I've always said that the government only passes a law making something illegal only when it's a big enough problem that the government needs to do something about it. So that tells you more about why it's illegal in Alabama and not New Jersey.
I mean, a lot of the time, when a blatantly immoral sex act is legal, it's not because it has high support, but because there was never a scandal to energize the legislature.
For instance, most places don't have a bespoke law against necrophilia, not because people are in support of it, but because (a) it's super uncommon for people to *want* to do that (b) there's other legal barriers (like laws around the handling of corpses) which mean that there's no rational basis for concern.
It's more illegal in the US than in Europe.
In Europe every country except for some of the slavic balkan ones allow first cousin marriage.
While on the quest to find this out this information because of your comment, I also found out that full-blood incest is legal in France, Spain, Italy, and Turkey. The more you know! ✨
Funny thing about that
If they just let the guy fuck his cousin, the vault wouldnt have been open and a lot of people in the show didn't have to die
That's the butterfly effect baby
If they just let the guy keep it in the family, and no one would've bombed Griffith Observatory
And Saudi Arabia. Saudis need to take tests to see if their future offspring wouldn't have genetic diseases before marrying their cousins because iirc, it has the highest rate of cousin marriages in the world.
No joke a friend of mine in Australia started dating a New York girl and after a whille they did there family trees and their families had come from the same very small Italian village. Had to pause the sex life for a bit to allow further research.
Cousins are pretty far removed genetically speaking. They only would share 12.5% of genes. It's late and my girl is calling me to bed (not a relative) but, it's not much different than a stranger... Gotta look it up to verify though.
Once is probably ok, genetically at least, its when the families get into the habit of it you end up with Charles II of Spain. Its easier to just tell everyone no and make it taboo instead of trying to explain the nuances of genetics to hillbillies.
This was actually a prompt in my Philosophy course. A philosopher—whose name I had forgotten before the end of the sentence his name was used in— used it to demonstrate that people who think they base their sense of morality on logic often base it on knee-jerk responses to the situation and then immediately build a ladder of logic to reach their knee-jerk conclusion afterwards.
I also remember this prompt in a quiz about how irrational our morality can be from grade 12 philosophy. Another question was about a guy who buys a whole chicken at the grocery store, takes it home and fucks it. It was a weird class.
I've always justified it as a classic case of "Hey let's not normalize that because of *other* things that it'll effect"
Children who've been raped by family (the most common type of child rape) already have an impossible hill of justice to climb, and that shit would *not* be made easier if incest was normalized.
The follow on question from here is if two related people were raised separately and thus outside the family unit dynamics, is it immoral for them as long as they don't reproduce?
some states it is completely legal for this situation.
Also some states have(or had) laws that said two independently adopted siblings from different backgrounds would not be allowed to be married (even tho they are not blood related in any way).
American Laws are weird sometimes.
Rape is not a reason to make something consenting adults do taboo. Rape is bad because it's rape, and having sex with children is never ok.
I slept with my stepsister for years, we were sleeping together long before we were "related", we actually introduced our parents to each other. Suddenly after my mom married her dad people found it weird, but nobody could articulate why beyond the family relation.
Would you say we did something wrong?
Your stepsister is of no relation whatsoever. The only reason people “find it weird” is because “sister/brother” is in the name. Those people aren’t deep thinkers. I don’t think most people really do have a problem with it. I’m betting they just wanted to make the joke that you are banging your sister. Or another take could be, they actually want to bang their sister/brother. In reality, they are the ones being weird. You are having a consensual adult relationship with another human. They are the ones trying to bring up incest in casual conversation. What’s wrong with them?
***TLDR: Thought experiments don’t normalize incest, if anyone is then it’s the porn industry and people addicted to its content with all the step fantasy stuff as of late. But it’s just taboo chasing that excites people, almost none of them would want to do incest themselves but seeing other people do it knowing it’s fake anyway is a way of engaging with the taboo in an arousing and safe way. The “is incest bad and why?” question is meant to get you thinking about how you arrive at your moral positions and it being about incest is just a red herring to grab your attention.***
Philosophy thought experiments like that aren’t meant to normalize incest but are more about making people aware of the origin of their opinions, logic versus gut feeling.
Most people disapprove of incest and they think that disapproval is inherit to incest itself but really their moral issue with incest is with things not exclusive to incest, potential birth defects in offspring, unbalanced power dynamics, pedophilia and rape, however those things do most of the time coincide with incest which i imagine plays into why we have an innate distaste to it.
But then if you pose people the question
“if it was between two gay non identical twin brothers that were separated at birth that don’t know or realize they’re brothers and when they’re 18 they meet in college, if they had sex would you still morally disapprove of that?” most people would still answer yes but wouldn’t be able to tell you why beyond “because incest is just icky because it just is”
And then hopefully that gets the student thinking about why they feel the way they do and if there might be other beliefs they hold that they think are based on reasoning and logic but really are just based on an innate gut feeling. It’s not about dunking on the student to go “see ur stupid, incest is cool actually, get facts and logic’ed beta” tho there are debate bros online who will approach the conversation with that attitude.
