Columbia University professor charged with incest with his daughter

[nishant1911]

IMO
laws should be made like this-
(i) first you have to confirm that a law about something is absolutely needed (by some protocol) .a law banning homosexuality is not needed, the same way a law that will ban people have sex with a wooden plank, nobody is getting hurt either way.
(ii) then it should fall in either category-

1.law is logically sound.

2.a law which 99.9%(or any such no.)(not 51%,this isn't democracy) of people on planet will agree upon.
logic -if you are in such extreme minority you aren't normal.
you can invent a way how will you demonstrate those 99.9 people agree on something.
(2 could seem like a subset of 1 but sometimes it isn't)

for approving a law concerning ban of incest you can use 2. and i am sure i don't need to explain why such a law is needed.

 

[civver_764]

The problem is when you charge people with incest you're saying that they're too weird to be tolerated, but when you charge them with rape you're actually showing concern for the victim.

I think that consensual incest relationships can exist and I'll even go as far to say that incestuous marriage should be recognized.

 

[GhostWriter16]

The problem is when you charge people with incest you're saying that they're too weird to be tolerated, but when you charge them with rape you're actually showing concern for the victim.

I think that consensual incest relationships can exist and I'll even go as far to say that incestuous marriage should be recognized.

A father should not only be allowed to sleep with his daughter, but should be given encouragement by the state to do so? Just no. I'm Libertarian, but we shouldn't encourage that kind of moral degeneracy.

And you can believe whatever you want, but you can't do whatever you want.

I pretty much agree with what the person above you said, if 99% of people want a law, and it isn't infringing on the most basic rights, it should be passed into law. And its a rare day 99% would want to take away anyone's basic rights anyway.

 

[nishant1911]

i think incest between first cousins could be allowed for liberty sake and even then it shouldn't be stretched to marriage( i myself remember having a crush on my cousin once) but between parent-sibling it is just wrong and show that something is fishy.

consensual doesn't matter as most likely (IMO) sibling would just accept the sex as consensual or would be too ashamed to tell the truth ,might have been pressured or lured in-exchange of something valuable or child groomed, etc.
something just don't arise out of nowhere ,it just don't fit in cause-effect theory where almost all people are programmed to take sexual relations with someone in family as taboo.
it just shows that either of them isn't healthy mentally.

but ofcourse, criminalizing it isn't the solution as you will be just increasing its appeal (from what i've seen ,among the things in their power perverted will get pleasure from the most dirty one) and it isn't the kind of thing you will hear leaking out of the family business.
well seeing it that way, we can't do anything much about it at all

 

[Traitorfish]

The OP makes no assumption one way or the other.

I can barely find any literature at all about adult/parent incest independent from parent/child incest.
I can't find where the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network http://www.rainn.org/ or Incest Survivors Anonymous http://www.siawso.org/ seems to make any mention. I'll admit that's not really proof. The only thing I have is ancedotal evidence from the previous article I posted about MacKenzie Phillips.

I don't think we really disagree all that much. I think your overestimating cases of true "consensual" incest between adults and their parents by some unknown degree, and you think I'm underestimating it. Neither of us has any solid proof either way as to who is more correct.

I'm not estimating anything, over or otherwise; as I have said, I have absolutely no idea how many incestuous relationships are truly consensual, nor, I think, does it matter. We cannot simply assume from the mere fact of an incestuous relationship that consent was absent, however likely that may be.

Ultimately my position is that reports of adult/parent incest should be enough probable cause for a stringent investigation for possible abuse. I think that in most cases adult/parent incest is a manifestation of Stockholm syndrome as a result of childhood and ongoing abuse. If it is found to be one of the rare (in my opinion) cases with no history of abuse or coercion then I have no case. My intentions are not to impose my morality on society, but to protect the victims of coercive incest.

I agree. Incest is, given the nature of the relationship and the inherent dangers in sexualising that relationship, reasonable grounds for suspicion. I simply do not think that incest should be criminalised in itself.

