| Author | Message |
|---|
Stripey-Stripes.
Motor Baby
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 804 | August 5th, 2007 at 06:54am
Fezzik:streaks in the sky.: Perhaps, but not necessarily. What if it is a family that encourages incestual relationships to "keep the blood pure" or whatever nonsense?
But who would do that? With what we know about genetics, no one in their right mind is going to encourage incest. And if a family did, or if they were arranging marriages between cousins or whatever - well, that wouldn't be consensual, would it? In modern society, incest is so taboo and looked down on that one couple doing it would be rare enough; the chances of their descendants wanting to be together as well would be fairly astronomical. I mean, how many people in the world are attracted to their brother?
Yea, just because the mom and dad are blood related doesn't mean that some mutant gene that automatically makes you attracted to your sibling is going to pop up. We're talking like this is a common occurrence, but I can't think of anybody I've even HEARD of that has had any kind of relation with a family member.
Jerry Springer doesn't count.
No one worries about the purity of their blood anymore, this isn't Harry Potter...we don't have maniacs wandering the streets asking to see your family tree. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 5th, 2007 at 09:04am Fezzik:
But who would do that? With what we know about genetics, no one in their right mind is going to encourage incest. And if a family did, or if they were arranging marriages between cousins or whatever - well, that wouldn't be consensual, would it? In modern society, incest is so taboo and looked down on that one couple doing it would be rare enough; the chances of their descendants wanting to be together as well would be fairly astronomical. I mean, how many people in the world are attracted to their brother?
Modern society? There are many many many societies throughout the world, many of whom practice marriage rituals that seem very strange or harmful to Western society, which is what I'm thinking you mean by "modern society. There are a good many societies where incest is not taboo, among other things we would think taboo.
You might say, well that's them, I'm talking about THIS society. But what about these people who immigrate to the United States and western Europe and bring their practices with them? Then, incest and all these other practices become our problem. Saying "nobody in their right mind" would do such and such is rarely an effective argument, because different people come from different perspectives and what seems of crazy to you, may seem of perfectly sound mind to them.
Not to mention, some people are just not in their right minds. |
Stripey-Stripes.
Motor Baby
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 804 | August 5th, 2007 at 11:08am ^^But I doubt that it's going to become a problem.
It hasn't so far. I highly doubt there will be a mad rush to impregnate/be impregnated by by a sibling/cousin/parent. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 5th, 2007 at 11:17am jocee;Spam Queen:^^But I doubt that it's going to become a problem.
It hasn't so far. I highly doubt there will be a mad rush to impregnate/be impregnated by by a sibling/cousin/parent. Arranged marriages to relatives happen more often than you think, even in the United States. Especially with the influx of Indian and other Eastern immigrants to the country. Often times, women get the short end of the deal and end up stuck in oppressive marriages. Then there's bride burning because of dowry miscommunication, which I don't even want to get into.
You may not be aware of these practices, but I assure you, they go on a lot more frequently than you might think. Even here. Besides, even if it's were not happening in the wast, it should still be of concern to us. One world. |
Fezzik
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2748 | August 5th, 2007 at 03:49pm streaks in the sky.: Modern society? There are many many many societies throughout the world, many of whom practice marriage rituals that seem very strange or harmful to Western society, which is what I'm thinking you mean by "modern society. There are a good many societies where incest is not taboo, among other things we would think taboo.
You might say, well that's them, I'm talking about THIS society. But what about these people who immigrate to the United States and western Europe and bring their practices with them? Then, incest and all these other practices become our problem. Saying "nobody in their right mind" would do such and such is rarely an effective argument, because different people come from different perspectives and what seems of crazy to you, may seem of perfectly sound mind to them.
Not to mention, some people are just not in their right minds.
Any society that encourages incest is pretty obviously uneducated and ignorant. So, let me amend my statement: no educated person in their right mind would encourage incest. And again - arranged marriages don't fall under the category of consensual, so that point is irrelevant to this discussion.
What those people need is education, not laws banning their traditions and practices. It would be far better for people to come to the conclusion that what they're doing is harmful to themselves and their society as a whole than to be forced to stop.
And I doubt very much we have to worry about pro-incest people immigrating into America; especially with immigration the way it is now, most people from countries that would support incest (and I'm basing this on the reasoning that they would have to be very poor, underdeveloped countries) wouldn't have the money to sneak into this country, let alone come legally. Anyone who did have that kind of money would also have the education to know the effects of multiple generations of incest. Besides, people here and in most developed countries are so fiercely disgusted by incest that it's not as though there'd be a mass jumping of ship if a small number of incest-supporters entered the country. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 5th, 2007 at 05:32pm Fezzik:
Any society that encourages incest is pretty obviously uneducated and ignorant. So, let me amend my statement: no educated person in their right mind would encourage incest. And again - arranged marriages don't fall under the category of consensual, so that point is irrelevant to this discussion.