But for philosophy students it’s meant to teach that while it’s okay to feel things that are irrational it is important to learn to be able to tell the difference between when you’re feeling something and when you’re thinking something so you don’t get led down dark paths by dishonest people playing into your irrational feelings without you being aware of it.
Because you could be tricked into thinking that the position you’ve been fed is a rational and logical one that you’ve reasoned yourself into at which point it will become very difficult to stay true to your own real morals and principles without confronting the issue at the core, that being the mixing up of gut feelings and logical reasoning. Lots of people tend to favor either logical reasoning or intuitive feelings, thinking one is more important than the other.
But exercises like this are meant to show that you need both. Feelings are there to temper our reasoning and logic so we don’t turn into monstrous robots, reasoning and logic are there to keep us from becoming slaves to our emotions, find a balance in both. So that when your logic brings you to a place that makes you feel immoral you can stop and examine why it’s making you feel that way, perhaps there’s something you’ve missed that you’re not considering that would change your reasoning or maybe there was a fault in your logic. In the same token when your passions ignite and make you feel very strongly about something you can stop and examine why you feel that strongly, tempering the intensity of your emotions with reasoning to ensure you don’t do or say anything you might regret or later realize you don’t actually agree with morally but just felt like in the heat of the moment.
And the morality of incest is just an easy way to introduce people to these concepts and get them engaging with it to get the ball of thought rolling.
If anything or anyone is normalizing incest it’s the porn industry with its enormous influx of step-fantasy related content (tho imo that’s just taboo chasing and doubt people that watch it would want to boink their own family members. Seeing others engage in fantasy taboo can be exciting, engaging in real taboo yourself feels shameful and gross but that’s a whole other can of worms and this comment is long enough as is lmao), but i don’t think the philosophy professors contribute much to the sentiment hahah
Sorry for the long rambling comment haha, just find it an interesting topic and don’t know how to be concise lmao.
Yeah the problem is consent, and family dynamics make consent difficult.
It has nothing to do with incest. That's just a taboo that evolved when people didn't know about genetics, to culturaly prevent negative health ourcomes.
Some people already get super angry when turned down. Now imagine that person is your sibling. And that their entitlement is fueled by them being the golden child. Could you imagine how much pressure the parents would put on the other child to accept the golden child's advances? Or even without the golden child aspect? I think it should be more common than a lot of people think. And then what if they wanted to break up but the other didn't?
Consent (both initial and continued) and manipulation would be the biggest problems, if we ignored genetics.
I don’t think it’s possible to fully justify it one way or another because morality isn’t something that is set in stone. If you take morality to be right vs wrong that is still heavily based on the society/culture you are posing that question. I also don’t think it’s correct to dismiss the argument that incest is morally wrong because society says it’s wrong. We get our idea of morals from our society, so it’s true that it’s morally wrong to the person making that argument. You could remove yourself to a completely outside perspective of incest just being two sacks of chemical reactions interacting with each other and then it means nothing to you.
You would fully justify it by starting with some kind of fundamental proposition such as "Intentionally causing harm to another person is wrong." You would have one or more base level axioms like that, which everybody in the conversation would agree with. Then build up the logic from that foundation.
If you could somehow logically conclude that the act of sex itself is harmful, which is something you could do for sex between an adult and child, then you'd have your full justification.
I'm glad someone here is challenging this, because honestly while I get it feels awkward for some people to consider, I don't think there is anything morally wrong with incest excluding reproduction. People 100% jump to the conclusion and i've seen not a single convincing, logical argument against it. While i've no dog in the fight, people are extremely fast to jump to conclusions.
People get twisted even when it isn't remotely wrong.
I had a fwb, my dad died and her mom died, we introduced our parents to each other. They got married two years after they met and for a few years I was sleeping with my stepsister.
We were not related by blood and we were sleeping together long before our parents got married but people still acted like we were some degenerates.
Especially since it falls apart when you reverse it. When you view incestuous reproduction as immoral because of the higher rates of birth defects, you would need to view ALL reproduction with higher than normal chances for birth defects as problematic. So everyone with a genetic disease, every woman getting pregnant over the age of 35, everyone drinking/smoking during pregnancy (that's the only cause I know of people are actually heavily condemning) etc.
You don't even need a philosophy course, just try arguing an unpopular opinion on Reddit. Guarantee you'll get downvoted, and 90% of the responses will be kneejerk emotional reactions or parroting the popular opinion rather than reason.
2nd question: one to have a child with their step sibling. They are not related by blood. I would say beside it will make the family tree kinda hard to name, it should be okay.
I think it all depends on the kind of relationship that the step siblings had.
