in future.

[pauraque_bk]

First: I do not have an axe to grind here. I honestly don't have strong feelings about this subject one way or the other, and it's not my intention to offend anyone. I don't want to be inflammatory, I just want to improve my understanding. But I'm going to talk about incest, so if that makes you too upset to argue rationally, you may want to skip this.


A long time ago, a friend and I were discussing the gradual drift towards sexual permissiveness in this society, and I mentioned in passing that I thought that same-generation incest (without having children) would eventually become generally acceptable. She disagreed, but her arguments did not convince me.

So I want you to tell me why my viewpoint is incorrect. Not morally wrong -- I'm not interested in judging sexual morality here, I'm only interested in what you think will happen in society, and why. How does the sibling incest taboo differ from the homosexual taboo? Why would one become accepted and not the other?

Incest is not a universal taboo -- it's accepted in some cultures, in some contexts.

It's disgusting to many people in this culture -- but so is homosexuality.

It can produce unhealthy children -- but between contraception and medical advances, how much of a problem would this really be?

Acceptance of it could result in more couples who are not having children -- but so does homosexuality. Incestuous couples could adopt.

It has a connotation of abuse to many, and indeed abusive incest has harmed many. The same can be said of homosexuality. Where's the evidence that same-generation incest is necessarily abusive?

There is a minority of people who enjoy it and/or prefer it and wish it were permitted, and others who are already willing to defend their right to practice it consensually.

And consider this: A lot of you reading this are involved in Harry Potter fanfic. Incest stories are not at all uncommon in this fandom, and even people who don't write it, read it, or like it (such as myself) have become desensitized to its presence. I don't care that it exists, and apparently neither do most other people in the "liberal" areas of the fandom. Does this not serve as a model of exactly what I'm asking about? Is this not an example of a diverse society observing a minority trend to break a taboo, initially being upset by it, but eventually tuning it out and accepting its presence?

Once again: *I'm not saying incest is good*. I'm only saying that I think the incest taboo's days are numbered.

So have at it. Change my mind. Don't worry about offending me; I don't have anything invested in believing either way. I'll let you know when I'm convinced.

Comments

My goodness...

[dphearson.livejournal.com]

What medicine have you been on?
Well, amyway, I do not think incest will become any more or less acceptable in the future, and here is why:
Travel.
And having access to it.
It has been said that with the invention of the bicycle, the British village idiot has declined, since extended incest no longer happens- the women bike away, as far as possible!
Girl and boys usually play doctor, even have fleeting sexual encounters- but this is part of experimentation. A lot of the 'incest' stories in HP (confined to the Weasley Twins, it seems) connote more than sex- it is about being in sync with the person, of having an understanding of the person- in short, a romance. The relatiosnhips in HP are also an extended form of incest- everyone is everyone's second cousin it seems.
But in reality, most 'harmless' incest is really experimentation- girls and boys can go off into the world and seek companionship from others. Even hill-billy are venturing out of the local towns now, and marrying other hillbillies that are not related to them.
There are very good reasons for people not to engage incest- not the least if which is culural and genetic stagnation, another trait we have seen in HP (and in ancient Egyptian culture).

Re: My goodness...

[pauraque]

What medicine have you been on?

Just about everything in the cabinet, in an attempt to get this horrible cold/flu/cough thing to go away. Haven't succeeded yet.

A lot of the 'incest' stories in HP (confined to the Weasley Twins, it seems)

From what I've seen, there are three main realms of HP incest fics:

Fred/George. Indeed, this is largely romantic and works with themes of deep understanding of another person. Rather like the dubious correspondence between most slash fanfiction and how actual gay men behave, F/G fic may or may not have any relation to the way real sibling incest works.

Lucius/Draco. This squicks me, so I haven't read it, but I assume it deals with child-abuse type themes rather than romantic-type themes. I hope so, at least.

