Lesbian incest!

I have enjoyed sex with my:

  • Mother

    Votes: 32 29.6%
  • Daughter

    Votes: 16 14.8%
  • Sister

    Votes: 58 53.7%
  • Aunt

    Votes: 27 25.0%
  • Niece

    Votes: 20 18.5%

  • Total voters
    108
Etoile said:
*cheers wildly*

I love seeing that sentiment. I know another message board that needs that lesson slapped across the top of every page.

Thank you. This is a thread asking about opinions. I personally feel that that in itself is a good cause to have the agree to disagree policy. Flame wars don't do anything but cause poor feelings:).
 
the reason mother/daughter incest is rare in stories is because it's hard to think of a realistic scenario for such a story. that's also the same reason most mother/son and father/daughter stories suck. it's hard to do without throwing out all realism or making it so realistic that a lot of readers would be repulsed. sibling pairings are easier to write because it's just easier to imagine and think of a plausible reason or situation where siblings might engage in sex with each other. sibling incest is much more common in real life than parent/child for this very reason. at least consensual incest. nonconsensual incest is likely an entirely different story.

personally, the non-consent kind isn't even appealling as a fantasy to me. incest with consent works in a story if it's well written. i've written a few sibling incest stories. i liked writing them. in real life though i find the idea disturbing.

i probably already said that though. whatever. i don't want to read what i wrote before because i don't care.
 
Query

I most raise this question, if the word Incest comes from In-castus=impure by means of the loss chaste, unchaste; then can a sexuality which by the definitions of most cultures throughout history does remove one's chastity.
 
Maester said:
I most raise this question, if the word Incest comes from In-castus=impure by means of the loss chaste, unchaste; then can a sexuality which by the definitions of most cultures throughout history does remove one's chastity.

NO....though I can't speak for most cultures.....incest is rape of an adult care giver.....if you live in the states go to any court house or prison and you will find your answers.

peace.....
 
From here:

incest:
c.1225, "the crime of sexual intercourse between near kindred," from L. incestum "unchastity," also specifically "sex between close relatives," noun use of neut. adj. incestus "unchaste, impure," from in- "not" + castus "pure" (see caste). In early use also in ref. to sexual relations or marriage with one under a vow of chastity (sometimes distinguished as spiritual incest).
 
killallhippies said:
where's the question?
Can Homosexuality really be described as incestuous, since in any culture which would forbid such a relationship would do so because of that culture's dislike for homosexuality and not for because of the blood relation (that is of course as far as I have found)? Incest is taboo because of the problem with genetic isolation, recesive gene, etc. etc. etc. In the times and places in which Homosexuality was accepted, Ancient Greece, Edo Nihon (japan), Qin China, sexual relations between family members who were of the same sex were not an issue.
 
Last edited:
Maester said:
Can Homosexuality really be described as incestuous, since in any culture which would forbid such a relationship would do so because of that culture's dislike for homosexuality and not for because of the blood relation? Incest is taboo because of the problem with genetic isolation, recesive gene, etc. etc. etc. In the times and places in which Homosexuality was accepted, Ancient Greece, Edo Nihon (japan), Qin China, sexual relations between family members who were of the same sex were not an issue.

I see semantics at play here. Sexual contact between siblings is taboo. In my opinion the gender isn't an issue, it's the familial bond. Should that bond be sexual between anything but the parents? In my opinion it shouldn't.
 
Maester said:
Can Homosexuality really be described as incestuous, since in any culture which would forbid such a relationship would do so because of that culture's dislike for homosexuality and not for because of the blood relation? Incest is taboo because of the problem with genetic isolation, recesive gene, etc. etc. etc. In the times and places in which Homosexuality was accepted, Ancient Greece, Edo Nihon (japan), Qin China, sexual relations between family members who were of the same sex were not an issue.
Yes, homosexual incest is still incest - the definition of incest has nothing to do with the genders of the participants, only their familial relationship.

I disagree with you that the societal taboo against same-sex incest is related to the homosexuality more than the incest. In the United States, incest is widely thought to be wrong. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is more accepted. So I can't imagine that the complaint against gay incest is because they're gay more than because it's incest. That sounds like saying that someone who disapproves of gay incest would then be more likely to approve of straight incest, simply because incest "isn't as bad" as homosexuality. Sort of "well, at least they're not gay!" attitude, and I don't buy that.
 
robbie_boy1 said:
NO....though I can't speak for most cultures.....incest is rape of an adult care giver.....if you live in the states go to any court house or prison and you will find your answers.

peace.....

but that is rape and statutory rape at that, not Incest; incest is a seperate crime in many industrialized state, incest is a crime even between consenting adults
 
Etoile said:
Yes, homosexual incest is still incest - the definition of incest has nothing to do with the genders of the participants, only their familial relationship.

