Is it Time to take Incest out of the Closet?

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I opened this subject on another forum
as expected it released a volume of negative comment
the following post was made after the initial emotions died down

I am hoping to get beyond judgments of right and wrong
about a subject nobody has first hand experience in.
That is simply gossip at best
and bigotry at worst

I hope to examine the phenomenon objectively
or at least as objectively as is humanely possible.

Hopefully the negative emotions are now vented
and we can use our combined intellect
to get down to business
and dissect this beast
and reveal its heart

If there are still some bursting with disgust
please feel free to vomit it out
I promise not to respond

I am initially talking about the uncounted number of children
already victims of the public attitude to incest
and seeking rescue for them

and then hopefully we can talk about the future solutions.
The healthy suggestion for a DNA test is a good start
in that direction.

and I am also hoping
that if our conversations are intelligent and revealing enough
they can extend beyond this forum
into full public debate

With that larger view in mind
It would be so nice
if everybody would put aside preconceived notions
and give this sensitive subject your full attention

I would like to emphasize that pedophilia
whether inside our outside the family group
is not under discussion

2

oh no the great evils of incest prohibition!! since they exist in all human societies and are ingrained into human nature, go crusade about something you can influence like mass starvation.

3

Incest is world wide
and it is not all about abuse

It is my contention that the natural sexual aversion
we all feel inside the small family group
has nothing to to do with the social taboo against incest

That custom was formed during the Bronze Age
where virgins received a high bride price
also ensured paternity
and cemented clan alliances

The taboo has been carried forward
Royals continue to ignore it

We are all searching for the right mate
In the process of mate selection the aversion is innate
It is rare within the small family group
to find the right mate
so we go out and search within the larger family

Incest happens when the aversion barriers are down
between two consenting adults
the act is then natural
and the family should not be penalized

I am not including dysfunctional abuse
molestation
or pedophilia
that should be outlawed
within or without the family group

4

If the point is that the incest taboo performed an essential social function in ancient civilisations I don’t see much evidence that this is no longer true of contemporary society. While the issue of a dowry has clearly become less significant (in the West at least), there remain important practical reasons for the prohibition of incest - whether, for example, in the general sense of community cohesion (expansion of socio-economic ties, appreciation of diversity, etc.) or the more direct question of individual psycho-dynamical development (incest occuring within abusive environments).

Am I in the ballpark yet?

5

I am not trying to encourage incest
what I am suggesting is
why create a law
that penalizes not only the occasional natural attraction
between two consenting family adults
but also creates unnecessary suffering
for the innocent offspring as well?

Nature regulates sexual aversion within the family group
quite well herself.

By keeping it in the closet
we have no idea of the extent
of the family damage we might be doing
What are the numbers?

6

The abusive context and the genetic consequences, so far as I can tell. That and our moral attitudes. Take those as you will.

Unfortunately I’ve no idea, although there probably are figures and I can’t imagine criminalisation is covering that up particularly.

Anyway, doesn’t an incest taboo make sense, really, from a whole host of perspectives?

7

I don’t think the harm done to the offspring due to social rejection can be pinned on the laws. You’re conceding that most people have a natural aversion to incest. That natural aversion will express itself as disgust at the thought, and when people see the product of a concept that disgusts them, they will be disgusted by the reference. It’s guilt by association, and it seems that it stems from something other than the laws.

8

Here’s an anecdote to ponder:

“A brother and sister Julie and Mark vacationing in the south of France. They have some wine, one thing leads to another, and they decide they want to have sex. They use two different kinds of contraception and enjoy it, but they decide not to do it again.”

How do you react to this, and what conclusions do you draw from your reaction?

9

I am saying that the law should be re-examined.

Example:
As it stands now
no matter if two family members are genuinely in love
have consensual sex
and have children
if they admit it publically
or a neighbor finds out
and files a legal compliant
one or both parents go automatically to jail
and the children go into foster care
So they are forced to live lives of lies.

So my first question is
What exactly did they do that harms anybody?

Secondly
How and why and when was the incest law formulated?
If it was to protect against genetic deformities
the modern science of DNA can prevent that

Do have no care for the children of incest?

I am sure there are numbers for prosecuted cases.
But how many thousands are in the closet?
How do we know if there are not millions?
Are we still in the Dark Ages?
How are we to find out the truth
unless we change the laws

10

I think it would be considered a harmful environment for the children. I’m not saying I agree with that outright, of course, but I can see the logic. Moreover, I think a case could probably be made that the individuals involved in the relationship are in some sense misguided (socially alienated, for example). That’s much more contentious, though, and less clear where the burden of responsibility ought to lie.

