you can never be sure that they are actually freely consenting.
They’re adults. That’s all you need to know.
Also, not condoning grooming or whatever.
Comment on Anon files a lawsuit
it_depends_man@lemmy.world 5 hours agoThere are three reasons against incest:
- culture
- genetics
- it is impossible to rule out power dynamics and grooming. If they were freely consenting adults it wouldn’t be bad from this point alone, but you can never be sure that they are actually freely consenting.
unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 3 hours ago
Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 hours ago
Sure, people can just be that weird, and maybe most instances are, but any time you’re dealing with a situation where someone is having sex with a person who knew and had influence over them during childhood, it’s difficult to say they didn’t push a little too much to end up at this result.
It’s like a young adult dating an old friend of their parents; most people’s minds immediately go to that one time 10 years ago where they both disappeared for an hour in the middle of a barbecue and got kinda defensive about it afterward…
Red_October@piefed.world 6 minutes ago
You’re really implying a considerable age difference here though, and that’s not really implied in either the original fake story or the hypothetical posed here. It’s not like dating an old friend of their parents, it’s more like dating their childhood best friend.
unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 2 hours ago
I must reiterate, I am not advocating for incest. When someone says “you can never be really sure that they are freely consenting”, my reaction is astonishment. Who is that person to judge what any of that means?
Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 hours ago
Who are we to worry about the wellbeing of our loved ones? We’re well-meaning adults in a situation where we can’t be certain they weren’t raped. We might be wrong and sticking our nose where it doesn’t belong, or we might be right and end up being the one person dedicated enough to save another person from a case of grooming. Those cases specifically rely on a person to dig too deep - they wouldn’t be uncovered otherwise.
It’s a difficult place to be in, which is why we shun those relationships from the get-go. Nobody wants to be in that situation, and there are enough people in the world to have sex with that we can afford to say “not anyone who specifically had a hand in influencing what your developing brain considered ’normal.’”
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 2 hours ago
I want you to ask yourself something.
“What is my point? Why am I arguing in favor of this?”
I don’t know your answer to the question and I assume your current opinion is not one that you thought a lot about. It is just a spontaneous thought.
I think that because I am wondering when I read your comment, why is defending the right to have incest for some “fucking weird” people when you were just made aware of the danger of grooming, especially in that context?
unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 2 hours ago
I was initially responding to
You can never be really sure that they are freely consenting
I am in no way arguing for incest. I am not arguing for mistreatment of anyone. Or that it’s appropriate to misconstrue the facts to hide “family secrets”. I am well aware of the dangers of grooming. If you want to go into people’s homes to see if adults are behaving themselves sexually, then you also are deranged.
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 2 hours ago
I don’t think anyone argued for “going into people’s houses to check”.
But the question about “freely consenting” is grooming and power dynamics. So if you are not in favor of these things, what was said that you have an issue with?
Just as a reminder, the topic was what the problem with incest is.
Soulg@ani.social 2 hours ago
I don’t really agree with him but I do not think they’re arguing in favor of it, just going “meh adults who cares go ahead”. I’m favor who be like, no it’s good actually
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 2 hours ago
I think they are trying to make a nuanced take but the nuance is not really there in that specific case, causing them to argue accidentally for something that they don’t agree with. But I could be mistaken and miss something huge and there is an important nuance.
Agent641@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
What about twins?
yakko@feddit.uk 4 hours ago
Twins are creepy when when they’re not fucking each other
ZeldaFreak@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Genetics and health issues aren’t a big topic now, because of disabilities caused by genes. If your jurisdiction allows for example people with down syndrome to reproduce, you can’t argue about genetic defects by incest, as they are less likely/server. Here politicians did switch their argumentation towards protecting the family, which makes sense but only when they grew up as family. The problem is when siblings didn’t know each other, when they grew up, later fell in love and only then find out they are blood relatives, they legally can’t reproduce. You can’t argue with protecting the family, because they never where family. They don’t see them as brother and sister.
In Germany there is a group who is fighting to legalize it. About consenting, there is a different law in Germany, which protects that. In Germany for the age of consent, we have 3 categories (14, 16 and 18). The one that matters in this context is everything under 18. If one partner is under 18, you can’t fuck them, if you have a specific relation like teacher, family member, guardian. Also this only applies to consent. Rape is still rape.
But to be fair, a lot changed recently and being against incest “just recently” (still over 10 years) weakened their arguments. They don’t reevaluate everything that gets affected by court decisions or law changes, if now something else got weakened in their arguments. Consenting incest not between guardians, aren’t that many. It needs a group to collect facts and arguments and then need to present them but that doesn’t even guarantee politicians to act