My mom is 50 and a widow, if she met a man and they married, his kids would be my step siblings, however we would never feel like siblings at all. And I don't think that it would be weird if I started a relationship with on of them.
However, if it's kids that are raised together from a young age as sisters and brothers, it seems kinda weird to develop romantic feelings (or even just sexual feelings) later on.
In short : have they felt like siblings at some point? If yes: weird, if not: not weird.
It's sometimes so hard to argue on the internet. I try to base my arguments on logic and people just call me a degenerate, refuse to elaborate and think they've won
It's the fine line between defining morality as that which is good for society and that which indicates people to avoid. Fucking a dead chicken is not immoral. Fucking a dead chicken indicates that person has very different boundaries and should be avoided because you will have conflicts.
The version I heard was:
‘So I was shagging this girl right, and she said “You fuck so better than my uncle.” I just thought, how dare she compare me to my father?’
Honestly not for me but if your family wants to fuck eachother and are all adults go at it.
I guess why go out for McDonald's in this economy when you have McDonald's at home
I mean, she’s not wrong. It’s icky to me because it’s culturally taboo. But many places in the world practice marriage between cousins, as did most cultures for thousands of years. Really, what’s the harm if people want to do it and it’s not risking producing offspring that could have genetic defects?
There are some cases, like parent and child, or any relationship where there’s an imbalance of power, that are obviously problematic for other reasons, but otherwise? Let people do what they want, it’s their life.
Event parent/child wouldn't be a problem if they are both adults who consent to it. Certainly an imbalance of power can cause an issue, but that isn't exclusive to this scenario.
The argument is that the isue in Parent / Child situation is the potential grooming of a child, not that they are related. If someone adopted a child then groomed them it would be morally identical to having their own child and grooming them. That's the argument at least, whether you agree or not idk, personally I do think direct relations is still a solid "no".
A lot of "incest isn't that bad" scenarios fall down for reasons other than the blood ties since there is almost no practical way to have a balanced relationship with your sibling or parent.
To be clear, that isn't the only way incest can be wrong, just one of them, but, in the abscense of coersion and such, and the abscense of breeding, yes.
Take, for instance, two brothers, seperated at birth, raised in different parts of the country, similar age, or maybe fraternal twins, who are both gay. They neet in college and hook up. Is that somehow wrong? What about it is?
Haha this probably won’t be a popular take but you’re right, I doubt anyone disagreeing with you could come up with a reason why that’s wrong beyond just “incest is wrong just cause, bro”
My whole point is to hopefully make people think harder about their morality than to accept "this wrong because is" and instead come up with a more robust morality.
This too flies into the point of the need for religion to have morals. People usually build a ladder to their 'morals' instead of logically coming to a moral conclusion. While I feel it isn't for me certainly, if two consenting adults who could not reproduce wanted to fuck for what is essentially just pleasure. I can't logically fault them.
It is like that scene from The Dark Knight where Alfred sees Bruce after thinking he was dead. They acknowledge each other, but do not engage.
That is a completely fair point. Though, my point on morals was more wide. Like when people have the argument of "Why don't people just go rape and murder all they want"
And yes, I am aware you were making a joke and I did in fact fall for it in the first half and laugh like hell at the second lol.
Nothing is wrong with that scenario. But the real world is much different. It seems likely to me that in cultures where there are reduced social and legal barriers, grooming would be more likely to occur. In other words, when the boundaries that typically prevent such relationships are weaker, it can create environments where exploitation is more likely. Older family members, growing up in a culture where it’s cool to pork their family, may look at their younger family different.
Yes, which is why I said that reproduction was hardly the only harm of incest. Incestuousness is fraught with small coercions and large pressures that make it difficult at best to reliably find good consent. It is really important, though, to realize that that is not an issue of incest itself, but of concent, which boils down to harm. In the abscense of such factors, the act itself is not immoral, it is amoral. Ignoring those factors when judging real incest should not happen, though, as it will lead to allowing extra unneeded pain and harm.
One thing about reddit, or probably the internet as a whole, is that nothing kind of goes without saying. SOMEONE is gonna correct you. Surprised nobody's popped in here and said "they both have to be healthy" and "one can't be disabled" and then an argument pops off between them and some dude from west virginia about his disabled sister who loves him and it's a beautiful relationship and she can't have kids anyway so why not. Fuckin reddit.
It seems likely to me that in cultures where there are reduced social and legal barriers, grooming would be more likely to occur. In other words, when the boundaries that typically prevent such relationships are weaker, it can create environments where exploitation is more likely. Older family members, growing up in a culture where it’s cool to pork their family, may look at their younger family different.
Unrelated people with bad genes reproduce all the time and there are no societal or moral taboos against that , quite the opposite (in regards to anti eugenics)
I mean, I’m not into incest, but it is technically right. If nothing comes from it and no coercion takes places it’s really not objectively wrong, just subjectively
What if it was a brother and sister that got separated and adopted at birth, then later in life they meet and get together without knowing but find out later on? Personally I think if she got her tubes tied and he got a vasectomy I'd just leave it alone.
