I’m all up to date with my podcast now after having neglected it for a while… enjoy 🙂
I’m all up to date with my podcast now after having neglected it for a while… enjoy 🙂
My friend over at lilysgardner has provided me with a few links to news articles in recent years here, here, here and here, about just how many children a single sperm donor can sire, at times without his knowledge, and in one of these cases over eight hundred children.
In many of these cases, the sperm donors were assured that their samples would only be used to produce a small number of children, as one article explains:
Sperm donors too are becoming concerned. “When I asked specifically about how many children might result, I was told nobody knows for sure, but that five would be a safe estimate,” says a sperm donor in Texas who asked his name be withheld because of privacy concerns. “I was told that it would be very rare for a donor to have more than 10 children.”
He later discovered in the Donor Sibling Registry that some donors had dozens of children listed.
Personally, I think this is very unethical behavior on the part of the Sperm Banks. They should be honest with their donors about how many children they are likely to be producing in this way.
Another article says:
“There are no rules or regulations about donor identification, testing donors, monitoring numbers of children or medical records,” Kramer said. “No one is watching. There are no laws.
“They recruit young college kids with no education and no counseling for the donors,” she said. “They are lied to and told there will never be any more than 10 kids out there. They don’t keep track.”
Again, that’s awful. There definitely needs to be more regulation of the industry.
I can fully understand a donors desire for privacy, and at the same time I can also fully understand a donor childs desire to know at least in the basic, who their biological father is. After all, everyone has the right to know who their biological family are… right? I am of the belief that it would be better if at the very least the sperm donors were asked a series of family health questions and perhaps provide blood tests so that the recipients of the sperm know about his genetic health and any potential inheritable diseases. This kind of information is vital for the resulting child who may need this information for their own medical files.
Interestingly, many families choose not to tell their kids that they were conceived in this way. This is understandable because the sperm donor is just that, a donor, not the man helping to raise the child. But at the same time it is withholding the truth from the child, as I have said, everyone has the right to know their own parentage.
So, what does any of this have to do with the subject of my blog? Quite a lot actually. One of these articles states:
The same sperm donor should not be used to create so many children because of the risk that two of the offpsring will unwittingly meet and start a family of their own, which could cause serious genetic problems in their children.
This can and does happen, it’s called ‘accidental incest’. As we have already explored onanother essay on my blog, it has been scientifically proven that people are hardwired to find similar looking people more attractive. Of course when the Westermarck effect is absent, as it surely would be for two half-siblings who don’t even know that they are half-siblings when they meet, there can be an instantaneous and intense attraction between these two people and they would not realize that they are actually having some feelings similar to GSA in terms of them noticing their similarities. On occasion they may never know, especially if their respective families never even told them how they were conceived. Some may later find out and have their marriages annulled because of the incest laws.
Surely all of the secrecy that seems to come with sperm donation does have it’s downside and it can ruin families. Wouldn’t it be better if all children knew their real parentage to begin with? It would save people from this kind of pain. So if two siblings choose to be together, they can do so in full knowledge of the facts, including the genetic health of their biodad, as this will be ESPECIALLY important were a pregnancy to result. There is an increased risk associated with incestuous pregnancies anyway, but not as high as is generally believed. This said, all such pregnancies should be very carefully considered, and it is better if all the facts are known, including any family history of potential genetic nasties. People can only make sound reproductive choices if they do indeed have access to all the facts that they should have access to.
Transparency in the sperm donation industry is important for moral reasons and for medical reasons. But not ALL of the responsibility is on the sperm banks, some of it is also on the families who become pregnant using donated sperm samples, they should be honest with the resulting child about his or her biodad for all of the same reasons.
So what should a couple do if they do later down the line, after they have married and had children, discover that they are in fact half-siblings? I would imagine this would be quite the mindfuck to a lot of people, a complete and utter shock to the system. The options available to them are clear: They could split up, or they could stay together. I do not think it is right or fair for society to make this choice for them by annulling their marriages or throwing them in jail if they wish to remain a couple after the facts become known to them… remember these are people who have spent many years as husband and wife. Feelings don’t necessarily just vanish because society says that they should.
I think support should be available to people who have gone through the emotional turmoil of accidental incest, rather than condemnation. Support for these kinds of issues is something that is very uncommon in the world, and I think that this community should open it’s arms in support of these people and welcome them. We could surely help these people better than those who know nothing of consanguineous love.
Many if not most consanguinamorous relationships begin in normal families which are functional. However, sometimes family members may become close to each other as a consequence of family dysfunction, as a means of coping with the shit going on around them. Sometimes, this closeness and shared pain leads to an incestuous relationship.
