The rise of incest page 9

215 posts

Flag Post

This reply coming from someone who sleeps with half the men in England.

Slut shaming, really? “My invention of your sexual frequency disqualifies your opinion!” Tsk tsk. Wait, unless you mean you? “This reply” is kind of ambiguously possessive. Hehehe, but I’m just teasing.

Of course you like anything Vika says, you are two pees in a pod. So tell me, I have insulted your lifestyle, are you going to go ape shit?

A few others on this bored. I get up to all sorts of weird stuff myself. I’m not mad… just, disappointed? It’s also a little surreal. I understand people who are ‘grossed out’ or ‘uncomfortable’ or such – comfort is closely tied to familiarity, it’s an imposition to assume that the infrequent is not also going to be shocking. But! You waffle between “Why should I care” and self righteous trumpeting of your moral supremacy. You do seem to care, frankly. I would suggest you care far too much, and have to ask you Why? You seem to have a great deal of hostility to sexual deviancy in and of itself. It’s not something I see very often. Seen a lot of people pay lip service superficially, but not a lot of people actually care. Maybe it’s just the easiest target, and I’m over scrutinizing this.

When you get married, do you want a woman who has slept with several other men? Maybe she had a baby or two, are you willing to accept those babies as your own? I would hazard a guess that you would rather have a woman who has saved herself for just the right spouse, the person she loves. I can actually tell you when women started being free, but then it would be a waste of my time.

Absolutely to the first, I really don’t see it as problematic in the least. Probably not to the second two, not a big fan of children personally. Virginity is special, sure, it represents a threshold. It’s a great trespass, a liminal divide. It’s neat to interact with. But necessary? Integral? No. I don’t see any shame in the sexual act, and certainly would feel sorry for anyone who denied themselves that sexual expression throughout their life. I feel it is enriching, simply, that a denial of it is a denial of growth, opportunity and discovery. Although abstinence has its value in that regard as well, albeit of a different flavour.

I would ask you this. My wife and I have been married 45 years. Yet most marriages only last a few years nowadays. Why is that? Could it be that the past of these people catch up to them and they grow apart? Could it be they don’t really know what love is and are just in lust? Think about your beliefs and tell us you really like the idea that everyone is screwing everyone else for recreation. Do you really want to marry a well used spouse? Now where are those morals?

Congratulations? I would like to really establish here the differences between our two positions. I am glad you have a happy relationship with your wife. I am glad you have your set of expectations, and found someone of similar views, and you two make each other happy. Despite not personally identifying with your values, I don’t see them as something that should be vilified. As for short marriages, I couldn’t tell you, changing societal expectations, changing financial situations? Too much lust being justified through fufilling the expectation of marriage? Sure, I’m sure that happens all the time. I find it weird that you use love as a validation tool. Do I feel I’ve been in love? Yes certainly. You don’t see your denial of other people’s capacity to love as a tremendous, monstrous, demonization of them?

Kasic,
Kasic! You always seem to say things very close to what I am thinking, but always beat me to the punch! Have to start waking up earlier, hehe.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Recreational sex? We in the normal part of America call those kind of women sluts.

And when a guy does it, he gets called a lucky bastard and get high-fives.

Originally posted by jhco50:
What business is it of yours that they are allowed to ruin children’s lives with their morbid behavior?

Techniocally wouldn’t be mine unless I knew them somehow, it would be more the state’s business.

When incest is brought up, it is usually a father molesting his daughter.

But we’re not talking about that because we’ve agreed that’s fucked up.

Sex is something shared by a husband and wife as a show of love.

Well I think we’ve come across the crux of many arguments for you.

Recreational sex is just a self absorbent pursuit.

Damn selfish Giraffes.

Children deserve to feel safe in that unit. They shouldn’t have to be afraid of a parent sexually abusing them. They deserve to grow up and have a normal life.

Which is why child abuse, molestation, pedophilia, etc. are illegal, and no-one one here actively wants to change that.

Some on here would deny that to them for their own abnormal desires.