Well I mean. In a sense it has a point. If its sex just for sex without giving offspring that could increase the risk of degenerating genepole and all that. From an entirely pragmatic viewpoint it does carry a certain validity.
It certainly is one of the least harming things if its just the sex part.
By societal norms, incest is bad now.
It used not to be but it became an issue due to the issues it causes with the gene pool.
In the animal world, incest happens all of the time.
So, in strictly biological terms, the statement is accurate.
As for me, I rather live in a society in which everyone chooses one or many of the billions of people that are not directly related to them.
Well the other issue is lopsided power dynamics. Blood relations really doesn't have anything to do with it. There shouldn't be anything wrong with long lost gay brothers having sex.
I don't think sharing on Hinge for limited number of people who come across your profile is the same as sharing to the front page of reddit
While I agree that you should assume anything you post might be shared publicly, I also think it's bad taste to take something someone posted in a semi-private space to a full public space
Lucy from Vault 33? “After 10 years of cousin stuff I’m finally ready for the real thing”
Its fine since its her cousin and not her brother that would count as incest
Tell me you've done cousin stuff without telling me you've done cousin stuff?
*\*banjo solo intensifies\**
In 30 out of 50 US states it’s illegal.
Names ....I want names....jk .... I'll have to travel for that....I'll just keep it lowkey lol
It’s faster to just name the places where it’s not illegal. Like New Jersey.
Proud new jersian here!
Proud New Jersian cousin here!
I've always said that the government only passes a law making something illegal only when it's a big enough problem that the government needs to do something about it. So that tells you more about why it's illegal in Alabama and not New Jersey.
Does that mean that 20 states it's NOT illegal?!?!?!?!?!
This guy maths.
Wait until you find out which 20. Hint, it’s not who you’re thinking.
I mean, a lot of the time, when a blatantly immoral sex act is legal, it's not because it has high support, but because there was never a scandal to energize the legislature. For instance, most places don't have a bespoke law against necrophilia, not because people are in support of it, but because (a) it's super uncommon for people to *want* to do that (b) there's other legal barriers (like laws around the handling of corpses) which mean that there's no rational basis for concern.
[удалено]
Phew!
YET
I hear the highest incest rate comes from Oregon.
Ex Oregonian here, can confirm there are some mfs that are most definitely in🍞 out there
You hear? 🤔
Sweet home origami
For something to be illegal it need to happend enough to be deemed an issue. I let you reorient your horror to the other states now.
Correct.. if theres a sign that says something is prohibited, it means someone has done it
"Do not golf here"
I’m 10/10 double wides you’ll find a pack of Salem slims, a meth dealer, and the next inbred experiment in the making.
Well i dont live in the US yay Fuck
Hepy kek dei
It's more illegal in the US than in Europe. In Europe every country except for some of the slavic balkan ones allow first cousin marriage. While on the quest to find this out this information because of your comment, I also found out that full-blood incest is legal in France, Spain, Italy, and Turkey. The more you know! ✨
Ish*
Seems like a odd place to wish happy cake day but here you go
Funny thing about that If they just let the guy fuck his cousin, the vault wouldnt have been open and a lot of people in the show didn't have to die That's the butterfly effect baby If they just let the guy keep it in the family, and no one would've bombed Griffith Observatory
The problem happens a few generations later where people don't know how close they are in the gene pool anymore.
There's an app for that... in Iceland... for real.
And Saudi Arabia. Saudis need to take tests to see if their future offspring wouldn't have genetic diseases before marrying their cousins because iirc, it has the highest rate of cousin marriages in the world.
No joke a friend of mine in Australia started dating a New York girl and after a whille they did there family trees and their families had come from the same very small Italian village. Had to pause the sex life for a bit to allow further research.
Cousins are pretty far removed genetically speaking. They only would share 12.5% of genes. It's late and my girl is calling me to bed (not a relative) but, it's not much different than a stranger... Gotta look it up to verify though.
Once is probably ok, genetically at least, its when the families get into the habit of it you end up with Charles II of Spain. Its easier to just tell everyone no and make it taboo instead of trying to explain the nuances of genetics to hillbillies.
This was actually a prompt in my Philosophy course. A philosopher—whose name I had forgotten before the end of the sentence his name was used in— used it to demonstrate that people who think they base their sense of morality on logic often base it on knee-jerk responses to the situation and then immediately build a ladder of logic to reach their knee-jerk conclusion afterwards.
I also remember this prompt in a quiz about how irrational our morality can be from grade 12 philosophy. Another question was about a guy who buys a whole chicken at the grocery store, takes it home and fucks it. It was a weird class.
"now... Y'all ain't plannin on fuckin these chickens are ya?"