A great many critics would hold such people up and say ‘see, incest is dysfunctional’… but I have some major things to point out here that would swiftly silence such opposition. First of all, nobody would turn around to an unrelated couple who were best friends previously and who got together when one or both were going through bad times. If anything, such relationships are usually celebrated as a triumph over adversity… and yet their consanguinamorous counterparts are dismissed as by default abusive. This logic makes no sense at all.
For instance, imagine a home where the parents are on illegal drugs, and both are so off their face that they cannot look after their kids. As a consequence, the children are neglected both emotionally and physically. Skip a few years and these kids are now older teenagers. There is a brother and sister who always looked out for each other and looked after each other… they had to… the parents were drugged up all the time. This brother and sister became very close, because they understood each other totally in ways nobody else could. This lead to them becoming close enough for a sexual relationship to form. How could ANYONE condemn this hypothetical brother and sister who have gone though so much together?
So now lets look at another scenario… imagine a terrible marriage where husband and wife were more like old enemies to each other. Imagine that the atmosphere was so toxic that everyone in the house had to walk on eggshells all the time, but not because BOTH people were like that, but because ONE of the parties in the marriage had serious mental health problems. Imagine that the woman frequently lost her temper and threw things at her husband. Imagine that she used to hold minor grudges for a decade or more, and Imagine that when she argued with her children, the rows would last for average 5 days of constant screaming and abuse. Imagine that she used to threaten her husband with horrible consequences if he dared to leave her. Imagine that the mentally ill one had three children, the oldest of which was a girl. She grew up to be a typical young woman, unremarkable for the most part. Everyone in the household suffered her mothers rages and insecurities, and the only person she felt she could turn to was her dad, who was also suffering. They became very close and then the unexpected happened… they fell deeply in love. Both fought it for a while, but they had to admit their feelings and it led to an affair behind the mothers back. Neither expected to feel that way, and at first didn’t want to feel that way, and yet they did. How could anyone condemn this couple? Anyone who does is condemning ME AND DAD… this is a part of our story!
By this point, we were BOTH emotionally crushed by my mothers actions and words, he had had many years of it… I’d listened to it since I was born. We sought and found solace with each other. Best part was, we each loved each other unconditionally, and accepted each other for who we were, no pretenses and nobody to impress… that was the best part, my first experience of not having to act with anyone. It always baffled me how mother could treat such a beautiful person as my dad with such cruelty and indifference… now I know it must have been Sociopathy or NPD.
In any case, the major point I am trying to make with this article is that incest is NOT dysfunctional, but it can be a welcome and healthy by-product of dysfunctional family situations. Like I said earlier, if you would not condemn best friends who got together during or after a traumatizing experience, then don’t do it to their consanguinamorous counterparts!
I’m writing this mostly in response to the recent frenzy of articles published in the media around the world about the mother/son GSA couple Kim West and Ben Ford. Soon after the original article appeared, so did many more a day or so later. It’s not the wide coverage of the story that bugs me so much is how it was done and how the public have responded to it.
These articles have mostly harped on about how ‘disgusting’ and ‘wrong’ it is and how this couple need ‘help’, and have even incessantly harped on and on about the discredited mutant babies argument. These ‘journalists’ and I use this term in the loosest possible manner, did practically no research at all on GSA and filled in the blanks with their own personal biases and ‘common knowledge’. All of the factual information within them came from the original article. That is not real journalism, it is writing a sensationalist piece based on somebody elses (very limited) knowledge and then putting it into print. A real journalist would have done some research, found out what GSA is really all about and tried to understand it before writing the first sentence. That is after all the only way that they could be sure that they were NOT in fact writing articles full of bullshit. Unfortunately that didn’t happen and bullshit is exactly what the readers got.
What to me is most staggering, is that on almost ANY OTHER TOPIC, research would have been done, apparently GSA and incest are exempt from this most basic of journalistic requirements. Personal bias and common knowledge is apparently enough to fill in the blanks where real knowledge and understanding should be.
This tells us something about these people in general, it tells us that they do not question societal norms when they are deeply ingrained. When people don’t question, what choice do they have but follow the crowd? This herd mentality is a disturbing aspect of human nature itself, and one that we are all guilty of from time to time, but it is also one that can be overcome with a bit of rational thought. In truth everyone has a choice, either behave like Lemmings and just follow the one in front, or get off the beaten path and use ones own brain.
In terms of what such attitudes meant for this poor couple, it meant that several people wrote articles full of bullshit about GSA and en-mass condemned them. It meant that the readers were still ill informed and jumped on the bandwagon of hate against them. It’s even meant that they have had to go into hiding because the cops are after them.