People are going out of their way to clarify that they’re only talking about adults, why do you still think they’re implying children are also in their arguments?

Adults, hmmmm. When you get married, do you want a woman who has slept with several other men? Maybe she had a baby or two, are you willing to accept those babies as your own?

If I’ve gotten to the point where I want to marry her, I’d have birthed them myself to be with her.

Romanticized as fuck? Yes, but some people are worth it.

Yet most marriages only last a few years nowadays.

If I remember correctly it’s about half.

Why is that?

Some people get married too soon, some people just can’t hold a stable marriage, they marry for the legal benefits and not, for love for each other, divorcing is more acceptable so women (or men) wont feel like horrible human beings for not wanting to be with their horrible human being of a spouse. Lots of reasons.

Do you really want to marry a well used spouse?

I still don’t quite get this whole virgin fascination that you and many others seem to have. It’s a powerful enough gesture, sure, but it shouldn’t be expected. Hell, I’d almost want someone with experience, less awkward flopping on genitals that way.

I realize that morals and values have been watered down to make some feel acceptable.

Imma just mentally replace “moral” with " imposed personal beliefs" from now on, ’kay?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:Oh good grief. We are back to genetic sexual attraction, or GSA? I thought we had sufficiently addressed that and found it to be a THEORY that had very little support. OR, if it did indeed exist…wasn’t all that significant as a “preventative”.

Show me again where it was debunked as something that was not real? TIA

And, as for Jerry Springer, some comments about its authenticity.

Meh, I don’t know about it’s authenticity. Maybe it’s all, partially, or not at all staged. I am convinced they recruit straight out of trailer parks, but I think perhaps they might do some “stirring shit up” to get the best audience/panel reaction possible.


It is “refreshing” to see someone support jhco’s modus operandi. LOL

I still think you two should get together for coffee.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:Oh good grief. We are back to genetic sexual attraction, or GSA? I thought we had sufficiently addressed that and found it to be a THEORY that had very little support. OR, if it did indeed exist…wasn’t all that significant as a “preventative”.

Show me again where it was debunked as something that was not real? TIA

Okay, I officially cease trying to communicate w/ ya.
What we have here….
How YOU got that shit outta what I said is utter nonsense.
Are ya sure ya’re not “channeling” jhco?
.
And, as for Jerry Springer, some comments about its authenticity.

Meh, I don’t know about it’s authenticity. Maybe it’s all, partially, or not at all staged. I am convinced they recruit straight out of trailer parks, but I think perhaps they might do some “stirring shit up” to get the best audience/panel reaction possible.

AND?
Ya are now debunking your own support-point that incest is bad.
Furthermore, the only crap presented on Springer is that such ppl very likely aren’t able to cope well at all w/ most situations in life. Yes, I agree….the idiots Springer uses to “entertain” other idiots probably isn’t the best examples of why incest isn’t a good idea. Hell, the situation there is that those ppl NEVER HAVE HAD a good idea.

So, where does Springer bring support for YOUR point about incest not being a good idea?
.

It is “refreshing” to see someone support jhco’s modus operandi. LOL

I still think you two should get together for coffee.

No thanks.
I have enough of that ilk I am well able to manage avoidance right here in my own “backyard”.
Ya can tell them by their bumper stickers (among many other ways): It’s Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve And, I am fond of this one: In case of Rapture, this car will be abandoned. I had one made that says: In case of Rapture, I’m claiming your car.

But, my huge favorite is: Are you spirited filled?
My other bumper sticker is: Spirited filled? No, I’m a quart low.

Others I like: Have you found Jesus?
NO…I didn’t know he was lost.

 
Flag Post
How YOU got that shit outta what I said is utter nonsense.
Are ya sure ya’re not “channeling” jhco?

Eh, I reached the same conclusion Twilight did – what exactly did you mean when you said, “I thought we had sufficiently addressed that and found it to be a THEORY that had very little support?”

I have enough of that ilk I am well able to manage avoidance right here in my own “backyard”.