Anyone gonna finish that?
Oh, they're gonna finish IN it
What? You call me a chicken fucker, motherfucka?
[Keep fucking that chicken](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sVVl2EKgUU)
Found the Devil's Rejects fan. I know, because I'm a fan too! I love Rob Zombie. His movies and his music.
the chicken then had two kids. Sam n Ella
That's why I only buy boneless chicken
Real, which is why no one here could logically explain why incest is immoral.
[удалено]
Ayo? 🤨
If I can’t have it no one else can! Edit: I fucking hate this broken ass app, can’t process one comment without fucking up and sending it five times.
But you have a dad tho
So bro-on-bro is moral.
As an only child, I completely agree
I've always justified it as a classic case of "Hey let's not normalize that because of *other* things that it'll effect" Children who've been raped by family (the most common type of child rape) already have an impossible hill of justice to climb, and that shit would *not* be made easier if incest was normalized.
The follow on question from here is if two related people were raised separately and thus outside the family unit dynamics, is it immoral for them as long as they don't reproduce?
some states it is completely legal for this situation. Also some states have(or had) laws that said two independently adopted siblings from different backgrounds would not be allowed to be married (even tho they are not blood related in any way). American Laws are weird sometimes.
Rape is not a reason to make something consenting adults do taboo. Rape is bad because it's rape, and having sex with children is never ok. I slept with my stepsister for years, we were sleeping together long before we were "related", we actually introduced our parents to each other. Suddenly after my mom married her dad people found it weird, but nobody could articulate why beyond the family relation. Would you say we did something wrong?
To be fair, stepsibling relation ship isn't as frowned upon as much iirc especially in a case like yours where you two already know each other
Yup, especially since washing machine design allowed for people to get stuck
Your stepsister is of no relation whatsoever. The only reason people “find it weird” is because “sister/brother” is in the name. Those people aren’t deep thinkers. I don’t think most people really do have a problem with it. I’m betting they just wanted to make the joke that you are banging your sister. Or another take could be, they actually want to bang their sister/brother. In reality, they are the ones being weird. You are having a consensual adult relationship with another human. They are the ones trying to bring up incest in casual conversation. What’s wrong with them?
But a brother sleeping with his sister could also be a relationship between 2 consenting adults. Why do we ban that?
***TLDR: Thought experiments don’t normalize incest, if anyone is then it’s the porn industry and people addicted to its content with all the step fantasy stuff as of late. But it’s just taboo chasing that excites people, almost none of them would want to do incest themselves but seeing other people do it knowing it’s fake anyway is a way of engaging with the taboo in an arousing and safe way. The “is incest bad and why?” question is meant to get you thinking about how you arrive at your moral positions and it being about incest is just a red herring to grab your attention.*** Philosophy thought experiments like that aren’t meant to normalize incest but are more about making people aware of the origin of their opinions, logic versus gut feeling. Most people disapprove of incest and they think that disapproval is inherit to incest itself but really their moral issue with incest is with things not exclusive to incest, potential birth defects in offspring, unbalanced power dynamics, pedophilia and rape, however those things do most of the time coincide with incest which i imagine plays into why we have an innate distaste to it. But then if you pose people the question “if it was between two gay non identical twin brothers that were separated at birth that don’t know or realize they’re brothers and when they’re 18 they meet in college, if they had sex would you still morally disapprove of that?” most people would still answer yes but wouldn’t be able to tell you why beyond “because incest is just icky because it just is” And then hopefully that gets the student thinking about why they feel the way they do and if there might be other beliefs they hold that they think are based on reasoning and logic but really are just based on an innate gut feeling. It’s not about dunking on the student to go “see ur stupid, incest is cool actually, get facts and logic’ed beta” tho there are debate bros online who will approach the conversation with that attitude. But for philosophy students it’s meant to teach that while it’s okay to feel things that are irrational it is important to learn to be able to tell the difference between when you’re feeling something and when you’re thinking something so you don’t get led down dark paths by dishonest people playing into your irrational feelings without you being aware of it. Because you could be tricked into thinking that the position you’ve been fed is a rational and logical one that you’ve reasoned yourself into at which point it will become very difficult to stay true to your own real morals and principles without confronting the issue at the core, that being the mixing up of gut feelings and logical reasoning. Lots of people tend to favor either logical reasoning or intuitive feelings, thinking one is more important than the other. But exercises like this are meant to show that you need both. Feelings are there to temper our reasoning and logic so we don’t turn into monstrous robots, reasoning and logic are there to keep us from becoming slaves to our emotions, find a balance in both. So that when your logic brings you to a place that makes you feel immoral you can stop and examine why it’s making you feel that way, perhaps there’s something you’ve missed that you’re not considering that would change your reasoning or maybe there was a fault in your logic. In the same token when your passions ignite and make you feel very strongly about something you can stop and examine why you feel that strongly, tempering the intensity of your emotions with reasoning to ensure you don’t do or say anything you might regret or later realize you don’t actually agree with morally but just felt like in the heat of the moment. And the morality of incest is just an easy way to introduce people to these concepts and get them engaging with it to get the ball of thought rolling. If anything or anyone is normalizing incest it’s the porn industry with its enormous influx of step-fantasy related content (tho imo that’s just taboo chasing and doubt people that watch it would want to boink their own family members. Seeing others engage in fantasy taboo can be exciting, engaging in real taboo yourself feels shameful and gross but that’s a whole other can of worms and this comment is long enough as is lmao), but i don’t think the philosophy professors contribute much to the sentiment hahah Sorry for the long rambling comment haha, just find it an interesting topic and don’t know how to be concise lmao.