 

[Snorrius]

It seems that err let's call them famisexuals will be next minority fighting for their rights. Here is what I found on one of the internet forums:

I'm 26/f and in an incest relationship with my dad. Really I just don't see why people even see incest as such a big issue. Sure it's unusual, but then people used to have a problem with gay people too. Nothing dirty about it, incest isn't all about sex you know, it's a type of relationship.

Basically, we're romantically and sexually involved, as well as being family. It is true that religion bans this sort of relationship, but those bans were in place long before the first contraceptives appeared on the scene. I'm taking the contraceptive injection so he cannot get me pregnant.

You're asking to what extent people enjoy having incestuous relationships? We're a very small minority, and one still in preparation stages for our eventual fight for equal rights in nearly every country. Because of the taboo nature of incest, there are a lot of people who might be interested in such a relationship but are afraid of breaking the taboo.

If you're asking whether we enjoy being in these relationships... well of course we do. I for one wouldn't be in this relationship if it didn't feel right to me. I love him as my dad, and I love him as my lover. Basically, I just completely fell in love with him, and him with me. The romantic bond is built on the pre-existing family bond, it is quite a unique type of relationship in this regard because it requires that these two roles to each other remain in harmony.

I realize that this arrangement probably sounds weird to people, but it does exist, and there are far far more normal incestuous people like me out there than the abusers you hear about on the news. I even run a small forum for the friends I've made in the incest communities online, so I have spotted general trends and thinking patterns common to all of us. Aside from my relationship choice, I am really no different from the next person.

She is not different from the next person she says. They have private forums and they will fight for their rights. I believe I heared that somewhere already .

 

[MobBoss]

Meh.

I honestly do not care. It is none of my business what two consenting adults do with each other, assuming they aren't murdering each other.

It's not looked kindly upon by society at large, but it's also one of those things that has happened accidentally (such as with separated cousins or siblings) and no one would even know there is a problem.

I don't care. People should recognize (just as they should recognize when they have kids at a very late age) that there are major risks involved in having children that way; it's provably not healthy. That's the only thing that warrants a frown from me.

Personally, I also wouldn't do it. But my own discomfort aside, I don't care if adults who want to do it engage in such behavior. Frankly it's none of my business and I'd rather it stayed that way.

It's taboo in our society and biologically less healthy when it comes to having children, but it's also quite natural, if rarer than most other things. Cousin couples are hardly unheard of either.

I will also echo some other statements I've read.... why are we commenting on a case if we weren't there and don't know all the details and even the police admit there was consent?

Seems like gossip to me. My reaction is still meh. Someday people will get over this stuff.

I, for one, hope we never 'get over' negative feelings about incest. Ugh.

 

[GhostWriter16]

@Mobboss- For good or for ill (And IMO definitely for ill) people will get over them. I agree with you, ugh.

 

[Snorrius]

MobBoss, Domination3000, are you twins?

 

[Traitorfish]

I, for one, hope we never 'get over' negative feelings about incest. Ugh.

Acknowledging that something is creepy, emotionally unhealthy and quite probably a very bad idea does not mean that one must advocate for its criminalisation. Unless, of course, you consider your own emotive reactions to be an effective determinant of the exercising of governmental authority, which I suggest reflects are a rather erstwhile commitment to individual liberty.

 

[nishant1911]

yeah i always mistake one for another

 

[Cheetah]

Alright. I finally got through all the posts so far.

To me it seems the great majority of posters here agree on several points:

- Consensual sex is good, non-consensual sex is always bad (I know it was already said, but I don't think you need to point out that rape is bad Tf). This includes sex with people under a certain age, as we all agree that very young people do not have the proper faculties to give consent.

- That something is creepy or seems yucky to us, is not a sufficient reason to ban it. (Mobby & Dommy are the most vocal objectors to this. And almost the only two I think?)

- Incestuous relationships have a great probability of being non-consensual, psychologically unhealthy and having at least one of the participants being mental problems.