What those people need is education, not laws banning their traditions and practices. It would be far better for people to come to the conclusion that what they're doing is harmful to themselves and their society as a whole than to be forced to stop.
And I doubt very much we have to worry about pro-incest people immigrating into America; especially with immigration the way it is now, most people from countries that would support incest (and I'm basing this on the reasoning that they would have to be very poor, underdeveloped countries) wouldn't have the money to sneak into this country, let alone come legally. Anyone who did have that kind of money would also have the education to know the effects of multiple generations of incest. Besides, people here and in most developed countries are so fiercely disgusted by incest that it's not as though there'd be a mass jumping of ship if a small number of incest-supporters entered the country.
Actually, arranged marriages can be consensual in the sense that the bride or groom has a say in the mater and a right to opt out. This is one of the more fortunate scenarios. But yes, that's somewhat irrelevant.
Trying to turn an entire society away from a practice that I would assume has a long and established place in their culture is not only extremely hard but possibly risky. What if the more hard-lined traditionalists decide they don't want foreigners in their country trying to re-program their people, and take action. Physical action. What's the huge difference between banning primitive practices and discouraging them, you're still trying to replace their values with your own. Why not make it a law that would deter many more people much faster, than say, introducing some educational program on why incest is bad. One of the most effective way to change attitudes is to change the law to reflect the desired attitudes first.
Poorer people are definitely not the only ones to practice incest, rich people are just as likely, if not more likely to inter-marry for the whole "keeping the blood pure" and keeping the wealth in the family excuse. And even in the poorest nations, there will always be a wealthy elite. People who have enough money to immigrate, people who will bring these practices of keeping the blood "pure" and protecting family wealth with them. And just because it hasn't been brought to mainstream attention does not mean it doesn't go on in larger numbers than you think. People are very good at hiding their private lives.
You keep saying, "nobody in their right minds" or "nobody with wealth and education". Not necessarily. Old customs and habits can very easily override modern knowledge.
For example: My mother dated a wealthy Indian man a long time ago. He wanted very badly to marry her, but his family would not hear of it. He ended up marrying a first cousin or something. He and his parents were well educated people, taught in great American schools(well, he was, anyways). I'm sure they knew very well that incest is not recommended. But it was a tradition, so it didn't matter. Culture can override common sense.
Sorry for the nonsensical rant. |
Fezzik
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2748 | August 5th, 2007 at 07:37pm streaks in the sky.: Trying to turn an entire society away from a practice that I would assume has a long and established place in their culture is not only extremely hard but possibly risky. What if the more hard-lined traditionalists decide they don't want foreigners in their country trying to re-program their people, and take action. Physical action. What's the huge difference between banning primitive practices and discouraging them, you're still trying to replace their values with your own. Why not make it a law that would deter many more people much faster, than say, introducing some educational program on why incest is bad. One of the most effective way to change attitudes is to change the law to reflect the desired attitudes first.
But, exactly - what you're suggesting is banning incest, right? But the government of a country founded with a tradition of incestuous marriages wouldn't be too keen on making that law, so it would have to be foreigners putting pressure or integrating into the government to have it make that change. That I could see people resisting violently, at least more than outside influence in education - I mean, foreigners coming in making laws banning your sacred traditions? Making a law might deter people faster, but doing things quickly isn't really as important as doing them peacefully; if they've been inbreeding for centuries, the damage is already done. What's another generation going to do, in the scheme of things?
streaks in the sky.:Poorer people are definitely not the only ones to practice incest, rich people are just as likely, if not more likely to inter-marry for the whole "keeping the blood pure" and keeping the wealth in the family excuse. And even in the poorest nations, there will always be a wealthy elite. People who have enough money to immigrate, people who will bring these practices of keeping the blood "pure" and protecting family wealth with them. And just because it hasn't been brought to mainstream attention does not mean it doesn't go on in larger numbers than you think. People are very good at hiding their private lives.
I suppose you're right on this, but I wouldn't really know. But I think a lot of wealthy people would at least have the sense to not have siblings / first cousins marry. What you were talking about with your mother and the Indian man - I assume that means your mother's not Indian? I would guess then that if that man had fallen in love with a wealthy Indian girl, he would have been allowed to marry her, even if they weren't closely related. I know, how many wealthy, non-related families can there be in each race? But my point is that I think in most cultures where incest would be common, people wouldn't be marrying relatives because they love them, but because they want to marry in their race and class, and that's really a horse of a different color. There's a big difference between someone's parents encouraging them to marry their first cousin because they look down on the poor or people of a different race and two first cousins falling in love on their own volition. I don't think it's fair to ban consensual incestuous relationships when the former is driven by something totally different than the latter. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 04:30am What I would fear for, are the people who are sent into those likely third world nations to do the educating. They are almost certain to meet some sort of opposition, it's severity based on how successful the teachers are in their mission. You're probably correct that trying to teach the people the errors of their ways would be more peaceful than having their government ban it outright. But it would likely take a lo more than a generation.