Oh the horrors of talking to someone who disagrees with you!

D : >

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Okay, I officially cease trying to communicate w/ ya.
What we have here….
How YOU got that shit outta what I said is utter nonsense.
Are ya sure ya’re not “channeling” jhco?

I’m sorry you find this frustrating (for whatever reason). I was simply asking for you to steer me towards where the GSA theory “has very little support” in your own words. Not sure what good the Cool Hand Luke video is for this discussion, however.

Nope, not channeling jhco. I think very well for myself and always have.


Ya are now debunking your own support-point that incest is bad……So, where does Springer bring support for YOUR point about incest not being a good idea?

Actually, no, I was going more for the Big Picture. Yes, Jerry Springer and most of it’s participants are stupid, but that’s kind of the point. They tend to engage in lower level “bad” behavior, and their numerous episodes of incest are demonstrative of that. These aren’t the sort of people we want to strive to emulate.


I have enough of that ilk I am well able to manage avoidance right here in my own “backyard”…..

Ok, so aside from the religious jokes (or perhaps in addition to them), I understand you do not like your neighbors. Why again are you living in Kansas? I’ve asked this question before, but received no answer. Wouldn’t you guys be happier in a more liberally enlightened area like Berkeley? Serious question.

 
Flag Post
I was simply asking for you to steer me towards where the GSA theory “has very little support” in your own words

I’ve never heard of GSA before, but from the wikipedia page, it doesn’t sound utterly implausible. While I do think the term is misleading (as the attraction is based not on genes, but on presumed similarity from heritability) there’s some sense to it. People are attracted to those similar to them, in both intelligence and beliefs. However, being raised apart immediately puts a damper on this, as different living conditions drastically affect an individual. I’m not immediately shoving it under the carpet as bogus, but I’d need to see a lot more data supporting it before we go anywhere else with it.

I wouldn’t call it genetic sexual attraction either. The entire hypothesis is that genetic similarities will lead to a higher chance of attraction based on extrapolated similarities in intelligence, physical appearance, and beliefs. The attraction itself is not genetic.

 
Flag Post

First, I need to do a mea culpa on the issue of the GSA theory.
Since Ninja has appeared to be on the con side of incest, I was thrown a huge curve ball when she introduced GSA and I (yes, quite oddly) took it to mean that we are genetically wired to NOT BE INCLINED to have sexual attraction for our immediate family. Paint me chagrined.

Most of the reason I wasn’t able to process this as a pro-incest position from her is because of her jhco-ish penchant to seeming endlessly continue to bring up the progeny aspect of incest when we had made strong effort to establish that we well accepted this probability possibility in a percentage that is highly dependent on factors of relationship-nearness of family members and the numbers of continued incidents.

So, onward.

Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:Oh good grief. We are back to genetic sexual attraction, or GSA? I thought we had sufficiently addressed that and found it to be a THEORY that had very little support. OR, if it did indeed exist…wasn’t all that significant as a “preventative”.

Show me again where it was debunked as something that was not real


That is the jcho-ish shit I refer to.
Nowhere in my post did I even come close to saying “not real”
Such is the distortive hyperbole crap jhco spews.

sufficiently addressed = discussed
found it to be a THEORY that had very little support = my opinion based on what I read from her link and a very cursory further investigation on the subject.
OR, if it did indeed exist… = meaning that I fully accept the possibility that it does exist…duh.
_ …wasn’t all that significant…_: do I really need to explain that?
as a preventative. = given the presumed amount of incest that APPEARS—an issue that certainly isn’t much at all “in the open”—of a very low incident level….but still does happen & has much more interest (“porn literature”) a lot more than we are likely aware of would INDICATE to me that such a genetic disposition of prevention of such familial sexual activity (my mistaken position) wasn’t as near causal as is up-bringing of moral instruction.