Admittedly, they didn’t present themselves in the best light when they were talking about the ‘mind blowing sex’ and wanting to have a baby. However, they do NOT deserve all this hate levied against them which is based on ignorance and prejudice. I would ask any and all journalists who may come across my website to actually do a bit of research on GSA in case you ever need it for an article of your own. Let’s not continue jumping on the bandwagon of hate, all that does is spread ignorance and prejudice. Let’s be part of the solution instead and give a more balanced view.
Oh dear, today we have yet another article in the overflowing bucket of hate levied against us. This moron doesn’t even try to explain WHY she believes that incest is wrong, she just repeatedly states that it is. The level of ignorance of the issues here is absolutely staggering, and her attitude is lamentable, although sadly unsurprising and typical of writers of this caliber. Usually it is customary for reporters of any kind to research what their topic is before presenting their arguments. However, when it comes to incest, apparently none is required beyond looking at other sensationalist news stories and making comments about how gross it is. Hardly the hallmark of a serious journalist, but it does sell newspapers on shock value alone. If it sells, I doubt her boss minds that her work is full of inaccuracies. So, I will do with this article what I do with all of them… give them the ‘Jane Doe’ treatment
Incest. It’s an icky term.
It’s only icky if you find it icky. I personally don’t… so here in your opening sentence is a personal opinion masquerading as fact. FAIL count: 1.
Defined as the sexual relations between immediate family, incest takes place when say a brother and sister or a father and daughter have sex.
Actually, incest is defined differently in different places. Some places include first cousins, where other countries only immediate family counts. Some places include step-relations and adopted relatives, others don’t. Incest is not illegal in every country, and in fact a great MANY places do not have these outrageous laws against it.
And it seems consensual incest is on the rise.
Why is that a problem? If it is between consenting adults and it does not harm anybody then there is no good reason for this to be considered a bad thing.
Just this year we’ve reported on a mother who wants to have a child with her son, a daughter who fell in and out of love with her father, and a daughter who lost her virginity to her once estranged father, now fiance.
So? It shouldn’t even be an issue. These beautiful relationships should not be condemned, they should be celebrated the same as any other relationship between consenting adults is.
Last year Josh Duggar, the eldest child of the clan from now-defunct show 19 Kids & Counting was suspected of incest after being accused of ‘fondling three young girls’, two of them his sisters when he was a teenager. This was also before he was one of the men outed as a user of Ashley Maddison, a dating website for people looking to have affairs.
If these ‘young girls’ were also teens of similar age, then that would not be a problem as it falls under youthful experimentation. If however they were pre-pubescent children then he should have the book thrown at him for child molestation. The incest isn’t the issue, the age of these girls is the issue… or at least it should be. As for being a member of a dating website for people looking to have affairs… that’s pretty screwed up because adultery hurts people. I can understand that some people find themselves in situation where they are tempted and do stupid things, but looking for adultery specifically is clearly very wrong.
There was even an uproar after Lena Dunham released her memoir/bounded book of essays Not That Kind Of Girl in 2014, with some commenters accusing the Girls star of incest with her kid sister, after shedescribed the time she ‘examined’ her sister’s vagina and discovered pebbles buried within.
While the latter example was a bunch of overzealous adults responding to a child’s curiosity (Dunham was 7 at the time the ‘incident’ took place), the others are cause for concern.
You acknowledge that this latter example is not the same as consenting adults having sex… you fail to mention that the Duggar case is totally different from incest between consenting adults. Fail count: 2
Furthermore, WHY should it be a ’cause for concern?’ Mind explaining that?
It seems many consensual incest relationships go a little like this: parent or family member is separated from their child at a young age. Parent or family member reconnect with said child later in life. Both parties ‘fall in love’ disregarding the obvious implication of genetics.
Well first of all, not all consanguine couples want to procreate. In fact a great many choose not to for this very reason, and there are many safe and reliable long-term methods of contraception available.
It is also a fact that the actual risks of inbreeding are considerably lower than you may realize. There is no actual studies on the risk for immediate family, however, there is a study for double first cousins, who have the same amount of shared genetics as full blood siblings. Their risk is 9%. Therefore the risk for full siblings, and for parent/offspring relationships will be around this level too.
