SirChained
Banned
You didn't answer the question. Should dwarfs be banned from having sex with each other?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Incest between consenting adults...
- Thread starter Deified Data
- Start date
- Status
You didn't answer the question. Should dwarfs be banned from having sex with each other?
So, how would you cab the spread of that gene? By restricting relationships between random individuals or by restricting between family? That's where legality comes in. Their are multiple reasons why it would be favorable to a government to reduce chronic heritable diseases.
Vermillion
Banned
1) If it were a choice, there would be a difference in how we see sexuality, period.
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westermarck_effect
Devolution
Member
How does dwarfism effect them? Deafness? With incest it's not that clear cut. With incest you get hemophilia, heart conditions, cancer, and other major disabilities. Do you think that's fair to the offspring and society at large?
Why should they be banned? As long as they are not related they should be able to take the chance........they could have a tall child too. But limit it within the same family and that probablility shoots up.
Sickboy007
Member
Or deaf people with the same type of genetic deafness.
Which tends to happen often, since they frequently go the same schools, etc.
SirChained
Banned
Do you really think legality is what's keeping people from incest or something? That's what it seems like. Do you know of anybody that would probably bang their sister if it were legal?
Westermarck effect
Read it, learn it, love it.
I'm of the mind that incest is inherently wrong. Our biology even tries to prevent it from happening.
And treating the prevalence of genetic defects from incest being comparatively common with 40-year-old women.... those women suffer that risk regardless of who they have sex with, whereas someone having sex with a sibling/parent can simply choose to have sex with someone else in order to avoid the risk. It is not the same.
I really do feel like people are driven by their enjoyment of incest to make arguments for it, as much as they want to put up the front that they're just trying to be fair. Reminds me of NAMBLA.
Read it, learn it, love it.
I'm of the mind that incest is inherently wrong. Our biology even tries to prevent it from happening.
And treating the prevalence of genetic defects from incest being comparatively common with 40-year-old women.... those women suffer that risk regardless of who they have sex with, whereas someone having sex with a sibling/parent can simply choose to have sex with someone else in order to avoid the risk. It is not the same.
This is how I see it.ElectricBlue187 said:
I really do feel like people are driven by their enjoyment of incest to make arguments for it, as much as they want to put up the front that they're just trying to be fair. Reminds me of NAMBLA.
crimzonflame
Member
Holy crap. Stop making the interracial relationship comparison.
CrocMother
Banned
It is taboo because before birth control technology began to improve exponentially in the 1950s with the invention of the pill, pregnancy for hetero couples engaging in sexual behavior was an unavoidable reality.
We live in an age where two consenting adults exhibiting basic responsibility can easily take measures which reduce pregnancy to a .01% chance, and even then we have morning after pill and in the worst case, abortion.
This is one of those societal taboos that still resonates deeply in us even though the founding logic has somewhat fallen through.
So would you rather ban; among family or among random people? Which one has a higher probability than the other?
SirChained
Banned
You clearly don't understand genetics. If two people with heritable recessive diseases bear a child, there is a 100% chance that the child will inherit that disease, much higher than incest. I'm not sure if dwarfism is one of them, but deafness may be. Even if dwarfism isn't one, I'm sure two dwarfs bearing a child has a much higher risk than incest.
I don't exactly have any statistics on me, but it'd seem that abuse would be much more common with incest than among gays. I know this thread is only about consenting relationships, but the abuse/coercion involved is my biggest problem with incest.
Femmeworth
Banned
I'm okay with incest, as long as the couple doesn't reproduce together.
No, it's not always a 100%. You are the one that doesn't understand genetics. Only if all have reccessive recessive and no dominate allele for the normal trait. My point is the chances of keeping a trait within the same generation are increased exponentially if incest is allowed. So why would you make it legal?
Face it Tiger..
Banned
oh my..it's an Incest Defense Force.
Ship me out back into reality GAF, the virtual one no longer sustains my sanity.
Ship me out back into reality GAF, the virtual one no longer sustains my sanity.
Deified Data
Banned
Joint pain, crippling bone deformities, restricted lung growth and pulminary function, etc, etc. Certain forms of dwarfism also limit cranial development and brain function. It's not that simple. Should they be allowed to procreate despite that? I believe they should, honestly. The same applies to incest.