No, my mother is not an Indian. And that certainly had something to do with it, but Indian culture is unusually strict with their marriage practices. Even if my mother was Indian, they would not have been allowed to get married. Different castes, family connections, all these little factors. Sometimes wealth doesn't even play into it.
I was acquainted with an Indian couple who wanted to get married. The man was very wealthy, wealthier than the woman's family. But her parents would not allow it because he was of a lower caste than them.
The reason consensual incest should not be allowed is because it not only increases the chance of birth defects, which means you are putting your unborn child's health at risk, but it causes something called role conflict.
Role conflict is when you simultaneously hold two positions that contradict each other in regards to expected social behavior. Say a man marries his adult daughter. Should he treat her as a daughter or a wife? How does her mother treat her? As a daughter or a "rival", we'll say? How does the child of of the man and his daughter/wife see his father/grandfather? As a father or a grandfather? Even stranger, how does he treat his mother? As a mother or a sister? Such role confusion upsets the social order in a way that is not necessary, healthy, and can be avoided. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 04:31am I space stuff out weird. |
Stripey-Stripes.
Motor Baby
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 804 | August 6th, 2007 at 05:05am streaks in the sky.:Arranged marriages to relatives happen more often than you think, even in the United States. Especially with the influx of Indian and other Eastern immigrants to the country. Often times, women get the short end of the deal and end up stuck in oppressive marriages. Then there's bride burning because of dowry miscommunication, which I don't even want to get into.
You may not be aware of these practices, but I assure you, they go on a lot more frequently than you might think. Even here. Besides, even if it's were not happening in the west, it should still be of concern to us. One world.
But we're not talking about arranged marriages. Which, by the way, I am perfectly aware of.
We're talking about incest. And just becuase a marriage is arranged, does not mean it's going to be to a cousin or other blood reletive. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 05:23am But they often are. |
Stripey-Stripes.
Motor Baby
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 804 | August 6th, 2007 at 06:40am But that's not what this is about.
This is about whether or not incest is right or wrong, even if it is concentual. |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 06:41am And what I was saying about incest played into that. I'm pretty much off the arranged marriage point, why do you bring it back up? |
Fezzik
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2748 | August 6th, 2007 at 04:40pm End on End.:
No, my mother is not an Indian. And that certainly had something to do with it, but Indian culture is unusually strict with their marriage practices. Even if my mother was Indian, they would not have been allowed to get married. Different castes, family connections, all these little factors. Sometimes wealth doesn't even play into it.
Caste, class...my point is the same; that man probably didn't marry his cousin because his parents wanted him to marry his cousin, but because she was the only single woman around who met their qualifications.
End on End.:The reason consensual incest should not be allowed is because it not only increases the chance of birth defects, which means you are putting your unborn child's health at risk, but it causes something called role conflict.
Loads of things increase the chance of birth defects. Yeah, in a perfect world, no one would do anything that might in anyway hurt their unborn child, but we don't live in a perfect world, and, as has been said 8021394810 times, first-generation incest doesn't usually lead to birth defects. Okay, it weakens the gene pool, but if two people love each other and are going to raise their child in a happy, healthy, supportive environment, who am I to stop them? And really, how many people are actually, legitimately attracted to a close relative (not being pushed into out of some snobbish attempt to "keep blood pure" or an arranged marriage)? How often does that really happen? Most cases I've heard of had extenuating circumstances - a brother and a sister who were adopted by separate families, then met and fell in love; estranged first cousins; people who didn't even know they had a half-sister - how do you judge situations like that?
End on End.:Role conflict is when you simultaneously hold two positions that contradict each other in regards to expected social behavior. Say a man marries his adult daughter. Should he treat her as a daughter or a wife? How does her mother treat her? As a daughter or a "rival", we'll say? How does the child of of the man and his daughter/wife see his father/grandfather? As a father or a grandfather? Even stranger, how does he treat his mother? As a mother or a sister? Such role confusion upsets the social order in a way that is not necessary, healthy, and can be avoided.
Well, first off, I'd never approve of father/daughter mother/son relationships - or any relationship where one person holds a position of power over another. People should be equal in a romantic relationship - if they're not, it causes role conflict, like you said, not to mention a whole slew of other dysfunctions.
As for role conflict in a sibling/sibling or cousin/cousin relationship, well, I think that's something the couple would deal with in their own way if they really loved each other. There are loads of strange families out there who don't fit the nuclear stereotype (didn't you ever watch Full House?). |
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 05:37pm Indian society is strange. Sometimes even being in the same caste and being well off is not enough. If lack of other women were the reasons he married his cousin, how do we explain cousin marriage being a fairly common practice in India, where plenty of suitable non-relatives are available?
