Real Incest Stories on Literotica?

Hypoxia said:

Children of close-DNA incest have a higher likelihood of defects than other children, but it's still a small percentage...

Click to expand...

It's a small percentage increase for cousins. For first-order relatives (siblings or parent-child), it's very high - as much as 50% or more of births have moderate to severe issues.

Looking at what's popular in the incest category, it's those first order relationships that drive the fantasy. It's all mom-son, brother-sister, and daddy-daughter.

Jose_Rick said:

It's a small percentage increase for cousins. For first-order relatives (siblings or parent-child), it's very high - as much as 50% or more of births have moderate to severe issues.

Click to expand...

Can you document that? I tried to research it online when writing What Is Incest? What I found was... a lack of hard data. The hardest sources I found put the first-order incest figure at 10-30% higher than for the general population. [UPDATE] I just now found this genealogist Q&A:

Q: Is there a higher birth defect rate among babies born to incestuous relationships?

A: Yes, with a strong caveat.

*IF* the family in question has a family history of harmful recessive genes (traits that are only expressed if the gene is passed on from both parents -- a non-harmful recessive gene example is blue/light eye color, or red hair), then close kin producing children will have a higher likelihood of ending up with harmful double-recessive traits in their children.

If there are no matching harmful recessives in the parents (and most obstetricians will offer genetic tests for such things in the prenatal process), then there's no more risk than for any other two people.

Click to expand...

Hypoxia said:

Can you document that? [/url]:

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I didn't save a link or even remember the exact search terms I used. The wikipedia article on incest has lots of links to peer reviewed journals, but some of them are quite old. There are a lot more in the inbreeding article, but you have to wade through a ton of junk to find anything useful.

This article from Psychology Today (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animals-and-us/201210/the-problem-incest) includes a link to a complete article from The Journal of Genetic Counseling (http://www.lotscave.com/files/Journal of Genetic Counseling (Vol. 11, No. 2, April 4, 2002).pdf).

The P.T. story was the first result for this search: birth defects in first order incest

The first link indicates a total rate for disabilities and death approaching 50% for first order relatives. It may well have been where I saw the number. That said, later in the article it digresses into a political discussion of the GOP position on rape law for incest victims. I don't disagree with the article's position on the matter, but given the political slant one has to wonder if the data wasn't cherry picked. Other seemingly trustworthy sources indicated defect rates more on the order of 25 to 35 percent. Of course, not everyone is necessarily including the same kinds of issues in their numbers, so they may not actually be in disagreement.

Incidentally, when I did that search, one of the related search terms was: effects of inbreeding

When I clicked on that, the first result was a link for Scholarly articles for effects of inbreeding. Following that link returned a treasure trove of links to peer reviewed articles, although many of them were about livestock management.

Edited to add:
The quora post by Elliot Mason was a good read. I found this interesting:

As a genealogist, I often warn my clients that if I successfully trace their line back at least four generations I'm extremely likely to find a cousin marriage.

Click to expand...

I'm close to having four complete generations now and haven't found one yet, nor am I likely to - the missing branches are all people living in different countries from one another. It's even better news for my kids. Four complete generations have no cousin marriages. Apparently we're not horny enough to be nailing our cousins. Then again, I've seen some suspicious stuff at family reunions.

Many of the old European families married close relatives. As did rich families throughout history to keep their wealth in their families. Up until the 20's or 30's this practice was not uncommon or frowned upon.

Why is it that poor rural people are made fun of for being inbreds when it was much more prevelant in the Upper classes of society.

Besides how many kids were born to these families that were deformed in some way or had other birth defects.

According to One study I read about an african tribe who lived in a desert and had no contact with anyone else for centuries the rate of children being born with disabilites was only slightly higher than those born in other cultures with similar levels of poverty and medical access.

Ldy_Sea said:

Besides how many kids were born to these families that were deformed in some way or had other birth defects.

According to One study I read about an african tribe who lived in a desert and had no contact with anyone else for centuries the rate of children being born with disabilites was only slightly higher than those born in other cultures with similar levels of poverty and medical access.

Click to expand...