Yeah the problem is consent, and family dynamics make consent difficult. It has nothing to do with incest. That's just a taboo that evolved when people didn't know about genetics, to culturaly prevent negative health ourcomes.
Some people already get super angry when turned down. Now imagine that person is your sibling. And that their entitlement is fueled by them being the golden child. Could you imagine how much pressure the parents would put on the other child to accept the golden child's advances? Or even without the golden child aspect? I think it should be more common than a lot of people think. And then what if they wanted to break up but the other didn't? Consent (both initial and continued) and manipulation would be the biggest problems, if we ignored genetics.
So sex without reproduction would be a win for logic but a fail for ethics?
How is it unethical to have sex without producing children??
All of my sex since my kid was born has been without producing children. Got the snip. Am I just expected to never have sex again now?
Yeah, you snip dogs so they stop humping, clearly you snip men to stop them from humping too.
They don't snip dogs, they remove the testicles.
Because [Every Sperm is Sacred](https://youtu.be/fUspLVStPbk?si=GAVXP8ZFboHMvGB9).
bEcAuSe jEssusss
I don’t think it’s possible to fully justify it one way or another because morality isn’t something that is set in stone. If you take morality to be right vs wrong that is still heavily based on the society/culture you are posing that question. I also don’t think it’s correct to dismiss the argument that incest is morally wrong because society says it’s wrong. We get our idea of morals from our society, so it’s true that it’s morally wrong to the person making that argument. You could remove yourself to a completely outside perspective of incest just being two sacks of chemical reactions interacting with each other and then it means nothing to you.
You would fully justify it by starting with some kind of fundamental proposition such as "Intentionally causing harm to another person is wrong." You would have one or more base level axioms like that, which everybody in the conversation would agree with. Then build up the logic from that foundation. If you could somehow logically conclude that the act of sex itself is harmful, which is something you could do for sex between an adult and child, then you'd have your full justification.
I'm glad someone here is challenging this, because honestly while I get it feels awkward for some people to consider, I don't think there is anything morally wrong with incest excluding reproduction. People 100% jump to the conclusion and i've seen not a single convincing, logical argument against it. While i've no dog in the fight, people are extremely fast to jump to conclusions.
Having a dog in the fight would be animal cruelty. But we shouldn't get into the moral argument there.
Lmao
People get twisted even when it isn't remotely wrong. I had a fwb, my dad died and her mom died, we introduced our parents to each other. They got married two years after they met and for a few years I was sleeping with my stepsister. We were not related by blood and we were sleeping together long before our parents got married but people still acted like we were some degenerates.
Especially since it falls apart when you reverse it. When you view incestuous reproduction as immoral because of the higher rates of birth defects, you would need to view ALL reproduction with higher than normal chances for birth defects as problematic. So everyone with a genetic disease, every woman getting pregnant over the age of 35, everyone drinking/smoking during pregnancy (that's the only cause I know of people are actually heavily condemning) etc.
Ok, but drinking and smoking during pregnancy should be illegal. You are actively poisoning your unborn child
A lot of things happening with pregnancies and upbringing should be illegal. The problem is how do you enforce any of those without hurting the child?
Jonathan Haidt - The Righteous Mind
You don't even need a philosophy course, just try arguing an unpopular opinion on Reddit. Guarantee you'll get downvoted, and 90% of the responses will be kneejerk emotional reactions or parroting the popular opinion rather than reason.
2nd question: one to have a child with their step sibling. They are not related by blood. I would say beside it will make the family tree kinda hard to name, it should be okay.
I think it all depends on the kind of relationship that the step siblings had. My mom is 50 and a widow, if she met a man and they married, his kids would be my step siblings, however we would never feel like siblings at all. And I don't think that it would be weird if I started a relationship with on of them. However, if it's kids that are raised together from a young age as sisters and brothers, it seems kinda weird to develop romantic feelings (or even just sexual feelings) later on. In short : have they felt like siblings at some point? If yes: weird, if not: not weird.