Sirius/Narcissa. This ship existed before OotP, and the new knowledge that these two are first cousins has only added fuel to the fire and brought the pairing out into the spotlight. There's clearly some mainstream-fandom interest in the murky borderland of cousin incest. It's enough to be kinky, but not enough to squick most people. In the real-life mainstream, cousin incest is considered unserious enough to be the subject of jokes.

Cousin incest is pretty easily accepted or ignored. I don't think parent-child incest will ever be accepted. Sibling incest is where the wiggle-room lies, and where the political battles, if they come, will be fought.

And this, on AIM:

pauraque: I see from your reply that you're assuming incest generally stems from lack of available partners?

dphearson: It is...more than that. As an Americorp teacher, I got to see and listen to pretty hairy stuff, not the least of which was same generation incest- brothers touching each other, girls exploring each other. Boys overly interested in their sister's developing bodies. Stuff that made them feel rather guilty, but was actaully part of the development process. All of these kids starting hanging out with people though...
dphearson: And sometimes incest was a power play between an older sibling/younger sibling. Yech. Or mom's boyfriend decides one day the Billy/Suzie looked good that day. Double yech...and try getting the law involved with that...
dphearson: But if you could have your choice between a person you have know all your life and a new, exciting person, even if they live in teh next town/tribe/clan/continent over, I think Humans will always prefer novelty.

pauraque: Everything you've said is true. It can also be said of homosexuality. Kids experiment with their same gender friends, and most get over it and move on. Some don't. Likewise, some people grow up and still prefer their relatives. A small minority, but enough that society has noticed it.

[idlerat.livejournal.com]

I agree, I think incest will become more accepted. Did you see _Lone Star_? sorry if that's a spoiler. But I think that's the tolerant-attitude wave of the future, for liberal types. Once sexuality isn't just tied to procreation, a lot of taboos lessen or melt away.

However, I don't think incest will ever become nearly as widely accepted, let alone practiced, as homosexuality, because the psychological conditions related to the taboo include things almost no one would agree to change. I think the taboo on homosexuality has to do with things like sexism (men shouldn't act like women and vice versa) and related ideas of masculinity, femininity... it also has its own steam; all of which can and should be changed. But I think the incest taboo has to do with family relations and drawing boundaries in childhood intimacy. Those boundaries are going to continue to be necessary, obviously, and I think most people will continue to see those who made up their family in childhood as out of bounds sexually. I once had a first cousin interested in me, and it freaked me out, and I know it was because he reminded me of my father, and that's a big big boundary for me. I think there's always something weird about sexual intimacy between people who knew each other as children, though it's a staple of fairy tales.

Of course many people will continue to be guided by ancient religious prohibitions that they interpret as god-given and not human-made.

[pauraque]

Did you see _Lone Star_?

No, I didn't. Is that a movie?

Once sexuality isn't just tied to procreation, a lot of taboos lessen or melt away.

Quite true.

I think the taboo on homosexuality has to do with things like sexism (men shouldn't act like women and vice versa) and related ideas of masculinity, femininity... it also has its own steam; all of which can and should be changed. But I think the incest taboo has to do with family relations and drawing boundaries in childhood intimacy.

I agree. Another difference is the source: Some people are evidently born gay, but I doubt that anyone is born preferring incest; that's an acquired taste. However, BDSM is also an acquired taste, and those folks have managed to organize and make some headway in advocating for themselves politically. It is easier for gay people, having the pretty good argument that they didn't choose to be how they are, but that argument apparently isn't necessary to make progress.

[idlerat.livejournal.com]

Interesting comparison (BDSM). And good point about what you're born with, although sexual proclivities vary so much, and people seem to have so little control over whom they find attractive (e.g.), that tolerance really can't afford to stand on the nature/nurture distinction, IMO.

_Lone Star_ is an excellent movie directed by John Sayles and starring Chris Cooper. At least I liked it.

[vaznetti]

How does the sibling incest taboo differ from the homosexual taboo? Why would one become accepted and not the other?

