Posted: 04 August 2012 at 4:40pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Freethinker112
I think we, as a society, have a very bad habit of defining normal things just by majority view. More people agree, then it is normal otherwise wrong or sin. But just because most people believe in a thing doesn't make it right, just as the belief of everyone, in medieval times, that Earth is flat was wrong.
I think if two people, adults, are doing something with mutual consent, nobody should interfere. Variation is the key of universe. We can't define a rigid normal, because there will always be exceptions. And who are we to judge who is wrong? Just because you two have different opinion, you decide yours is right and theirs is wrong? Remember, commonplace is not always right. Once Sati also used to be "normal therefore right".
Now, the children are more likely to get genetic abnormalities. So, it is unfair for a child to have problems because it was not his choice. And remember, normal marriage of unrelated people can also have genetic birth defect, so it is not a very good criteria to prove incest wrong. But, the people should not take any chance.
So, if an incestuous couple is mutually agreeing, and practices protection to avoid pregnancy, I am perfectly OK with that.
Now, bring the flame war!
Totally agree with that.
It's funny, because I was talking with my mum yesterday, telling about the vicious and hateful Chick-fil A appreciation day thing we witnessed in the States, when homophobes proudly wore their hate on their sleeves and lined up to stuff their faces across the country.
My mum, who was initially opposed to homosexuality but whom I'm somehow managed to convince went back to square one when I spoke to her about gay marriage, and insisted that marriage should be between one man and one woman.
'If we begin to accept things like gay marriage,' she went on to tell me, 'then we might as well end up accepting incest as well and the world will come to an end if that happens', unwittingly trotting out a rather hackneyed counterargument that gets posited all too often by detractors of gay marriage.
The only issues people appear to have with incest is that a) genetic defects in offspring and b) they're just unable to wrap their heads round the concept of a brother and sister or mother and son in a sexual relationship. But human emotions and feelings aren't homogenous or something which can be pigeonholed into socially acceptable categories. Sometimes, when people grow up being too reliant on each other, or when they've been through an unconscionable amount of pain or suffering or trauma together, then yes, it's possible that they may end up feeling a lot more attached and connected to each other, and if sexual congress allows them an outlet to give expression to their feelings and helps them overcome their horrors, and furthermore, if they are consenting adults, and are taking all the necessary precautions to avoid pregnancy, then why should society have a problem with that? They are not harming anyone else, are they? What they do with their private lives is their business alone.
I mean, if things such as fetishes, deviant sexuality, open relationships, polyamory and so forth are slowly starting to lose their social stigma, I'd say incest isn't far away.
Edited by joie de vivre - 04 August 2012 at 4:44pm