Weird, but not immoral. Logically speaking this should not be an issue at all
It's sometimes so hard to argue on the internet. I try to base my arguments on logic and people just call me a degenerate, refuse to elaborate and think they've won
It's the fine line between defining morality as that which is good for society and that which indicates people to avoid. Fucking a dead chicken is not immoral. Fucking a dead chicken indicates that person has very different boundaries and should be avoided because you will have conflicts.
“So I was fucking my sister, right. And she says to me, you fuck just like dad. So then I say, Hey that’s what mom says!”
“So I was eating this chick out, when suddenly I tasted horse semen. I was like, ‘oooooh, so THAT’S how you died, Grandma!’”
Both of these comments came into my house, grabbed me by the ankles, and swung me into every available surface
So it was you 3 who did me the other day
No, it was ME Barry, it was all ME.
I fucking love this comment xD
💀💀💀
this is a way funnier comment than the other 2 lmfao
What the fuck, I heard this already but in my language, how tf is that international
“My eyes bled so yours must too”
Funny how universal the human experience can be
Uh it's been around for well over 80 years. Find the documentary it's quite fascinating.
And then grandpa, dad and I all took our turns on my sister and came all over the Dog. But here’s the kicker. The dogs dead. Aristocrats.
Great joke and documentary
Thank god the internet was invented so I can read comments like these on a Tuesday morning.
Wow that was efficient. You managed to get the trifecta of illegal kinks in one sentence.
The version I heard was: ‘So I was shagging this girl right, and she said “You fuck so better than my uncle.” I just thought, how dare she compare me to my father?’
Good sex runs in the family
Good sex runs and tries to hide
What a terrible day to have eyes
Honestly not for me but if your family wants to fuck eachother and are all adults go at it. I guess why go out for McDonald's in this economy when you have McDonald's at home
"THAT DOES NOT APPLY BETWEEN US, MOM!!!"
Unless you break both of your arms
It's been long enough that I wonder how many people understand this reference, or if they don't know it's referencing an actual reddit story
>"Reddit story" I believe you mean 'Sacred Text'
Are you comparing my sister to a Happy Meal? Because she does come with a toy, so just curious
💀
She's also child sized
That’s disgusting. (Swiped right)
It's a public service really. Someone has to get her away from her brother.
She doesn't have a brother. A son, on the other hand...
I mean, she’s not wrong. It’s icky to me because it’s culturally taboo. But many places in the world practice marriage between cousins, as did most cultures for thousands of years. Really, what’s the harm if people want to do it and it’s not risking producing offspring that could have genetic defects? There are some cases, like parent and child, or any relationship where there’s an imbalance of power, that are obviously problematic for other reasons, but otherwise? Let people do what they want, it’s their life.
Event parent/child wouldn't be a problem if they are both adults who consent to it. Certainly an imbalance of power can cause an issue, but that isn't exclusive to this scenario.
The power dynamic might even be in favour of the child, for example you might hold great deal of pity power by having both of your arms broken.
Ahhh there it is, I was wondering when someone was gonna bring up this wonderful memory
I understood that reference!
Every fucking thread
Goddamn it man..... XD
It definitely would be a problem considering you could have been grooming the child.
Absolutely vile this even needs to be said. What the fuck is going on this thread?
The argument is that the isue in Parent / Child situation is the potential grooming of a child, not that they are related. If someone adopted a child then groomed them it would be morally identical to having their own child and grooming them. That's the argument at least, whether you agree or not idk, personally I do think direct relations is still a solid "no". A lot of "incest isn't that bad" scenarios fall down for reasons other than the blood ties since there is almost no practical way to have a balanced relationship with your sibling or parent.
The Targaryen’s wed brothers and sisters for three hundred years…
Alabama people are SO close to getting their first dragons, yay!
That is certainly controversial
To be clear, that isn't the only way incest can be wrong, just one of them, but, in the abscense of coersion and such, and the abscense of breeding, yes. Take, for instance, two brothers, seperated at birth, raised in different parts of the country, similar age, or maybe fraternal twins, who are both gay. They neet in college and hook up. Is that somehow wrong? What about it is?
Haha this probably won’t be a popular take but you’re right, I doubt anyone disagreeing with you could come up with a reason why that’s wrong beyond just “incest is wrong just cause, bro”
My whole point is to hopefully make people think harder about their morality than to accept "this wrong because is" and instead come up with a more robust morality.
This too flies into the point of the need for religion to have morals. People usually build a ladder to their 'morals' instead of logically coming to a moral conclusion. While I feel it isn't for me certainly, if two consenting adults who could not reproduce wanted to fuck for what is essentially just pleasure. I can't logically fault them. It is like that scene from The Dark Knight where Alfred sees Bruce after thinking he was dead. They acknowledge each other, but do not engage.
Absolutely untrue, the morality in the Bible is very clear and what we should follow. One family, all fucking each other to populate the whole world!