Furthermore, GSA is applied to the extremely rare event of close-blood family members that we separated very shortly after birth and later reunited; but somehow developed an oddly “compelling” attraction for each other (or maybe only one having such feeling?) that included sexual desire. It is kinda hard for me to find there is much “evidence” in such a small sampling to be able to produce much in the way of a theory. Ergo, of much SIGNIFICANT—on either the pro or con side of our discussion of incest.

It appears that Kasic somewhat shares my position: “I’m not immediately shoving it under the carpet as bogus, but I’d need to see a lot more data supporting it before we go anywhere else with it.”

But, again I say: I feel somewhat foolish for having so 180’ed the (maybe?) obvious. But: there is no fool like an old one. LOL

Now

I understand you do not like your neighbors. Why again are you living in Kansas? I’ve asked this question before, but received no answer. Wouldn’t you guys be happier in a more liberally enlightened area like Berkeley? Serious question.
It maybe a “serious question”; but it is a seriously dumb one. Ergo, very jhcoish in nature.

I have NEVER said I do not like ALL OF my neighbors….be it all of my fellow Kansans or of the very limiting factor of ones that I can encounter in a 15 minute walk. We do have cars here in Wichita that very well enables me to have very pleasant & highly rewarding intercourse.

And, do not like is so fucking subjective that Ninja’s use of it is what so greatly makes me say that is a dumb question. Liking, at least for me, is a matter of degrees. I suppose that factor is probably different for different areas. But, given the fact that I have only 24 hours in a day just like everyone else (meaning I can’t possibly encounter ALL of my neighbors)….and that the several close friends I do have already greatly enrich my life….and that I have family here….and that I have area-specific work here….and that south-central Kansas does have its own good points….and that I’m not one to pull up roots because I can’t//don’t want to handle “Red State” bigots, etc….and that I enjoy lending support to see that political hack assholes like Gov. Brownback isn’t able to complete his ultra-conservative take over of Kansas….I could go on.

But, do I really need to do so in order to show why I think it was a seriously stupid question?
While more eloquent than the bullshit: if you don’t like America….just leave (ring a bell, jhco?)….it pretty much boils down to the same thing.

 
Flag Post

So, their is not much to talk about in this thread. Let’s just end it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

It maybe a “serious question”; but it is a seriously dumb one…..
While more eloquent than the bullshit: if you don’t like America….just leave (ring a bell, jhco?)….it pretty much boils down to the same thing.

I asked a question very civilly, and was told that it was “bullshit” and “dumb”. If you have gotten to the point where you denigrate a simple question, you have lost your discussion skills. I would not impugn you in such a way if you just a question; I consider that quite rude.

And no, it doesn’t boil down to the same thing. What you describe jhco doing is an ultimatum (My Way or The Highway); mine was a query for more information to better understand.

 
Flag Post

incest is a disrespect to each other family and for a woman to close of blood to have childern and come out normal . sex is a bad word it about getting off using people to do so its not about passion something beautiful lust is not bad unless we use it to disrespect someone elses spouce. we all have eurgises but to use them hurt people mame indigust i’m gay and I’m in the middle sometimes men make me sick somtimes woman no sex is better than the other
and i’m not talking about sleeping with both

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Wait, wtf is going on here?

Someone clarify all the poster’s views? From where I’m standing it looks like the thread has degenerated into 1-2 post trolls and ad hominem.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Helltank:

Wait, wtf is going on here?

Someone clarify all the poster’s views? From where I’m standing it looks like the thread has degenerated into 1-2 post trolls and ad hominem.

I wouldn’t really call two troll posts five days apart “degenerating.”

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Helltank:

Wait, wtf is going on here?

Someone clarify all the poster’s views? From where I’m standing it looks like the thread has degenerated into 1-2 post trolls and ad hominem.

Okay, basically, you have all but two or three people who are okay with incest. Then you have those 2-3 people who cannot dissociate incest from pedophilia/bestiality for no apparent reason and are against it because they think incest = all sexual paraphilias lumped into one and constantly attack incest for things that aren’t incest. Then we’ve got 2-3 trolls or grammatically incomprehensible people.