Hm. Interesting stuff, and I'm not sure I have an opinion one way or another--I'm just playing with ideas here. And you know, I probably also have a slightly different point-of-view, in that in Greek society intergenerational incest (of the uncle-niece variety) was encouraged, as was the marriage of first cousins, while Roman society had a strong taboo against uncle-niece marriage: so I tend to see these prohibitions as socially constructed rather than natural.

It strikes me that the reason that intergenerational incest is not considered a legitmate choice in our society has to do with issues of consent: that is, a child is not considered able to give free consent or to withhold consent in a sexual relationship with an older member of the family. The same rules apply to sexual relations between teachers and students, or within the workplace, two areas in which our society has become notably less permissive over the past decades. And the power imbalance between the more senior member of the group and the more junior member of the group is held to exist even when the junior member is technically above the age of consent. An unmarried faculty member of, say, 35 who has a sexual relationship with a graduate stuent of 23 might well find him or her self in quite a lot of legal trouble, with attendant social consequences. Even if the graduate student believed that he or she had enetered the relationship of his or her own free will, the other members of the organization might hold that the relationship by nature is one of coercion.

So I think that sibling incest would only become acceptable in our society if it can be construed as a sphere in which consent can be freely given; but if the relationship is believed to be such that the younger sibling would be incapable of withholding consent, the relationship would remain prohibited. My guess is our society tends to see relationships between first cousins as consent-based.

All this to say that I'm not sure homosexuality is the only appropriate comparison, because I think that for many people the issue of consent is tricky, whenever an older sibling and a younger sibling are in a relationship. Maybe that's why F/G is so popular?

[pauraque]

Yes, the issue of consent is probably why "incest rights" haven't followed closely on the heels of gay rights so far. It would probably take a lot of examples of consensual *middle-aged* incestuous couples to break down the... I want to say 'stereotype'... of incest necessarily being an abuse of power. Once people reach a certain age, the age gap becomes less of a concern.

[altricial.livejournal.com]

It's going to take a long time, but I agree with you. All the power to the Pro-Incest Lobby.

[lolaraincoat.livejournal.com]

Um, I this is one of those points at which having an anthropologist around might be useful.

My intro to anth. prof, like two decades ago, said that some kind of incest taboo is pretty universal to human societies - but that who counts as kin varies wildly. So maybe what we´re seeing here is not so much change in the restriction on incest as change in definitions of kinship? Of course I might be remembering wrong and also even if I remember rightly the anthropologists might have rethought this more recently.

But I wouldn´t want the taboo to go away, b/c then all that porn would lose a certain je ne sais quoi, if it wasn´t all forbidden and all.

[pauraque]

some kind of incest taboo is pretty universal to human societies - but that who counts as kin varies wildly

This is quite true. Groups can have large exogamous clans, consisting of people who aren't related to you by blood or marriage in any way, but whom it would still be incestuous to sleep with. And this is a good point -- kinship definitions _are_ changing. Divorce and remarriage has become accepted, and gay marriages are gaining acceptance. The definition of family has certainly proven a certain degree of elasticity.

[daszeria.livejournal.com]

FWIW, I don't think same generation incest is either morally wrong or necessarily bad. My own view of sexual matters is that a relationship is fine as long as both parties are mature enough to know what they're doing; that would accomodate, say, brother-sister incest. The traditional taboo on it largely comes from, I think, the genetic deformities that result from it; but with contraception, that's no longer a problem.

[pauraque]

The traditional taboo on it largely comes from, I think, the genetic deformities that result from it; but with contraception, that's no longer a problem.

That's some of it, yeah, but some other cultures have incest taboos that extend to socially constructed kinship groups.

I don't have a particular moral objection to sibling incest either, and the fact that I don't, and you don't, and altricial above doesn't -- that does suggest that there's a room for the mainstream to eventually come to the same conclusion.

[daszeria.livejournal.com]

"...but some other cultures have incest taboos that extend to socially constructed kinship groups."