As a society, we have the right to stop something that could put a child, born or unborn, at risk. There are many factors that can lead to birth defects, but many if not most are genetic and cannot be helped. The potentially risky outcome is preventable and should therefore be prevented. If incest occurs once in a family, there's no reason why it wouldn't happen again, all the more reason for it to keep happening. If so and so married her cousin, what's going to stop her children from being open to the possibility of marrying theirs? Wouldn't they be more likely to? Then, the cycle just continues until you finally do start seeing the affects due to recessive genes being passed on again and again.
You, like many people would never approve of a parent/child relationship. But going by your rationale of "if they loved each other", who are we to tell two adult people who they can and can't marry? As for the siblings, who says sibling relationships are always equal? Many times the elder hold precedence over the younger.
There are many dysfunctional families out there and no need to add more. It would be less consequential to me if the family weren't such an important institution in our society. It is, in fact, the most fundamental institution. Condoning relationships that are more likely(though by no means, certain) to bring about developmental defects on the child, that can cause role confusion in the child(the adults may be able to figure out a way to sort out role conflict, but the task is much harder for a child), that will cause the child to be mocked and scorned by peers and everyone else. Condoning this would detrimental to society, because society starts with the family. |
Ignore Alien Orders
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2026 | August 6th, 2007 at 06:31pm The issue that most people seem to be taking with parent/child relationships is the same issue that I would take with boss/employee relationships, just on a more extreme level. It's very dangerous, psychologically, for someone to be in a relationship with someone who is in a position of authority for them, and a hundred times more dangerous if that person has always been THE authority figure. With a boss and employee, however, arrangements can be made: an employee can find another job, or switch to another department. Obviously this doesn't work for parents and children, but that's not an issue just because you can never erase that connection. Honestly it's mental abuse for that to happen, and as far as I know, the law is allowed to step in in serious cases of mental abuse.
The factor you seem to be overlooking is that most people don't actually want to be in an incestuous relationship. It's not like a secret desire everyone has; in fact it's very rare. That's why I don't see this turning into some big epidemic where every other person has some sort of birth defect because his or her parents were related. Very few people would actually want to enter a relationship with a relative, and then even fewer would have mutual feelings for each other.
|
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 06:45pm Most people may not want to, but many people don't want to engage in certain things. For a good reason, I might add. Just because something is rare, doesn't mean it is acceptable. Social acceptance can and very well may lead to an increase in it happening over time. As I've pointed out before, societies where incest is accepted have much higher occurrences of it than in western society. |
Ignore Alien Orders
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2026 | August 6th, 2007 at 08:47pm I'm not saying that the fact that it's rare makes it an issue; I'm saying that the fact that it's rare makes it so that it won't turn into this widespread epidemic. This isn't like rock 'n' roll or baggy jeans, it's not something that appeals to millions and millions of people and will spread like wildfire. It's not going to greviously affect the human species in the way of deformities, because we have such knowledge of genetics that even if multiple generations of inbreeding occur--which isn't very likely--someone will have the sense to say, "hey, lets not have kids."
There are certain diseases that are prevelant among certain ethnic groups--does that mean that they shouldn't marry each other and have children? Of course not; it just means that they should be tested for these conditions beforehand and, if their hypothetical child would be at risk, decide not to have children, or to adopt. This is similar: if there are risks to any children they may have, they can simply decide not to have any.
|
skystiles.
Banned
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 13229 | August 6th, 2007 at 09:27pm The fact that it isn't a widespread issue does not mean it should be acceptable. Especially if acceptance can lead to an increase happening in the future. I'm not saying that it will become a very common occurrence, but when people are legally allowed to do things, more people will do them.
Ethnic groups who are likely more likely to carry diseases, such as blacks and sickle cell-anemia and Ashkenazi Jews and Tay-Sachs disease, these people cannot help that they carry harmful genes. It is involuntary and just part of their genetic makeup. A woman who carries a recessive gene for Huntington's disease will carry it and may pass it on, whoever she has kids with. No matter who they breed with, there is a chance of passing on the harmful gene, if not the disease itself.
It is very voluntary whether you decide to commit incest and increase the chance of breeding children with problems. |
Ignore Alien Orders
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2026 | August 6th, 2007 at 09:49pm That's not true at all about things being legal, at least not in this case. Whether incest is legal or not, most people will still be grossed out by it. Even though I'm defending it, I'm grossed out by the idea.
I know it's not their fault; my analogy was that you can fall in love, get married, and make the concious decision not to have children if there's a risk of birth defects--many people do.
Again, my point about the frequency of relatives who mutually want an incestuous relationship had nothing to do with how much of an issue it is, just that even if it's legalized, most people won't do it because they just won't have the desire or the oppourtunity.
|
