routes would be another.

What I mean by distortion of access is that family members generally have access to each other in a way that potential mates in the society at large do not. Given that, the casual exploitation of this access would give rise to very intimate intrafamilial sexual relationships long before any similar relationships would be likely to form outside of the household. While this might be relatively harmless as an aberration, as a general phenomenon it would be highly disruptive to the continuation of non-incestuous, nuclear family households.

Before anyone rebuts that these concerns are merely social, I would point out that the formation of bonded mate pairs is inherently social, and is at least one of the most critically important processes that any society must do in order to perpetuate its own existence.

[Blaze86420]

I am almost certain that Menelik is trolling.

Which is good.

[Claudius Gothicus]

What's with incest in here lately?

There's millions of humans out there ready to '' and be ed'' with more than flexible standards... so why focus on brothers and sisters?

seriously, I can understand if there's ethical doubts... but aren't we trying to project something in here?

[boofhead]

If you have gay sex with your brother there is something wrong with you and your brother.

Brother's aren't meant to have bum sex.

They're meant to fight each other as kids, but also have great times, and help each other learn how to be men. Then after the youthful years are over it's likely brothers will respect each other to a certain degree for the rest of their lives.

Not suck each other off.

/thread

[The Dude]

ITT Boofhead presumes that brothers are meant to do anything at all.

Why?

Because that's how he feels.

ITT Boofhead uses subjective reasoning as foundation for his attempts to discover an objective moral standard, and fails to understand that his own disgust regarding homosexual incest is grounds enough to feel the way he does. He feels that without something objective to cling and appeal to his own feelings do not suffice. If this fallacious loop amuses you as much as it does me, let us know.

[Exarch]

it is disgusting and unholy; better to ban all homosexuality period.

[chriscase]

Dude, IIRC from my cultural anthro classes, the incest taboo is virtually universal - one of very, very few such customs. Now, I'm not a believer in some externally decreed moral objectivity, so I's speculate that the effects of incest as a widespread cultural phenomenon would be deleterious in some way that's common to all human societies.

[Claudius Gothicus]

Dude, IIRC from my cultural anthro classes, the incest taboo is virtually universal - one of very, very few such customs. Now, I'm not a believer in some externally decreed moral objectivity, so I's speculate that the effects of incest as a widespread cultural phenomenon would be deleterious in some way that's common to all human societies.

There's probably some sort of Societal Mechanism working in there somewhere, that's what Levi-Strauss said. I also tend to believe that after a certain level of community development all Social Systems tend to differentiation, that alone causes children to socialize and internalize patterns in different ''fields'' of society, which will in turn, reinforce the Westermack effect by complimenting it with a wider and differentiated catalogue of ''choices''.

[Rinan]

Dude, IIRC from my cultural anthro classes, the incest taboo is virtually universal

Interesting then to see it occur in some societies like Egyptian pharaos etc. Though, of course, this was very much the exception. I can imagine it'd be out of the regular for their society too, considering they considered the Pharaoh divine he must've been a special case... But I'm not an Egyptologist, so I wouldn't know.

Into the second page of this thread, and nobody has yet to ask what the hell is wrong with Menelik for even coming up with the OP in the first place.

OP has manga girl as avatar. 'Nuff said.

[Menelik_I]

OP has manga girl as avatar. 'Nuff said.

Now I also have a manga sig too