Well, also realize that constructed kinship groups are not necessarily artifical in the eyes of some cultures; they simply don't distinguish blood/non-blood kinship the way we do (I'm thinking of Iroquois warrior societies here). A taboo against incest would very naturally extend to every part of a kinship system.

[pauraque]

Of course, but it does demonstrate that while the incest taboo may _originally_ stem from a need to avoid genetic deformities, that can't be considered the only reason it has persisted.

[chresimos.livejournal.com]

That's....interesting. From reading above comments (like, that incest is only wrong in a power-abusive situation). For some reason it makes me think...it seems like moral thought in society is drifting towards consent-based ideas. For example, in the distant past it was perfectly morally acceptable, say, for husbands to rape their wives. We've gone completely the other way. That is, everything is okay as long as whoever's involved consents to do it. If this argument works for incest, how far does it extend? To euthanasia, maybe?

Anyway, the strongest argument for anti-incest to me is the, I suppose, non-sexuality of childhood, or that the family at least should be a sort of no-sex zone. *shrug*

Even though it doesn't make a lot of sense, because, say, if you have an adopted sibling you grow up with, that isn't incest, even though the psychological connection is the same. And if old incest-taboos were only in place because of reproduction - people aren't looking for reproduction in sex, so much, these days.

But maybe incest will never be accepted because, well, if you're not into the incest, and you have a sibling, when you hear about incestous couples, you'll consider your sibling and go...eew.

[pauraque]

That is, everything is okay as long as whoever's involved consents to do it. If this argument works for incest, how far does it extend? To euthanasia, maybe?

Well, the right of a patient to die is certainly a matter of intense debate these days. Morally, I find I must agree that everyone is the master of their own fate, and that extends to suicide. If someone is willing to help you commit suicide because you can't do it on your own, I can't find moral fault with that. Though I don't think I'd be able to assist in a suicide myself. I've talked people out of killing themselves before, and when I think about it, that sense of panic and life-or-death responsibility comes flooding back. I don't want that on my hands.

But maybe incest will never be accepted because, well, if you're not into the incest, and you have a sibling, when you hear about incestous couples, you'll consider your sibling and go...eew.

But many people have the same reaction to homosexuality. They think about two guys together, and then they think about themselves and their best friend together, and go... eew. This is a perfectly valid emotional reaction, but I'm not sure it can stand up as a moral judgement on other people's desires.

It would be interesting to ask someone who's _not_ comfortable with homosexuality (but is capable of talking calmly about it) what their emotional response has been to the recent glut of gay images in the media. Is it desensitizing after a certain point, or does it just deepen the resentment?

[chresimos.livejournal.com]

This is a perfectly valid emotional reaction, but I'm not sure it can stand up as a moral judgement on other people's desires.

Ah, but you said the issue was acceptance, and acceptance is based on many things, whether moral judgement stands up or not. :)

Is it desensitizing after a certain point, or does it just deepen the resentment?

Hmmm. I'd guess that people are desensitized to most things in the media, not just homosexuality in particular. I mean, TV in general is pretty...out there...often so far that it no longer becomes relevant to what you like or upsets you personally. For example, not being a fan of the incest myself, if I come across some movie on the topic, I'll just shrug, not start running around going How can they show this Think of the children. TV, images - still essentially an other, I think, something you can easily dissociate from yourself.

[mcfnord.livejournal.com]

i admit to not focusing well on all that is said there.
i am going to say that if family are "in love" then perhaps it's no big deal to me.
but that's typically not what incest is, at all, and it's the imbalance of power and exploitation in the context of family that makes it deplorable and rightly stigmatized.

it's also complicated if people want to break up.

[pauraque]

it's also complicated if people want to break up.

Heh, I hadn't thought of that. There would be some of the same pitfalls as dating a co-worker -- after you break up, you still have to see them. But with a family member, it would be worse, since you can always quit a job, but it's harder to quit your family. Thanks for the input.