What we do disagree on, is what laws are needed.

On the one hand, the principle of personal freedom and the allowance to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else stands very strong with all of us, but on the other hand practicality is also an important concern.

It seems the problem is to identify where to draw the line between:

1. Banning incest to protect the vast majority that would actually be abused, to the detriment of the few who would have enjoyed a legal incestuous relationship.

2. Allowing incest on the grounds that consenting persons are allowed to do what they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else, while still considering unwilling incestuous relationships as abuse and rape.

While I could see the point in position 1, I'm not sure how banning incest would make the situation any better for the people who are actually being abused. Point in fact, people are already being abused in incestuous relationships, and the state can only do something about it if someone finds out. Would the frequency and severity of unwilling, incestuous relationships change if it was decriminalised?

Could it not be, that if incest was decriminalised, incestuous relationships would be less hidden, and less ignored, simply because the participants would not feel the need to hide it as they do now? And if that got to be the case, wouldn't it be easier for the state, neighbours and people around the incestuous couple/people, to notice any signs of abuse or coercion?

As such, I am still on position 2. We have laws against abuse, coercion and rape. If something like that happens in an incestuous relationship, it will be a crime whether or not incest is a crime. And banning something because one doesn't personally like it, or because one thinks a broad ban is "just easier" than a law targeting a specific problem, is really not a position I agree with.

 

[civver_764]

Why is everyone just taking for granted that the vast majority of incest cases are abuse?

 

[dannyshenanigan]

Why is everyone just taking for granted that the vast majority of incest cases are abuse?

Because that's what the consensus is among the psychological/psychiatric community. Do you think you can go into any psychiatrist's office anywhere and expect to ever convince them it's okay that your sleeping with one of your parents?

 

[Mango Elephant]

Columbia University professor charged with incest with his daughter

*highfive

?

 

[woody60707]

Why are people bring up a father and daughter? Why not a son and mother. I get the odd feeling that if it pam anderson and an 18+ yr old son, this wouldn't be such an issue.

 

[woody60707]

Because that's what the consensus is among the psychological/psychiatric community. Do you think you can go into any psychiatrist's office anywhere and expect to ever convince them it's okay that your sleeping with one of your parents?

Samething can be said for smoking, drinking, one night stands with crack heads, getting pissed on, ect ect. There not really freedoms if you aren't free to make the wrong choices in life.

 

[Mango Elephant]

As such, I am still on position 2. We have laws against abuse, coercion and rape. If something like that happens in an incestuous relationship, it will be a crime whether or not incest is a crime. And banning something because one doesn't personally like it, or because one thinks a broad ban is "just easier" than a law targeting a specific problem, is really not a position I agree with.

I agree. And as for people saying that a ******** child might be born from incest, welll, I guess we have gay incest because no child could be born from that.

 

[innonimatu]

Because that's what the consensus is among the psychological/psychiatric community. Do you think you can go into any psychiatrist's office anywhere and expect to ever convince them it's okay that your sleeping with one of your parents?

The psychological/psychiatric community is the modern priesthood. They serve exactly the same function and use direct evolutions of the same methods. From the confessor in church to the psychologist in his office, the role has remained the same.

They have their uses, sure. And their abuses also. Personally, I find their whole community despicable and what they are trying to do (a science of understanding and manipulating human beings) an abomination. And I recognize them no authority whatsoever to establish social norms, nor any particular ability at identifying the real norms which evolve within society - quite the opposite, theirs is a failed science by any objective measure. But it will go on, it fits a social niche.

 

[classical_hero]

Why is everyone just taking for granted that the vast majority of incest cases are abuse?

Because the hold a parent has over a child is very strong. You are discounting that. Plus your idea of consensual is extremely flimsy and it will lead to more trouble than what you are willing to admit. There are reason why people in authority have stronger rules regarding them than other people, since abuse can happen when boundaries are crossed, like what we have here.