That didn't really work out so well for the ancient Egyptian Pharaohs. Lots of inbreeding led to a shitload of mental and genetic problems for their lineage. There was a show about this on the Smithsonian channel that I watched earlier today.

I honestly doubt how much of them are real. There can be real incest stories with aunts and cousins, but in close family, it might be all fiction and imagination.
But the question is who cares? We all are here to enjoy the kinky side of us which is mostly buried deep inside us.(At least for me.) I read and RP close family incest stories, but never in my real life has such feelings.
Even though I play father-daughter or brother-sister in the most kinky way, I nver see my dad in any sexual way.

nowat41 said:

I honestly doubt how much of them are real. There can be real incest stories with aunts and cousins, but in close family, it might be all fiction and imagination.
But the question is who cares? We all are here to enjoy the kinky side of us which is mostly buried deep inside us.(At least for me.) I read and RP close family incest stories, but never in my real life has such feelings.
Even though I play father-daughter or brother-sister in the most kinky way, I nver see my dad in any sexual way.

Click to expand...

I agree. I write a lot of incest stories, especially mom son and am always getting e-mails that ask if I ever had sex with my mother, or for some reason the readers think I'm female and ask if I've 'done' my son.

Worse is the ones that start bragging away about how they fucked mommy and sis and when and etc etc... Once I realize that's where its going I stop reading.

I joke around and tell people that if you ever wanted to be cured of writing or reading incest stories then read through the incest is best thread and the posts there. Just on and on with these far fetched ridiculous stories about how they're screwing one or multiple family members.

ON the net you can't prove what's true or false, but the over the top nature of a lot of what's there-and in the emails I get-reeks of smoke blowing to get attention

I see incest as a fun fantasy for a story or role play and I keep them 18 and always consensual. But in real life there isn't much sexy about it, pretty much like rape fantasies, people have them, but you'd never want it in real life.

Jose_Rick said:

It's a small percentage increase for cousins. For first-order relatives (siblings or parent-child), it's very high - as much as 50% or more of births have moderate to severe issues.

Looking at what's popular in the incest category, it's those first order relationships that drive the fantasy. It's all mom-son, brother-sister, and daddy-daughter.

Click to expand...

I remember watching a documentary years ago that said the chances of birth defects didn't increase that much, even if the relatives were very closely related. An expert said the increase in risk was only by a few percentage points. The problems arise if there is consistent inbreeding over several generations, because of the reduced genetic pool.

I should stress this is just something I vaguely remember from a television programme I saw twenty years ago. I should also stress that despite my predilections for incest stories, in real life I think incest is almost certainly a bad thing and shouldn't really be encouraged.

If the bible is to be taken as historical fact, and there is scientific evidence some of the bible stories did really take place, like the flood, then the entire human race is inbred.

Ldy_Sea said:

If the bible is to be taken as historical fact, and there is scientific evidence some of the bible stories did really take place, like the flood, then the entire human race is inbred.

Click to expand...

Yes, but not many people take the Bible seriously as historical fact. Some do, but most don't.

Sorry, there is no evidence of a worldwide flood within the span of human existence. Many local floods occurred, sure, but nothing anywhere near Noachian. And there's no, as in zero, archeological evidence of the Moses+Exodus story either.

RelentlessOnanism said:

I remember watching a documentary years ago that said the chances of birth defects didn't increase that much, even if the relatives were very closely related. An expert said the increase in risk was only by a few percentage points. The problems arise if there is consistent inbreeding over several generations, because of the reduced genetic pool.

I should stress this is just something I vaguely remember from a television programme I saw twenty years ago. I should also stress that despite my predilections for incest stories, in real life I think incest is almost certainly a bad thing and shouldn't really be encouraged.

Click to expand...

The issue isn't birth defects - these are usually developments problems; the concern os with deleterious genes. This is often only a problem when the gene from each parent is the deleterious variant; humans actually encourage inbreeding in expectation that valued characteristics will be increased (animal breeding and royalty are the two main models of this artificial selection).

From a biological point of view, the real problem is homozygosity - both genes the same - because it is a reduction in variation. From an individual point of view, homozygotes are generally less robust than their heterozygotic (different gene variants from each parent) fellows.