I’m afraid I can’t answer the question, although my guess is that it has always been a feature of Judaeo-Christian/Roman systems of law. Of course, what you’re saying is that things have moved on, particularly in relation to science, but we perhaps have enough issues regarding artificial genetic selection and embryology already without adding this to the mix as well. The prohibition of incest simply isn’t contentious enough, I don’t think.

I don’t think decriminalisation is going to make the statistics any more manifest. How then would a recording process even take place? One of the great advantages of criminalisation (in any scenario), from the state’s point of view, is that it allows it to monitor our activities/behaviours.

11

After only 2 generations of incest birth there is a very high chance of severe physical disfunctions in a child. Beeing raised in an incest home where the parents are open with it is something no child should have to endure. Just look at how many children of homosexual parents that are being discriminated against because of their parents sexual orientation. The homosexual rights movement is at least 40 years old but this group still lacks basic rights in many western countries. Let’s just face it incest is not meant to be, and however hight the number of “happy” incest family there are, we won’t see a reduction if we decide to legalize it. And another thing is that incest is actually against nature. No I’m not saying it in a republican anti-gay way. Homosexual animals are found in all kinds of races from apes to cows to even some fish. When I say against nature I really mean it, it’s not mean’t to be. There is a reason evolution put a “no-no” sign on our siblings and cousins.

12

From the responses so far
it is clear everybody is merely sucking opinions out of their fingers.

Life throws a curve ball at all of us
mostly when we are young
careless parents
adultery
divorce
alcoholism
neglect
physical abuse
sexual molestation

I went through each and every one of those experiences myself
before I reached puberty
thank God all of that was out in the open
and the State came in and rescued me and my siblings
and I can speak about those experiences without
personal shame

I am not saying any of those experiences
are right or wrong
including incest
you take the punches and keep rolling

What I am saying
is that sticking our head in the sand like ostriches
regarding incest
and leaving kids to suffer in silence
without ever being able to express their feelings
in public
for fear of getting their parents arrested
is not only nonsense
its is cruel

The custom originated in the Bronze Age
when virgin daughters brought a high bride price
it also ensured paternity
and cemented clan alliances

It is about time we moved into the Nuclear Age

13

When we say "incest is unatural, it’s illegal, it’s forbidden, most of the time it consists of rape, most of the time it consists of pedophilia, it’s abusive, it’s unethical and highly immoral we are NOT sticking our heads in the sand nor are we hinding from the problem, We are actively taking a stance against it.

When we look at nature and how other species reproduce and when we look at pretty much every single human culture we see a pattern: Incest is not meant to be. When we make it a crime we don’t do it beacause we want the children who falls victim of it to suffer in silence, or because we want them to fear that their parents are to be taken away. We do it beacause we actually believe that people has some kind of a moral code that says: If it’s illegal than I’m not supposed to do it or at least for them to think that if it’s not accepted by a single culture, nation or species in existance then there is something wrong with such behaviour. Those who still persist in abusing their children frankly does not deserve to nurture or raise them and they are supposed to be locked away, or if possibly treated.

First of all I would like to see a source for that because I find it highly unlikely that this was a widely spread behaviour in the bronze age since cultures at that time were extremely local and the first kingdoms we know of were yet to be born. In any case, even if what you state is true, it does not in any way ratify it.

I don’t know if you are trying to be philosophical or if you are arguing this opinion for the sake of argument or if you just have a very machocistic nature but I don’t really understand what the prose-styled text and weird metaphors are about. And nuclear age? Have you watched too many madmax movies or are you just making fun of everybody? You know that irony does not translate very well into writing right?

14

Madmax went backwards into the Stone Age
Newtonian mechanics has been over ridden by quantum mechanics
We are in a whole new paradigm
Matter is no longer solid
it is all energy
physics and metaphysics have finally found a link
The new age consciousness
calls it the Nuclear Age
Get yourself on board. #-o

15

I mostly agree, but I think this is stated too strongly. Incest conceived of as intercourse is very rare, but gray areas are something many of us have experienced.

No child should be viewed as some sort of mutant for being the child of close relatives. And the odds are they are as normal as anyone else - not very. I am with you on this one.