1) Our view of sexuality is constantly changing, period.
2) Hypothetical effect, doesn't apply to all incestuous relationships (as proven the by the one study it mentioned)
Broder Salsa
Banned
Wish I had a hot sister or something.
It's disgusting.
I'd rather not even know that people support it on a hypothetical level.
If you're arguing in favor of it in this thread, call your parents/friends and tell them. See how that works out. Just say "I don't see anything wrong with incest between two consenting adults."
I'd rather not even know that people support it on a hypothetical level.
If you're arguing in favor of it in this thread, call your parents/friends and tell them. See how that works out. Just say "I don't see anything wrong with incest between two consenting adults."
Vermillion
Banned
This is, for the record, the fourth time the link has been posted, and the fifth it's been mentioned.
Sickboy007
Member
Lots of dwarfism types also affect heart and circulatory system, bones, hormonal problems etc.
Sorry, what's the point then? A clear sentence is better than an unknown one?
And what are you going to do? You said, if i'm not wrong, that they can fuck but not conceive a child. What are you going to do, fine them? Abort the child? Sterilise them?
I wouldn't ban either, it has already happened with random disabilities and it was horrible and inhumane. It's not our choice i think.
SirChained
Banned
That's why I said two people with the same recessive disease. Try again. And I read up on dwarfism, it is primarily a dominant disease. Meaning two dwarfs bearing a child will have at least a 75% chance of having a dwarf child.
Keeping it illegal minimizes inbreeding and that's a good thing. It also helps prevent abusive relationships.
But I don't even see why this is an issue. It's not like many people are into incest. There's no pressure from the masses to legalize it, which means most people are against incest. I would be interested to see how many incestual marriages occur in countries that legalize it.
Imo if you have a desire to bang your sister, brother, or close family member (who's not estranged) than odds are you have some type of psychological disorder. Our brains are programmed against such urges and that explains why incest is seen as taboo in most cultures. Besides, there are so many humans on Earth, why even attempt to start a relationship with your family member when there's so many other people out there?
But I don't even see why this is an issue. It's not like many people are into incest. There's no pressure from the masses to legalize it, which means most people are against incest. I would be interested to see how many incestual marriages occur in countries that legalize it.
Imo if you have a desire to bang your sister, brother, or close family member (who's not estranged) than odds are you have some type of psychological disorder. Our brains are programmed against such urges and that explains why incest is seen as taboo in most cultures. Besides, there are so many humans on Earth, why even attempt to start a relationship with your family member when there's so many other people out there?
dragonlife
Member
Incest is only hot if both people are attractive. Even more so if it's gay twincest.
Devolution
Member
I don't think that's fair to their kids either then. At some point it's not about being different but quality of life. We've entered into a gray area in which there is no right answer.
See above.
CrocMother
Banned
This line of closed minded thinking has got to go!
Not just on this topic but any topic.
Deified Data
Banned
Once upon a time, it was seen as perverse for a white to marry a black. It was illegal to marry. Their children were viewed as less than the sum of their parts. Some to this day argue that interracial couples shouldn't procreate because "children should look like their parents". It's a totally valid comparison because, at one point in time, interracial coupling was every bit as taboo (if not more so) than incest.
Hmm. I find it disgusting, not only due to the biological problems if the girl gets pregnant, but also because how it's a total disregard for how a family structure should work.
Anyway, I don't know if I'd have punitive laws against it, because how could you really enforce them? Having a child born with problems would be terrible but you can't really tell willing people that they can't have sex.
Anyway, I don't know if I'd have punitive laws against it, because how could you really enforce them? Having a child born with problems would be terrible but you can't really tell willing people that they can't have sex.
That's an interesting statement. How many people here would share their views with their family and friends?
So what is the probability of that happening? Why are you only dealing with extremes? My point is why increase the risk and make it a 100% likely a trait is passed on to a young one? We should not discourage relationships between two unrelated dwarfs.....BUT, we should discourage two dwarfs who are related. DO YOU SAY NO TO THAT?
Sickboy007
Member
There is certainly a personal answer, but i think this is one of these cases where it shouldn't be the law to decide.
The fact that we have removed a lot of the forces of natural selection from Humans is a problem here.