I disagree with you that the societal taboo against same-sex incest is related to the homosexuality more than the incest. In the United States, incest is widely thought to be wrong. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is more accepted. So I can't imagine that the complaint against gay incest is because they're gay more than because it's incest. That sounds like saying that someone who disapproves of gay incest would then be more likely to approve of straight incest, simply because incest "isn't as bad" as homosexuality. Sort of "well, at least they're not gay!" attitude, and I don't buy that.

I find it hard to count the States as any basis to measure a line of moral oppinion, I mean lets face it was founded by a bunch biggest prudes in history. Its like asking a Marxist if free capitalism should last forever.
 
Wyldfire said:
I see semantics at play here. Sexual contact between siblings is taboo. In my opinion the gender isn't an issue, it's the familial bond. Should that bond be sexual between anything but the parents? In my opinion it shouldn't.


word. i've heard this argument before and i find it silly. besides incest isn't just taboo because of genetics. when the jews who wrote leviticus were alive genetics were completely unknown, but they still banned incest and i don't think it was because they noticed a lot of birth defects because of incest. they outlawed because they thought it was wrong just like they thought having sex with your step mom was wrong or banging your brothers wife was wrong or animals or a menstrating woman. they just thought it was gross.
 
Etoile said:
*smacks head*

Doh.

Ahem.

Thanks, Wyldfire! :eek:
LOL Wyldfire is better at typo is all. I am of the anything in bed goes..just as long as you are not a member of the family...and that goes for Uncle Dad and Auntie Sis.
 
Maester said:
I find it hard to count the States as any basis to measure a line of moral oppinion, I mean lets face it was founded by a bunch biggest prudes in history. Its like asking a Marxist if free capitalism should last forever.

To be honest I don't see it as a legal issue, I see it as a moral one.
 
Etoile said:
In the United States, incest is widely thought to be wrong.

Some of the studies I saw in college really bring that into a different light. It is about like extramarital sex in classical Rome. While nearly everyone decries it, a surprisingly significant number practices.
 
killallhippies said:
word. i've heard this argument before and i find it silly. besides incest isn't just taboo because of genetics. when the jews who wrote leviticus were alive genetics were completely unknown, but they still banned incest and i don't think it was because they noticed a lot of birth defects because of incest. they outlawed because they thought it was wrong just like they thought having sex with your step mom was wrong or banging your brothers wife was wrong or animals or a menstrating woman. they just thought it was gross.
Actually, there were laws for when to "bang" your brother's wife not strick forbiddence. Most Anthropologist agree that most laws and mores existed because they did just as you disbelieve. Those cultures that did not have taboos against many acts like incest which did not help survival died out. And if you a religious person notice that the hebrew laws are mostly just good advice to keep you culture going.
 
Maester said:
Actually, there were laws for when to "bang" your brother's wife not strick forbiddence. Most Anthropologist agree that most laws and mores existed because they did just as you disbelieve. Those cultures that did not have taboos against many acts like incest which did not help survival died out. And if you a religious person notice that the hebrew laws are mostly just good advice to keep you culture going.


are you high?
 
Maester said:
Actually, there were laws for when to "bang" your brother's wife not strick forbiddence. Most Anthropologist agree that most laws and mores existed because they did just as you disbelieve. Those cultures that did not have taboos against many acts like incest which did not help survival died out. And if you a religious person notice that the hebrew laws are mostly just good advice to keep you culture going.

Those laws about the brother's wife usually read when the brother is dead.
 
Wyldfire said:
To be honest I don't see it as a legal issue, I see it as a moral one.
I am talking from a moral one, Yanks have a tradition of sticking their "holier than thou" noses in everyone elses buisness. Not to mention I think there are some definite inconsistancies in the American Philosophy "let's protect marriage by making it unconstitutional for people who are in love to marry," "protect the unborn child but kill the infidel," "kill the fetus, and save the serial-killer," and my favorite "democracy and freedom of speech for everyone, unless they disagree with us" I am not talking about whether it is a codified issue, I just think Americans are far too conservitive to be used as a moral base line.

but I could be wrong.
 
Maester said:
I am talking from a moral one, Yanks have a tradition of sticking their "holier than thou" noses in everyone elses buisness. Not to mention I think there are some definite inconsistancies in the American Philosophy "let's protect marriage by making it unconstitutional for people who are in love to marry," "protect the unborn child but kill the infidel," "kill the fetus, and save the serial-killer," and my favorite "democracy and freedom of speech for everyone, unless they disagree with us" I am not talking about whether it is a codified issue, I just think Americans are far too conservitive to be used as a moral base line.

but I could be wrong.

So sorry but you're talking to a bunch of "Yanks" I do believe. I'm not going to even start on some of the topics you bring up because this isn't the thread to debate them. I don't really care where you are from or anything, I just think it's morally wrong for sex to be anywhere in the family besides the parents. And by the way, I'm poly. where does that fit into the discussion? I have a legal husband and an emotional wife.
 
Back
Top