Yet even this elevated risk is insufficient basis to ban these relationships. Other groups of people also have increased risks of producing a child with a discernible defect. Women over 40 years of age are at increased risk of downs syndrome… should we ban older women from reproducing? Of course not. What of people who have an even greater risk of passing down a genetic disease, such as Tay-Sachs in which the risk is 25%? Should people with this disease be banned from reproduction or sex? No, obviously. With this information, you can see how INVALID this argument actually is. FAIL Count: 3
The kind of incest you are referring to here is called Genetic Sexual attraction, where two people who were separated from childhood are reunited. This is a bit different from straightforward incest where the people grew up with, or were raised by each other from the get go. The former is biologically incest but not sociologically, the latter it is incest both biologically AND sociologically. That said, the emotions involved in both kinds are similar, and the ridiculous discrimination faced by both groups due to prejudice and misunderstanding are the same… and both groups are sick and tired of being labeled as perverts.
My first question is how? How do you fall in love with someone you know you’re biologically related too?
Very easily and naturally, the same way that anyone falls in love with anyone… it isn’t that different for incest couples. Of course there is the added dimension of the family bond, which in incestuous relationships is the very basis on which the romance is built… this is the double-love concept that so many people find difficult to understand.
You might be wondering at this point about the Westermarck effect. Well that is not present for GSA couples for a start as it requires people to be raised by or alongside each other for it to be present. However, even people who were never separated may not experience the Westermarck effect strongly enough for it to prevent them from being attracted to a family member. It works for most people, but it doesn’t work for everyone.
Sure you get along really well and probably think they’re beautiful, but that’s because they’re family. They are a part of you. Heck, they even probably look like you
Actually, more recent studies prove that we are actually hardwired to be attracted to people who look like ourselves. Who could be more similar looking than a member of ones immediate family? The Westermarck effect supposed to stop people from feeling incestuous attraction… but for those of us for whom it doesn’t work, or is not present because of GSA… that’s how these relationships can and do occur.
There’s even a thread on Reddit dedicated to consensual incestual relationships. Take the 40-year-old uncle who recently met his 20-year-old niece for the first time. He’s convinced the day they spent together was ‘a date’ and their feelings are mutual. Or the person who walked in on his mum and brother in bed together.
I’m aware of the Reddit group, and I am a member there myself. I wouldn’t believe absolutely everything you read on that particular website because there are a fair few wannabes looking for kicks, that said, some of the content is relevant and some of it is true. It is important however that people do have access to such support groups if they are in need of advice or information.
One user pointed out that in most of these cases, where the person is questioning whether or not to act on their feelings, could be a case of Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA). GSA is the taboo topic on the rise that no one wants to talk about. Why are more and more biological family members coupling up than ever before?
I’m pretty sure that incest is occurring at the same rate at which it has always occurred. It’s just we know much more about it, and have access to more stories, because of the Internet. So there is no sudden explosion of incest cases, just greater awareness.
Genetic Sexual Attraction is the sexual attraction of two family members that meet first as adults. The term was coined in the ’80s by Barbara Gonyo who fell in love with her son after the pair were estranged for most of his life. The Guardian reported in 2003, “50% of reunions between siblings, or parents and offspring, separated at birth result in obsessive emotions.” In other words, they feel strong sexual feelings towards one another.
Again, why is that a problem? You still haven’t explained your objection, other than calling it ‘icky’ and using the invalidated mutant babies argument.
Gonyo’s book on GSA, I’m His Mother, But He’s Not My Son, suggests GSA is a result of a ‘delayed by-product of missed bonding’ which would have taken place between a mother and her newborn infant, The Guardianreported.
In other words, no Westermarck effect. Exactly what I was saying earlier in this rebuttal.
Is this an excuse?
People should NOT be made to feel the need to explain their love to anyone. Love is love and should be respected. So what kind of stupid question is that. FAIL count: 4
Should we allow family members to have sexual relationships because they are experiencing GSA?
You should be allowing any and all consenting adults to have their relationships unmolested by the state… family or not, initiated by GSA or not.
Should we stop treating these people, who have found love with one another, like circus freaks when they decide to tell their story?
Of course you should stop treating people like circus freaks. What kind of a question is that? FAIL count: 5
Should we continue to condemn them just because they can’t help the way they feel?
Of course you should! How would you like it if you fell deeply in love with somebody but society forbids that relationship? It’s not so easy to condemn when you think of it that way.
Yes we should.
Which makes you a bigoted arsehole. FAIL count: 6
For one, it’s illegal.
Yes it is, but it shouldn’t be. When consenting adults love each other and want to be together, don’t you think using the law to persecute them is immoral and disgusting? Just because something is illegal doesn’t mean it is wrong, and just because something is legal doesn’t make it right either. So this argument is plenty stupid and invalid. FAIL count: 7
Two, it’s just plain wrong.
Well apart from it’s illegality, the mutant babies argument, and the ick factor… you actually have not provided ANY basis for it being wrong.
Surely even the knowledge this person has the same bloodline as you would turn you off in the first place?
Actually no. In the absence of the Westermarck effect, and with the fact that we are by our very natures attracted to similarity… family members can and do fall in love. Incest does not turn everybody off… it might turn YOU off, but other people can and do feel differently.
How can you leave your current partner for someone you know is your daughter?
The same way that anyone leaves their current partner for somebody else. Would it not be more cruel to everyone if he stayed with his partner, stringing her along, while not giving his daughter the time and love and attention she wants from her father/lover, and remaining unhappy with the situation himself and having to sneak around? Yes, that WOULD be more cruel, wouldn’t it? Much healthier and more honest that he leaves his partner and lives with the daughter he is really in love with. People with integrity do not string people along.
This is something I cannot wrap my head around.
Clearly, hence this woefully ignorant article.
Yet, being treated as circus freaks is not okay either.
Good, finally something upon which we actually agree.
The mother and son who ‘came out’ as planning to have a child together last week didn’t have to go to the tabloids with their story.
True, but courageously they did. They certainly don’t deserve the torrent of abuse that they have received from the tabloids or the public.
They could have led a simple life without anyone knowing their secret
Again true… but why should loving couples have to hide? It’s SAD, it’s WRONG and it’s IMMORAL for society to treat loving couples this way just because they’re related.
But no, they chose to sell their story and in return they have been forced into hiding after police made it clear they could face jail time after their admission.
Yes, they are suffering PERSECUTION for their love. Can’t you see that this is WRONG?
Whether or not the couple in question have a case of GSA, incest is just plain wrong and sometimes there are feelings worth fighting against.
You STILL haven’t explain why you feel incest is wrong… and we are now at the end of your article. People should NOT have to fight against true love, making people do so is the real wrong here, make no mistake about it. Furthermore, before you go off and write more articles full of ignorance, logical fallacies and inaccuracies, I would recommend doing some REAL RESEARCH on the subject. Reading my website would be a good starting place.
Well guys, I promised an update when one was available and here is the latest.
A Clovis man and his mother accused of incest were freed on bond Wednesday after being arraigned in district court proceedings one day prior.
Caleb Peterson, 19, and his mother, Monica Mares, 36, were slated to be arraigned on the incest charges March 11 before Magistrate Court Judge Duane Castleberry.
Instead, both were taken into custody for allegedly violating the no-contact order. Both had bonds of $5,000 cash only. In addition to incest, a third-degree felony, both are accused of violating a court order that barred them from contacting each other after their February arrests.
Well, as I have previously stated, it is a complete and utter waste of the courts time and resources even prosecuting people for incest in the first place. They were consenting adults, they were not hurting anyone. While I can see how this might have upset some people, that is NOT a valid reason to put them in the dock.
Court records revealed under the $5,000 cash/surety district court bond agreement, Peterson and Mares are not to have any contact with one another. The case was transferred from magistrate court to district court. According to court records, Judge Matthew E. Chandler presided over the district court proceedings.
So a couple who were clearly in love and happy together are to not contact each other… yes, this is how heartless the system is. I hope they have an ALLY friend who can act as a go between. It must be absolutely heartbreaking for the both of them.
Also according to court records:
• Police first learned of incest allegations between Peterson and Mares during a response to a domestic dispute taking place near the suspects’ home.
Yes, busybodies interfered and reported them. Let it be known that just because somebody disagrees with a relationship, and just because the two people are biologically closely related, it DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS WRONG. Caleb and Monica deserve to live in peace without harassment, and they certainly DO NOT deserve this outrageous court case against them.
• Peterson, adopted by another family as a child, made contact with his biological mother and moved in with her after his 18th birthday. The record alleges that their relationship became sexual after Peterson moved in.
Which makes it GSA rather than conventional incest, but EVEN IF IT WAS, it should not matter. If two consenting adults choose to make love, what business is that of the law? I would argue none at all, because they were not harming anyone. The law need only get involved if somebody is being abused, this is clearly not happening in this case.
If convicted for incest — a third-degree felony — the two could each spend up to three years in prison and a $5,000 fine.
As I have said before, that is insane. Three years in jail and a $5000 fine FOR CONSENSUAL SEX WITH ANOTHER ADULT, just because of who that other adult is. That is complete madness, and immoral.
Efforts to reach the attorneys for Peterson and Mares for comment were unsuccessful.
Understandable, they probably don’t want to be dragged through the mud any more than they have been already. If the system showed any compassion they might have added a comment.
In any case, the community are completely behind Caleb and Monica, BTW… If either of you are reading our coverage, you can contact me on email@example.com I can put you in touch with a friend who can offer some secretarial legal services in the form of letter writing. I promise that this will be in the strictest of confidence and I will delete your e-mail address as soon as I have made such connection between you. Even if you do not feel comfortable doing this, we are all rooting for you both, and we wish you well.
Here you will find the latest round of crap about GSA, this time questioning it’s very existence. On with the show:
Names are a big deal. Would Marion Mitchell Morrison have become an American icon if he hadn’t changed his name to John Wayne? Would Elton John have become a pop superstar and byword for flamboyance if he’d stuck with Reg Dwight?
Would the irrefutable evidence that Barack Hussein Obama was born in the USA and is a practising Christian have been as wilfully and widely ignored if he was named Barry Harold O’Brien? For that matter, would Sonny Bill Williams command such attention if his name didn’t fold into a distinctive abbreviation?
So? People are entitled to change their names if they so choose in order to gain more success in the world, that’s hardly a new thing.
Then there’s the technique of using neologisms or euphemisms to give unusual behaviour a gloss of respectability or obscure the true nature of awful acts.
Well, just maybe sometimes those ‘unlawful acts’ should not be unlawful. GSA is NOT a euphemism, it is a genuine phenomenon. Yes, it involves two people who are closely related entering into a sexual relationship, it shouldn’t matter if this is brought about by GSA or not, people should have the right to choose their own partners without state interference.
“Polyamorism,” for instance, is having multiple sexual partners of both genders who in turn have multiple partners. You have to admit it sounds a bit better than “rampant promiscuity” and way better than “shagging anything that moves”.
The writer is clearly showing his prejudices here. Polyamory is not necessarily ‘shagging anything that moves’ as he so eloquently put it. There are plenty of closed triads where the three are as committed to each other as a regular couple would be. Somehow I doubt this writer would have similar qualms about the REAL promiscuity that happens each friday and saturday night when people go to nightclubs, get blind drunk, and then shag some random stranger. Promiscuity and polyamory are NOT the same thing and they should not be treated as the same.
(Polyamorics categorise disapproval of their activities as “polyphobia”, which is presumably resentment of people who are getting more sex than you are.)
It is a myth that poly people get more sex, the same crap was said about bisexuals and that also proves to be untrue.
“Extraordinary rendition” could mean just about anything. In fact, it’s agents of country A kidnapping a resident of country B and transferring him to a secret facility in country C, usually for the purposes of torture. And of course genocide is now known as “ethnic cleansing,” a term that suits war criminals down to the ground because you can skim over it without entirely registering that a whole bunch of people were slaughtered.
This has exactly what to do with people sex lives? I agree that this is bad, the same as civilian war victims being called ‘collateral damage’ is bad. This is still off-topic just a little.
Which brings us to incest or, as we now have to call it in certain cases, Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA).
Well, GSA is not a euphemism for incest, it is a phenomenon in which reunited family members become attracted to each other, and sometimes this leads to sexual relationships. So it might LEAD to biological incest (in the case of GSA it is not sociologically incest because they did not grow up together and the Westermarck effect did not have the chance to develop), but the feelings themselves cannot be defined as incest.
GSA is the phenomenon of close relatives who meet for the first time as adults and can’t keep their hands off each other. As in Kim West (51) and her son Ben Ford (32) who have just unapologetically outed themselves as a couple.
I think they probably should have been more careful about outing themselves in this way, as it has provoked a lot of hate against them. People such as the author of this article are contributing to the hate.
Briton West got pregnant at 19 while studying in California. She put her son up for adoption; 30 years passed. A couple of years ago Ford tracked her down and it was lust at first sight.
Three days after they had sex for the first time, Ford told his wife he was leaving her for his mother.
Would you prefer that he string his wife along and pretend that everything is okay? Would that be fair to either him, his mother or his wife? I don’t think that is a viable option, do you? It’s better to leave his wife than to be sneaking around committing adultery. At least he had the balls to do the right thing.
According to Charlotte Gill, the writer of a Daily Telegraph article that also appeared in the Herald, GSA is real, more widespread than we think and we’d better get used to it.
Yes, it is more widespread than people think, people only assume its rare because it doesn’t get spoken about. Ditto for non-GSA consanguinamory.
Call me sceptical. That’s partly personal experience: my family emigrated from the UK when I was two and the best part of three decades elapsed before I met any aunts, uncles or cousins. When I did so, GSA was conspicuous by its absence. Without ever having discussed it with my sisters – for some reason the subject just never came up – I’m pretty sure the same goes for them.
Well then, you’re one of the 50% of people who are reunited with relatives who DON’T experience GSA feelings, good for you. That fact however, does not give you the right to hate on the other 50% who do. Also, just because you never discussed it with your sisters, does not mean that none of them had GSA feelings secretly and never told anyone. People tend not to tell all and sundry that kind of thing.