Inbreeding in nature which results in deformities leads to reduced fitness and thus less chance of that particular offspring passing on the genes, but we as Humans on the other hand have the compassion and technology to save, help and raise many who would have died.
The fact that incest is illegal does not stop it from happening and children of incestual relationships (consensual or not) will continue to be born.
If the mechanisms and predispositions behind the incestual behaviours such as overcoming the westermarck effect or abusing your children are genetic, then our nature to help each other could be allowing for this to propagate and increase with each passing generation.
Inbreeding in nature which results in deformities leads to reduced fitness and thus less chance of that particular offspring passing on the genes, but we as Humans on the other hand have the compassion and technology to save, help and raise many who would have died.
The fact that incest is illegal does not stop it from happening and children of incestual relationships (consensual or not) will continue to be born.
If the mechanisms and predispositions behind the incestual behaviours such as overcoming the westermarck effect or abusing your children are genetic, then our nature to help each other could be allowing for this to propagate and increase with each passing generation.
Vermillion
Banned
1) In the hypothetical situation wherein it where a choice, all sexuality would be treated differently.
2) Your argument is that it's hypothetical?
Did you at least look at why it was assumed to exist? To prevent inbreeding. Do we have any similar biological block on homosexuality? No, no we don't. By that mark alone we shouldn't be comparing the two.
Devolution
Member
Fair enough. I just know that if I had some fucked up problems that I could pass onto my offspring I'd just adopt.
CrocMother
Banned
It'd be weird to just say it out of the blue, but if anybody actually asked I would tell them that I have no problem with consensual adults engaging in any kind of sexual behavior so long as it doesn't directly harm another living thing.
As Nietzsche would say, down with pity!
And they would say "So you have no problem with a brother and sister having sex..." and you'd say "Yeah..." and they'd back slowly out of the room.
SirChained
Banned
Extremes? I'm dealing with real life examples. Two dwarfs: at least a 75% chance of having a dwarf child. Should a dwarf have a homozygous dominant genotype, then there is a 100% chance of a dwarf child, regardless who their partner is (dwarf or no dwarf). These aren't extremes, they are real world examples. And it seems like you are not consistent with your cut-offs.
Deified Data
Banned
I've shared my views with my fiance, who agrees. Our consensus is that if we were brother and sister, we'd fuck anyway. Sounds about right.
Broder Salsa
Banned
Yeah, I wouldn't call up my parents saying "You know what? I think it's totally fine to double penetrate!" Pretty sure their opinion would also be "well... that's weird, but if there's no harm to anyone and it's not something abusive... then whatever". But not sure what our parents think should have to do with anything, if we just kept the same moral code as them they would still be as racist as my dead grandma.
Vermillion
Banned
Furthermore, the people using the "soulmate" argument also propagates the ridiculous notion that the only person out there for a person is their family member, or that there's only one person at all. That's ridiculous.
Perhaps because of the likelihood of genetic problems as a result of inbreeding? The social attitudes evolved from there, I presume.
Then there's the fact that spreading out among other members of the human race is better for gathering more advantageous traits in children, etc.
Perhaps because of the likelihood of genetic problems as a result of inbreeding? The social attitudes evolved from there, I presume.
Then there's the fact that spreading out among other members of the human race is better for gathering more advantageous traits in children, etc.
CrocMother
Banned
As long as they are:
A)Consenting Adults
B)Using contraceptives responsibly
I have no problem.
Love this gif so much.
Thank you for changing the background color.
1) You're right.
2) Yes, I'm arguing it's hypothetical because I'd rather see a physiological explanation than a psychological one. However, the results of the study are very interesting and I'm glad you and some others posted the link in this thread.
Technically, the "biological block" on homosexuality is homosexuality itself.
Dumb situation, since your fiance would unlikely be the person she is now if she was your sister to begin with.
Deified Data
Banned
It's important to mention that incestuous relationships resulting in children is not illegal in the USA in the first place. Their marriage is, with the procreation argument used to support that stance.
Your argument is too general. Interracial children were looked down upon because they represented a shift in the societal power structure. Not only that, colonial America had quite a bit of pairings between Europeans, Native Americans, and African Americans in the 17th century. Interracial marriage was actually a proposed way to integrate Native Americans into western society.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked