What's your take on relatives doing the nasty?

Basically I think the options are:

1. Yes, incest is fine. What two consenting adults do behind closed doors is no one else's business.

2. In certain cases, it's alright....like if the two relatives couldn't reproduce, or if there is enough "distance" between them (2nd, 3rd cousins, etc.)

or

3. Incest is wrong. Period.


Put me down for #3, but don't be swayed by my opinion...

Incest is disgusting. Ironically enough, I got quite a laugh out of this one story my cousin told me: He knew a guy who had been seeing this girl for about a month. So one day, they finally did the deed and he gets his uncle and my cousin to put him up from her house. When she sees him to the door, the uncle catches a glimpse of her and was like "what up cuz!". The girl responds back in the same fashion and homeboy was just standing there looking dumbfounded. Uncle had to explain to him that was his blood cousin that he just got through piping down. Funny.

I have never had sex with anyone I was related to but I make no judgements of those who have or do. So long as they aren't reproducing, I feel that what two consenting adults do is their business!

stonestatic wrote:

So long as they aren't reproducing, I feel that what two consenting adults do is their business!

I agree, absolutely 100%! I also have never been in an incestuous relationship, but I'm not going to judge people on something I know nothing about. It's essential that they do not reproduce, since that could harm the baby. But if they're two consenting adults who cannot reproduce, then that's their business. Two people cannot help who they are in love with, and it would be heartbreaking if they had to be apart. But with all that said, I could never do anything like that myself - it would just feel too weird to me.

If they're consenting and understand that reproducing is a horribad idea, then let them fuck like wabbits.

I think it's disgusting and shows a warped lacking of boundaries for all those who indulge in it. Sorry if that sounds judgmental, but the question was asked and so I'm answering. Aside from the 'eww' factor, and the large potential to generate impaired offspring, I think incestuous relations introduce too many other elements that skew the original familial dynamic between the family members. With 6 billion people in the world, no one should be turning to family for sex.

Unless we talking about cousins, it's nasty. And even cousins should be kept to a min imo.

Personally I find it repellent, but I don't think my personal tastes should dictate other peoples actions. As long as they're both consenting adults and it's not a child molestation situation, then I say to each their own.

Dan70 wrote:

I think it's disgusting and shows a warped lacking of boundaries forall those who indulge in it. Sorry if that sounds judgmental, but thequestion was asked and so I'm answering. Aside from the 'eww' factor,and the large potential to generate impaired offspring, I thinkincestuous relations introduce too many other elements that skew theoriginal familial dynamic between the family members. With 6 billionpeople in the world, no one should be turning to family for sex.

Agreed, you'd have to be VERY pathetic if you turn to your brother or your uncle or your mother for sex.

Wadsworth wrote:

Unless we talking about cousins, it's nasty. And even cousins should be kept to a min imo.

I think it's nasty even with cousins. Cousins are like water down siblings IMO. I mean people are gonna do what they're gonna do, but ewww.
Are you that desperate or hungry for sex that NOTHING is sacred? I would sooner dismiss somebody hiring an escort than bedding down a family member.

I don't really care as long as they're consenting adults. Who are we to keep people from doing things they wish as long as it doesn't cause harm?

Define harm. It's all good and well to say 'as long as they can't have children' but I highly doubt that's the case for most of them.

Supernova wrote:

Define harm. It's all good and well to say 'as long as they can't have children' but I highly doubt that's the case for most of them.

You think most of them have children?

Adrian LePere wrote:

Personally I find it repellent, but I don't think my personal tastes should dictate other peoples actions. As long as they're both consenting adults and it's not a child molestation situation, then I say to each their own.

This. It's a Gag Factor Five with me, but it ain't hurting me. When I think about my sisters, who are attractive women, the idea of sexual involvement with one of them is nauseating. I would never be able to understand someone who was engaged in an incestuous relationship. However, I am aware that I don't know everything.

Never would I ever.

That being said, I'd agree with #2.

Technically, I believe in freedom for all people insofar as they don't harm any other person. In almost all cases, incest would likely involve abuse in some way. One person would likely have more power in the relationship than the other, and thus (even if the ages weren't inappropriate) it would have more in common with statutory rape than any healthy relationship.

It also is complicated by the possibility of procreation. The chance of serious birth defects is astronomically increased by having a small gene pool, so any conception within an incestuous relationship would by definition be risking the quality of life of a possible child.

It's a pretty useful taboo, as the distastefulness most modern people feel for it prevents serious genetic consequences. Morally, if there isn't an imbalance in the power dynamic of the relationship, both people are able to consent, and they take precautions to prevent conception, then there isn't any logical problem with it.

As a matter of principle, I have no problem with it in fiction (of course) and as long as a relationship involves consenting adults and harms no one, I wouldn't consider it any of my business in real life.

Considering the rarity of meeting your long lost genetic sibling and falling in love, however, I'd figure that virtually all real world incestuous relationships are harmful and thus immoral. So I do kind of agree with #1, but I don't believe that it is accurate when applied to real life.

I in no way approve of or endorse incest, but I have to clear up a common misconception about inbreeding.

The odds of the immediate offspring having any bad mutations is about the same as any average offspring. You don't run into problems until multiple generations down the line, where there is inbreeding in all of those multiple generations. The risks for offspring of a non-incestuous couple where one of them has a family history of a genetic disorder is far higher than that of two genetically healthy incestuous couple.

Again I'm in no way approving of incestuous sex or reproduction, but a brother-sister/mother-son/father-daughter aren't going to produce a two-headed baby.

I really don't value social taboos unless they have a practical implication.
I think that incestuous relationships that could produce children poses enough risk to society to warrant prohibition.
I'm the oldest of seven kids, and I'm too protective of each of them. The though of having a sexual relationship with any of them makes my hackles go up and the rest of me go a bit green.
Objectively, though, I can't think of a good reason to prohibit, or even be disgusted by incestuous relationships that cannot produce kids.

I think it is wrong, but I sway from that when it comes to second and third cousins. Maybe then, if they met up later in life, never having had a relationship, it would be ok for them to get together. Of course without procreating.

I'm not a fan. Something else to consider is depending on the state you live in you could be breaking the law. I'm not saying it should be a crime (between two consenting adults), I'm just saying it is in some places.

I'm so uncomfortable with and detached from the whole subject that I'm pretty apathetic overall. That's their business I guess, if other people want to mess around with their own family.

RedBedroom wrote:

I think it is wrong, but I sway from that when it comes to second and third cousins. Maybe then, if they met up later in life, never having had a relationship, it would be ok for them to get together. Of course without procreating.

I can agree with you about third cousins. There's enough distance between them that the blood isn't similar. Second cousins, though, I'm not too sure about.

ITA that as long as no one is being harmed, what consenting adults do is their own business. I'm not attracted to any of my relatives, but hypothetically if I ever go to family reunion and meet some nymphomaniac cousin who happened to be hot and was willing to play a game of "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" then I can't promise that I wouldn't be tempted.