The evidence that there’s such a thing as GSA is pretty thin. The term was coined in the 1980s by American Barbara Gonyo who went weak at the knees when she was reunited with the son she’d given up for adoption.
The evidence is only thin because people aren’t doing the research, and they aren’t doing the research because they are put off by all the bigotry.
This is both self-diagnosis, hardly the most reliable scientific methodology, and self-serving. (Ford told a magazine, “This is not incest, it’s GSA.” Understandably: in Michigan, where he and his mother are shacked up, plain old incest is a crime punishable by life imprisonment.)
By calling it a ‘diagnosis’ you make it sound as though it is an illness, which it is most certainly not. As for self-serving, not really. Any group of people has the right to label and define themselves, it is part of their identity which should be celebrated, not condemned.
As to the anti-incest laws, life imprisonment for consensual sex with another adult is ridiculous, insane, inhumane and immoral, not to mention a tremendous waste of public resources.
Gill refers to a single study but glibly skates over the lack of scientific evidence: “There’s not a great deal of research into the area because who wants a PhD in incest?” How about anyone wanting to persuade us that incest has genetic origins?
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t, more research is required. In the end it doesn’t really matter, what DOES matter however is removing the stigma and prejudice from such relationships, and guaranteeing people equal rights.
Besides, since when did the scientific community let public opinion influence its areas of research? Each year at Harvard University a committee including Nobel laureates hands out the “Ig Nobels” to scientists engaged in spectacularly frivolous or dubious research. Past winners include a team that explored the viability of a “gay bomb” that would cause enemy troops to become sexually attracted to each other.
Well, leave it to the military to think up something like that, but you can’t make a straight person gay any more than you can make a gay person straight. Likewise you can’t make a consanguine couple change their feelings towards each other, and nor should you.
Gill insists that “those who succumb to GSA are not sickos or freaks but victims who desperately need help and understanding. Their feelings are not controllable.” This characterisation sits uneasily alongside the presentation of West and Ford’s story and their crowing about “incredible and mind-blowing sex”.
True they are not sickos or freaks, but they also are not victims either. They are normal people. The only victimhood they experience is the prejudice of society, and it is society, not they, who must change. Why should their feelings be ‘controlled’… how would anyone like it if they were told that they couldn’t be with somebody just because people say so? Not nice is it, think about what you’re doing and saying please and have a little compassion.
And given the sordid, coercive and traumatising nature of most incest, it seems a little reckless to push a “my DNA made me do it” line, even in unusual cases.
No, incest is NOT traumatizing in the majority of cases, people only hear about an abusive minority because consenting adults have nothing to gain from outing themselves, as articles such as this one and many more hating on Kim West and Ben Ford prove. Most incest is positive or neutral. The only trauma involved is having to keep such relationships secret because of bigotry and prejudice. That is the fault of society, not the couples themselves.
Truth is, we DO NOT KNOW whether there is a genetic element or not, I would say maybe not due to the fact that no ‘gay gene’ has ever been found, therefore it is unlikely that there is an ‘incest gene’. In the end though, it doesn’t matter, these relationships do not deserve such hate and prejudice and society must change it’s attitude.
Like the Phoenix, it rises again, thanks to Stefan, who e-mailed me the link to this new forum provider. It’s hard to believe that I’ve been looking for ages, and then somebody else just finds us one… a nice and very welcome surprise. The only downside is that the forum is in French, but that’s better than nothing. I checked out the TOS and used an online translation program and it simply says that there should be no porn, links to porn, no spam/hacks…etc, and no discussions of anything underage…. all of this fits our requirements perfectly. There is a clause against any ‘objectionable content’ so there is a small chance we may be TOSed, but hopefully by keeping it clean that won’t happen, that seemed to be mostly aimed at people creating hate sites with racist content and stuff. We won’t be doing that so I can’t see there will be too much of an issue.
In any case… join, introduce yourself and enjoy your stay… KINDRED SPIRITS IS BACK IN BUSINESS!
While this might seem like a blatantly obvious statement to us in the community, it isn’t so obvious at all to the outside world. In fact a flurry of articles as of late have been pretty much describing incest and GSA as a ‘condition’ requiring ‘treatment’ to ‘cure’ people of these ‘sick’ feelings. I believe I speak for everyone when I say ‘bullshit’, and I will tell the world why.