Consistent Brother-Sister mating will result in 97% homozygosity after 5 generations; First-Cousin Mating will have the same result after 10 generations. Second Cousin Mating will level off at 43% homozygosity after 15 generations, not much different from Non-relative Mating.

Inbreeding is a question of biology- it refers to genetic closeness between mating partners. Incest is socio-cultural - it concerns mating between relatives who are not allowed to mate. Kinship is a socio-cultural construction, and different cultures have different relatives, so incest often has very little to do with genetics.

Tio_Narratore said:

The issue isn't birth defects - these are usually developments problems; the concern os with deleterious genes. This is often only a problem when the gene from each parent is the deleterious variant; humans actually encourage inbreeding in expectation that valued characteristics will be increased (animal breeding and royalty are the two main models of this artificial selection).

From a biological point of view, the real problem is homozygosity - both genes the same - because it is a reduction in variation. From an individual point of view, homozygotes are generally less robust than their heterozygotic (different gene variants from each parent) fellows.

Consistent Brother-Sister mating will result in 97% homozygosity after 5 generations; First-Cousin Mating will have the same result after 10 generations. Second Cousin Mating will level off at 43% homozygosity after 15 generations, not much different from Non-relative Mating.

Inbreeding is a question of biology- it refers to genetic closeness between mating partners. Incest is socio-cultural - it concerns mating between relatives who are not allowed to mate. Kinship is a socio-cultural construction, and different cultures have different relatives, so incest often has very little to do with genetics.

Click to expand...

So, like I said, the problems only really appear after generations of inbreeding? If it was a one-off thing between two close relatives, that wasn't repeated through the generations, the chances of any problems, of whatever form, wouldn't be greatly increased? (Again, I should say I'm not advocating incest. It's almost certainly a bad thing in almost all scenarios).

The whole birth defects thing was the reason when I wrote my long SWB series which spanned 20 years of an incestuous relationship between brother and sister, I made each of them incapable of having kids.

he hated his father and himself so much he had a vas when he was 18 and she couldn't have kids because she was sexually abused when she was young and couldn't have them.

I did it for my own sense of realism that she never got pregnant through 20 years of bareback sex with him and to any fans who thought she would have or the ones that get off on the pregnancy fetish which is not my thing.

That's the one thing that bugs me about the incest
category. The idea of purposely trying to knock up
a close relative seems like a fantastically bad idea.

Mello_SixtyNine said:

That's the one thing that bugs me about the incest
category. The idea of purposely trying to knock up
a close relative seems like a fantastically bad idea.

Click to expand...

It's a fetish, it's a fantasy. Of course, in real life, it's a bad idea. But this is fiction. I'm a major incest fetish-ist, the thought of it turns me on more than practically anything else. But I would never dream of doing it in real life. It's purely a fantasy. I don't have a strong fetish for incest-related pregnancy, but it is still arousing. It's the ultimate culmination of the taboo, I suppose. Very transgressive. But, again, only as a fantasy.

RelentlessOnanism said:

It's a fetish, it's a fantasy. Of course, in real life, it's a bad idea. But this is fiction.

Click to expand...

It's a fantasy except when IRL fathers, uncles, and brothers fuck their young kin. Yes, incest as a vicarious experience strokes many readers. Not me, although I'm happy to feed others' desires as with my A TASTE OF INCEST cycle. I try not to let too much reality intrude. Same goes for other fetishes. Do wittols (willing wimps, 'cucks') really exist? Do BTB scenarios really play out? Of course, my sensibilities were shaped by such as BIZARRE SEX and S. Clay Wilson comix. Fun to write, fun to read, hell to live.

RelentlessOnanism said:

I remember watching a documentary years ago that said the chances of birth defects didn't increase that much, even if the relatives were very closely related. An expert said the increase in risk was only by a few percentage points. The problems arise if there is consistent inbreeding over several generations, because of the reduced genetic pool.

I should stress this is just something I vaguely remember from a television programme I saw twenty years ago. I should also stress that despite my predilections for incest stories, in real life I think incest is almost certainly a bad thing and shouldn't really be encouraged.