My reaction to the cases where adult siblings who have grown up together end up living as a couple and having children is, generally, that I think there is a good chance something is off, but that the state should stay out of it. I base this reaction not on statistics so it is perhaps of very little value. I assume most children conceived in this way are OK and I would not outlaw the giving birth from couples who we know are more likely to produce birth defects - say older mothers, those with certain family genetic problems, etc.

16

In the intellectual circles you move that might be an accepted term but I doubt it’s one that is going to last. In any case contemporary history is the most subjective -so called- science there is, surpassed only by astrology and intelligent design. Labeling our own time - not my piece of cake.
Get yourself off the board.

17

I have defined Ages by social contracts and corresponding spiritual belief systems

  1. Stone Age… 2,5 million BCE. Family group Hunter/Gatherers. Animists
  2. Bronze Age… 20,000 BCE. Clan group Agriculturalists. Shamanists
  3. Iron Age… 4,000 BCE. National group industrialists. Orthodox Religious Scriptures
  4. Steel Age… 500 BCE International scientists. Religious Protestation
  5. Nuclear Age…1900 AD Global stewards Ontologists

Those are the basic distinctions.
For a complete rationale read my book, Psyche-Genetics

18

In France, incest is not a crime; incest laws were abolished by Napoleon in 1810 …
Incest is legal in The Netherlands. Incest laws were abolished some 200 …

19

Sure, and in the bible Abraham says:

“Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife.” (Gen 20:12) // end quote

However this does not mean incest is justified, it is only another sad example of the gravely twisted sense of morality in the bible.
Even if what you said about france and holland was true -which it party is, even though it’s not quite as simple as you put it- it would not mean incest can or will be an accepted part of modern society.

From BBC News:
[i]
France dropped incest from the penal code under Napoleon - 200 years ago but siblings may not marry, and in 2004 a man who was having a sexual relationship with his half-sister was refused legal paternity of his own child.

In the Netherlands meanwhile, where consensual incest is no longer prosecuted, the legal status of the child born of such a relationship is ambiguous, according to Masha Antokolskaia, an expert in family law at the Free University in Amsterdam.

Sweden is the only country in Europe which allows marriage between siblings who share a parent[/i] // end quote

In 1998 -which was the last time an incest case was brought up in court in Sweden- A 2 year old child was put in a foster home after it’s parents had married and gone public with their relationship. The parents were cousins and the courts motivation was the safety of the child.

While some countries laws may have it legal/equivocal to have a relationship with a relative there is no country that I am aware of -including Sweden, France and Holland- where incest couples are allowed to marry or have children.

Again I would like to raise the issue of the biology involved. If the negative attitude toward incest had merely been the superstition of religion inherited through socialization I would agree with you. Things such as homosexuality is to me completely natural because it is in no way harmful and the only reason people ever thought badly of it was because some old book said so. However incest is not comparable to homosexuality. Incest is against nature and the reason why is purely based on scientific fact.

From Frank B. Livingstone’s Genetics, Ecology, and the Origins of Incest and Exogamy:

Inbreeding does not directly lead to congenital birth defects per se but it leads to an increase in the frequency of homozygotes. An increase in homozygotes has diverging effects. A homozygote encoding a congenital birth defect will produce children with birth defects, but homozygotes that do not encode for congenital birth defects will decrease the number of carriers in a population. // end quote

Furthermore some geneticists have of late put the risk of producing a disabled child as high as 50%. An example of that is Human Gentics Prof. Kuntzer of the Humboldt university in Berlin. He is interviewed in this video from CNN.

20

Not really true. Natural taboo arises in all cultures regarding this issue. Unless you’re lumping in Polynesians from 10,000 bc, Australian and South American tribes, etc, with the ‘Bronze Age’ of Western Europe, it doesn’t follow.

To go back even further (really an example from current observation but shows how fundamental and ingrained the taboo is):

Bonobos are a close relative to Chimpanzee’s in which the main cooperative/communicative social interaction is sexual congress. The males jerk each other off, the women engage in oral sex with any gender, there is no pair-bonding. Everyone diddles everyone else, and often the gestures can be read into as more physical forms of basic communication: ‘Please’, ‘thanks’, and ‘sorry’

Bonobos are by all accounts peaceful and pleasant creatures (much unlike their warlike cousins, the chimps).

Despite this wild orgiastic hippie lifestyle they espouse, there is one taboo: A mother will never engage in any relations with her son. Granted, this isn’t the full extent of what we would consider ‘incest’, but it illumines the point that this kind of taboo arises naturally when negative effects are commonly seen resulting from a particular act. It doesn’t require something so cognitively explicit as a dowry.