Firstly, in order for consanguinamorous relationships to happen in the first place, there must be a mutual attraction between the people involved. This is based on many factors, including personality, physical attraction, having things in common, compatible worldview, good communication, enjoyment of each others company, and mutual love and respect. Of course, this is the VERY SAME recipe for good exsanguine relationships too, which does go to show that when it comes to romance, we are more similar to regulars than they would believe.
What we have different is the family dimension of the relationship, which is the solid basis upon which such romances are built. Far from being a confusion of family roles, it is actually an affirmation of them, in that they are still family AND lovers simultaneously. This is the double-love bond that most people get so confused about.
So what causes people to label us as mentally ill? I think a number of factors come into play, but these are the main ones:
All of the above are very easy to debunk because the flaws are obvious:
So you see… there is no illness to treat. We are normal, functional, healthy human beings with feelings, and we are entitled to have whichever relationships we choose without fear of persecution, prosecution, harassment or bullying. We need to be allowed to just be what we are without all the hate. Society was dead wrong about gays needing treatment, and they are equally wrong about us. All we ask for is acceptance and mutual respect, society has nothing to fear from us and has everything to gain.
I’ve very recently been contacted by a woman who is married to her father and has had children with him, and the state has taken away their two healthy kids, and the children have since been adopted by other families. Sadly, their plight is not unusual, it is a part of the ongoing campaign of prejudice and discrimination levied against our people, and it doesn’t just harm these loving parents, it also harms the children involved.
Can you imagine being a small child, having a mother and father who love you and look after you, and the next minute you are ripped from your home and sent to live with strangers. Now these strangers might be nice, but you still want mum and dad. You are then systematically told that your parents are bad people and that is why you cannot live with them any more. Growing up you get told that they are disgusting perverts and deviants, and that you wouldn’t have been safe with them. You’re told that their relationship was WRONG and SICK and DISGUSTING, and that you’re the product of that ‘disgusting’ union.
What does this do to the self-identity of the child? If their parents were disgusting and created them by disgusting means, doesn’t that make the child feel disgusting? Wouldn’t that then make the child hate him or herself, as well as hate their birth parents? How is any of this healthy for the child? It isn’t! It is stigmatizing the child and the parents. In effect it is telling the child that he or she should not exist, and that he or she is defective. What a terrible and vile message to give to a child.
How the fuck can we justify taking children away from their loving families and subjecting them to this in the name of ‘child protection?’. We can’t! It’s insane, it’s abhorrent and it must stop. Child protection services are meant to be taking children away as a last resort measure, when the children come from homes where there is drug abuse, domestic violence, or a pedophile living there, or the children are neglected or otherwise abused… it should NEVER be a tool to be used in part to discriminate against a sector of society that does not harm anyone, let alone children.
Some people try to justify it using arguments like ‘if children are raised by incestuous parents, they will think it is normal and be brainwashed to be that way themselves’. Excuse me but that is complete horse shit. Same shitty argument was used to in times gone by to deny homosexual couples the right to adopt children or use surrogates, that it would somehow make the children gay. The vast majority if children raised by homosexuals turn out heterosexual, and guess what, the vast majority of children raised by consanguinamorous parents will turn out to be regulars! The sexual orientation of the parent has little or no impact on the sexual orientation of the children, so say otherwise is to be in denial of the evidence!
The other main objection is when people falsely conflate incest with pedophilia. They argue that incestuous people are more likely to sexually abuse children. This is again a false assumption. Pedophilia is when adults become sexually attracted to prepubescent children, it is an aberration that so far neither medicine nor psychology has been able to effectively treat. A pedophile may molest children who are related or unrelated. Those who are molesting their own children are likely doing so because of the easy access to them, not because they are related. It’s a lot harder for them to molest their neighbors children, for instance. Consanguinamorous people are ONLY interested sexually in other adults who are related to them. So then, why would somebody who is exclusively attracted to adults molest a child? They wouldn’t! It makes no sense, the whole argument is a nonsense.
The other one is that the children born are probably deformed because of the inbreeding. Again, so many healthy children are born to consanguine couples and there is no reason to take these kids away. Even in the instances that there are genetic problems, that is STILL no reason to remove the child from loving parents. You wouldn’t remove a downs syndrome baby from a home with two unrelated 45 year old parents would you? Of course not… so stop doing the equivalent to incest couples.
FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILDREN’S WELFARE, STOP STIGMATIZING THEM AND US, STOP TAKING THEM INTO CARE FOR NO GOOD REASON AND THEN BRAINWASHING THEM AGAINST THEIR PARENTS WHO LOVE THEM, AND STOP SPREADING IGNORANCE AND FEAR ABOUT US. THE COMMON OBJECTIONS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN HATE-MONGERING AND LOGICAL FALLACIES.
Really people this stuff makes me so angry.