Incest Is Best?

Ogdred Weary

The Lich-King of Angmar
Joined
Apr 2, 2012
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
12,282
Points
289
I would question how consenting that kind of sex is, but this isn't my field of expertise.

It will vary from instance to instance and I imagine in the majority of cases it is not consensual and is abuse but I find myself agreeing with Scargy over the terminology. The term "abuse" is clearer and more accurate.
 

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
36,899
Reaction score
53,713
Points
334
Location
HM The Tower of London
I don't know, the word "incest" is really bad as it is!
Back in the early/mid '80s what is now known as 'familial child sex abuse' was being tentatively discussed as incest.
'Incest' does indeed sound pretty bad, but it implies ignorance and vice rather than coercion.
 

Herr Cloaca

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Dec 26, 2020
Messages
150
Reaction score
472
Points
68
I used to frequent a second-hand bookshop. I bought a number of Biggles books there, but the bloke had a stack of magazine from the seventies full of "keep it in the family" articles on why incest was a really good idea.
This was in Norwich, by the way.
 
Last edited:

ChasFink

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Messages
1,433
Reaction score
3,796
Points
164
Back in the early/mid '80s what is now known as 'familial child sex abuse' was being tentatively discussed as incest.
'Incest' does indeed sound pretty bad, but it implies ignorance and vice rather than coercion.

I have always thought of the word "incest" as being neutral in the context of violence, abuse, etc. I do remember what scargy says about that time, though. I wondered why what I would call incestuous rape or abuse was simply being called incest, as if concentual incest didn't - couldn't - exist.

Of course it could be argued that consentual incest is wrong, unhealthy, etc. but that doesn't make it abuse.
 

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
36,899
Reaction score
53,713
Points
334
Location
HM The Tower of London
I have always thought of the word "incest" as being neutral in the context of violence, abuse, etc. I do remember what scargy says about that time, though. I wondered why what I would call incestuous rape or abuse was simply being called incest, as if concentual incest didn't - couldn't - exist.

Of course it could be argued that consentual incest is wrong, unhealthy, etc. but that doesn't make it abuse.
It's abuse because of the power relationship, as with the 'affair'/incest between Sappho and her father.

If a partner would find it hard to deny the other sex because of the consequences of saying 'no', the relationship is abusive, incestuous or not.
 

ChasFink

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Messages
1,433
Reaction score
3,796
Points
164
Agreed,. And if I didn't make it clear, I was in no way promoting or condoning consensual incest. But however distasteful it may be, it does exist - for example, one hears the occasional stories of couples who fell in love and later discovered they were first cousins, or siblings separated when infants.

Merriam-Webster defines incest as "sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry[;]
also : the statutory crime of such a relationship". Nothing about abuse, psychological or otherwise. I just get annoyed when words acquire subtleties of meaning that can cloud intelligent discussion of the matters at hand. Consider "kill" versus "murder": it's almost never a good thing when someone kills another person, but that doesn't mean that all killings are murders.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,365
Reaction score
11,485
Points
299
Agreed,. And if I didn't make it clear, I was in no way promoting or condoning consensual incest. But however distasteful it may be, it does exist - for example, one hears the occasional stories of couples who fell in love and later discovered they were first cousins, or siblings separated when infants.

Merriam-Webster defines incest as "sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry[;]
also : the statutory crime of such a relationship". Nothing about abuse, psychological or otherwise. I just get annoyed when words acquire subtleties of meaning that can cloud intelligent discussion of the matters at hand. Consider "kill" versus "murder": it's almost never a good thing when someone kills another person, but that doesn't mean that all killings are murders.
Hence the argument that 'Thou shalt not kill' means 'thou shalt not murder'. Not one i subscribe to, BTW.

Incest does not necessarily mean abuse, and can , depending on the particular state's definition of incest, be entirely unwitting. Given my Gran was one of 14 siblings only one of which I ever met, the world is full of first cousins once removed and second cousins I know nothing about.
 

catseye

Old lady trouser-smell
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
4,006
Reaction score
13,952
Points
224
Location
York
Hence the argument that 'Thou shalt not kill' means 'thou shalt not murder'. Not one i subscribe to, BTW.

Incest does not necessarily mean abuse, and can , depending on the particular state's definition of incest, be entirely unwitting. Given my Gran was one of 14 siblings only one of which I ever met, the world is full of first cousins once removed and second cousins I know nothing about.
I don't think it would be counted as incest if it was between cousins once removed or second cousins. The level of blood relationship would be distant enough to make it not a crime.

We are pretty well ALL related anyway, if you go back far enough.
 
Top