Click to expand...

It's not necessarily always a problem, but a lot of genetic problems stem from recessive genes. That means if both parents have one copy of the "bad" gene, roughly 1/4 of their children will express the defect. If a bad recessive gene runs in a family, and then that family turns incestuous, you're virtually guaranteed to have a bunch of unhealthy children.

Hypoxia said:

Sorry, there is no evidence of a worldwide flood within the span of human existence. Many local floods occurred, sure, but nothing anywhere near Noachian. And there's no, as in zero, archeological evidence of the Moses+Exodus story either.

Click to expand...

There's enough correlation of similar flood stories in unrelated myth systems to suggest that a large and catastrophic flood did occur. No doubt it was regional, or the "known world" rather than actually global, there's no way for people of that era to have known about anything happening more than a few hundred miles away.

Don't discount religious stories completely, the city of Troy was famously presumed to not exist until an archeologist found it exactly where it was supposed to be. Obviously the Iliad was a fanciful retelling of what was probably an actual war or wars, Hollywood does no less with many of our more recent wars. There may have been some sort of event involving Israelites leaving Egypt, even if what actually occurred only resembles the Biblical text in broad strokes. The archeological record is by no means complete.

A lot of religious/myth stories absolutely stink of being made up to "explain" some facet of nature (Tower of Babel, Pandora's Box, numerous native American tales like "how the skunk got its stripe" etc.), but Noah's flood is a long way to go just to sell rainbows, so the likelihood goes up that it was extrapolated from a real event. The Biblical story of Lot leaving Sodom is no doubt a pure invention but again probably extrapolated from a real city that was destroyed suddenly, some have suggested it fell victim to a large meteor strike. Exodus is far too involved to have been concocted from whole cloth, but most of the particulars would have been added over generations of oral history by devout religious believers.

Gee, that's an odd tangent to have gone off to in such a thread. Sorry!

Floods, tsunamis, eruptions, etc leave physical traces. People leave physical evidence. If a story from oral tradition doesn't match the evidence, which should I credit? I dislike heading into Velikovsky-land. There is zero physical evidence of a world-wide flood within human existance. Geology tells.

But enough of myth-busting; back to real incest, which (irregardless of laws) involves close inbreeding. Yes, the biological problem comes from piling-up recessive genes. Even fairly benign cousin-mating gets nasty after a few generations; c.f. the Hapsburgs.

The social problem is IMHO more serious, the result of power inequity. IRL incest is usually the stronger raping the weaker. Some LIT stories indeed deal with that as a tragic element to drive the drama. But readers much prefer the softer fantasies, not the actuality of crushed lives.

Romantic, consensual adult incest isn't unknown but I think it's pretty rare -- as rare as actual wittols? Whatever. We write tales to entertain and inflame our readers. Don't let reality subvert masturbation.

One thing is for certain in the digital age. It's getting harder and harder for people to believe in miracles. I mean, when I was growing up, a miracle wasn't really scrutenized as much as it is today.

Kantarii said:

One thing is for certain in the digital age. It's getting harder and harder for people to believe in miracles. I mean, when I was growing up, a miracle wasn't really scrutenized as much as it is today.

Click to expand...

But it's easy for people to ignore external reality and believe myths. Zillions do.

That leads to my Reality Rant. My definition: Reality is whatever bites your ass. That is, if something affects you, it's real, and if it doesn't, it's irrelevant, thank you. Beliefs may be totally looney-tunes but they don't impact me. However, BELIEVERS of looney-tunes shit can and will stomp my ass and generally ruin my day. The beliefs are fantasies. The believers are real. Oy.

A learned rabbi one said: Bullshit is bullshit, but the study of bullshit is scholarship. (He actually said 'nonsense' not 'bullshit'. I paraphrased.) Most bullshit believers don't bother reading the studies. Pity.

Back to incest. Most of what we read and write about incest (and various other fetishes) on LIT is bullshit. It's not real. It doesn't affect us, except as entertainment. (I have a definition for Entertainment too, which includes participating in ideological, athletic, and artistic activities. Entertainment is how we structure and fill our time when we're not being productive. Reading and writing incest and other fetish literature is certainly useless and certainly entertaining. It's all just mental games, folks -- until it's acted out.