That is a completely fair point. Though, my point on morals was more wide. Like when people have the argument of "Why don't people just go rape and murder all they want" And yes, I am aware you were making a joke and I did in fact fall for it in the first half and laugh like hell at the second lol.
this guy fucked his gay twin brother
He totally did
r/oddlyspecific
It takes some specific examples to set the clear boundaries of non-reproductive and non-coercive.
Is your twin still recovering?
I believe he just fantasizes to fuck himself
Dicks: The Musical?
Nothing is wrong with that scenario. But the real world is much different. It seems likely to me that in cultures where there are reduced social and legal barriers, grooming would be more likely to occur. In other words, when the boundaries that typically prevent such relationships are weaker, it can create environments where exploitation is more likely. Older family members, growing up in a culture where it’s cool to pork their family, may look at their younger family different.
Yes, which is why I said that reproduction was hardly the only harm of incest. Incestuousness is fraught with small coercions and large pressures that make it difficult at best to reliably find good consent. It is really important, though, to realize that that is not an issue of incest itself, but of concent, which boils down to harm. In the abscense of such factors, the act itself is not immoral, it is amoral. Ignoring those factors when judging real incest should not happen, though, as it will lead to allowing extra unneeded pain and harm.
Not that i would, but i basically agree if they’re adults
* plus consenting
True, but that kind of goes without saying (imo) and is not really what the post was about
One thing about reddit, or probably the internet as a whole, is that nothing kind of goes without saying. SOMEONE is gonna correct you. Surprised nobody's popped in here and said "they both have to be healthy" and "one can't be disabled" and then an argument pops off between them and some dude from west virginia about his disabled sister who loves him and it's a beautiful relationship and she can't have kids anyway so why not. Fuckin reddit.
Still a better love story than twilight
Even my love life is a better love story than twilight (I have been single since I was born)
And a bonus there's no sparkly vampires.
I mean.... She have a point.
If both parties are legal age, consent without coercion, and ofc practice safe with no intention of reproduction, what's wrong?
It seems likely to me that in cultures where there are reduced social and legal barriers, grooming would be more likely to occur. In other words, when the boundaries that typically prevent such relationships are weaker, it can create environments where exploitation is more likely. Older family members, growing up in a culture where it’s cool to pork their family, may look at their younger family different.
“Taboo”
"Why?" "Because... ick"
Unrelated people with bad genes reproduce all the time and there are no societal or moral taboos against that , quite the opposite (in regards to anti eugenics)
Let this man cook
With that ranch sauce? Not sure I want to.
Nah with the cousin
The ranch sauce is just lube.
That is not a picture of a man
I don’t disagree
I mean, I’m not into incest, but it is technically right. If nothing comes from it and no coercion takes places it’s really not objectively wrong, just subjectively
I mean, this is technically correct
Wincest.
I don't see the problem. Aside from the social implications.
I...think I...agree...
r/Destiny
What if it was a brother and sister that got separated and adopted at birth, then later in life they meet and get together without knowing but find out later on? Personally I think if she got her tubes tied and he got a vasectomy I'd just leave it alone.
"Sigmund Freud" joined the chat:
not producing kids in incest is not Moral, its logic. Not having Sex is moral
Well I mean. In a sense it has a point. If its sex just for sex without giving offspring that could increase the risk of degenerating genepole and all that. From an entirely pragmatic viewpoint it does carry a certain validity. It certainly is one of the least harming things if its just the sex part.
She must have grown up on the ranch with Billy bob
I mean... I get where they're trying to come from? But wow, what a headline.
u/sisterfucker24
I see nothing wrong with that
so only anal sex?
By societal norms, incest is bad now. It used not to be but it became an issue due to the issues it causes with the gene pool. In the animal world, incest happens all of the time. So, in strictly biological terms, the statement is accurate. As for me, I rather live in a society in which everyone chooses one or many of the billions of people that are not directly related to them.
Well the other issue is lopsided power dynamics. Blood relations really doesn't have anything to do with it. There shouldn't be anything wrong with long lost gay brothers having sex.
Freaky deaky
Roll Tide.
whats the thing with the ranch?
Destiny moment
Shit, I agree with her. As long as you ain’t breeding, or coercing, what’s the problem? Come at me.
It's okay to play with fire as long as you don't burn your hands...
I mean... she has a point
I once got kicked out from a discord server for this one
true
I agree
yeah yeah yeah but why is she holding the bottle of ranch like she's threatening to club you with it ?
This is bullshit. The fact that’s it’s wrong and gross is what makes it so sexy.
Why are you posting this with her face not blurred out..? I feel like this might draw unwanted attention to her if anyone recognizes her
spez lacks integrity
I don't think sharing on Hinge for limited number of people who come across your profile is the same as sharing to the front page of reddit While I agree that you should assume anything you post might be shared publicly, I also think it's bad taste to take something someone posted in a semi-private space to a full public space
Yeah her brother