RelentlessOnanism said:

It's a fetish, it's a fantasy. Of course, in real life, it's a bad idea. But this is fiction. I'm a major incest fetish-ist, the thought of it turns me on more than practically anything else. But I would never dream of doing it in real life. It's purely a fantasy. I don't have a strong fetish for incest-related pregnancy, but it is still arousing. It's the ultimate culmination of the taboo, I suppose. Very transgressive. But, again, only as a fantasy.

Click to expand...

Incest stories and fantasies are a favorite stimulus for arousal and masturbatory pleasure for me also. Mother and son mostly...occasionally brother and sister. The best are those that seem realistic and believable and take the time for a sexual relationship to evolve and develop. The ones where the mother sees her son's 10 inch penis and says, "Your cock is so much bigger than your father's. Let's fuck" really don't do it for me.

I agree with much of the foregoing, even some of the foreskinning. Namely, the primal emotional and erotic forces unleashed when imagining incestuous scenarios are unique and intoxicating, but real life incest is a definite no-no. However, I do sometimes wonder if technology may change some of this. First of all, at a certain point it is reasonably likely that human babies will not be produced in the "old-fashioned" way, but rather through hi-tech means some of which are beginning to be implemented now, as in the controlled combining of DNA made safe through gene editing, etc. There is also an artificial uterus in development. In any case, point is, the genetics/birth defects issue may not always exist. Then there are more exotic possibilities such as virtual realities and lives made possible when true VR comes along. Have any of y'all thought about this and what are your thoughts?

Duncan113 said:

... I do sometimes wonder if technology may change some of this. First of all, at a certain point it is reasonably likely that human babies will not be produced in the "old-fashioned" way, but rather through hi-tech means some of which are beginning to be implemented now, as in the controlled combining of DNA made safe through gene editing, etc. There is also an artificial uterus in development. In any case, point is, the genetics/birth defects issue may not always exist.

Click to expand...

I won't argue that artificial wombs for humans won't be developed someday though I first expect to see such for cattle. And we know in vitro fertilization gives more genetic control than in vivo. But I seriously doubt "old-fashioned" babymaking will go away anytime soon. And the genetic risks of incest are relatively minor compared to environmental hazards.

No, as I've said, IRL incest's danger is more social than biological and needn't even involve blood relatives. It's the strong preying on the week. Blood or step kin, parent or priest, it's abuse by authority figures and dominators.

Then there are more exotic possibilities such as virtual realities and lives made possible when true VR comes along. Have any of y'all thought about this and what are your thoughts?

Click to expand...

So you want to build VR models of your mother / sister(s) / aunt(s) and have full-sensory fuckfests with them? Will they know about it? Will their VR models of you fuck your VR models of them? Maybe the VR models could fuck themselves while y'all are busy with other stuff.

I foresee sensory-signal implants linking our nervous systems to the future UltraNet. Call a distant friend and connect your libidos; have total-immersion sex, signals going directly to your brains' pleasure centers, without even having to move. Yeah, the ultimate safe sex, and not too lonely. And if you link to your mother / sister(s) / aunt(s), what's the sin?

But I'd be wary. Why? Hackers. Imagine having your fuckfests hacked. Suppose you're NOT interested in incest, but you suddenly find yourself balls-deep in your mother / sister(s) / aunt(s). Or your chip-implanted poodle.

Hypoxia said:

No, as I've said, IRL incest's danger is more social than biological and needn't even involve blood relatives. It's the strong preying on the week. Blood or step kin, parent or priest, it's abuse by authority figures and dominators.

Click to expand...

And while (probably?) more IRL incest is that sort of situation than not, almost no incest fantasy or fiction uses a molestation storyline, favoring mutual consent scenarios instead. You might come close among rape fantasy stories, some of those no doubt use incest pairings, but those are more the victim full-on screaming and fighting back rather than the molesting situation of the young victim doing as the authority figure tells them and not really understanding what is going on.