[ SECRET POST #3055 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3055 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 072 secrets from Secret Submission Post #436.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 3 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

The longest rant.

[lb_lee]

Okay, so there are people who try to fight for legal incestuous marriage. They like to call it 'consanguineous' to try and avoid the stigma, and in my opinion, the actual reality of incest. Their argument is, basically, that marriage should be extended to all consenting adults, which sounds all very well and good, except in my opinion, it oversimplifies what incest actually entails.

First of all, I LOATHE using the term 'consanguineous' because my issue isn't and never has been blood ties. It's about family relationships and power. For instance, the grandfather in my family, who attacked at least four relatives that I know for sure, was not actually blood related to three of them. He was a stepgrandfather. If they wanted to, those victims could totally have married him. Still incest, though; he married into the family when my mother was like, eight. For all intents and purposes, he was their father.

So I don't have an issue with consanguinity. It's INCEST. If you happen to get married to someone and then discover you were related (because of adoption, anonymous sperm donor, whatever) I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH YOU. There is no power problem there. There is no pre-existing familial relationship.

Someone trying to equivocate consanguinity with incest is incredibly disingenous, in my opinion. It tries to make it about blood instead of power.

ANYWAY. On to actual incest.

Incest is complicated. The power dynamics are difficult to explain to someone who hasn't been there. Traumatic bonding is a thing; if you abuse someone regularly, sexually or not, you WILL bind them to you. Your victim has to be constantly aware of your mood and danger level, and placate you to keep you from abusing them even more. This devotion (especially combined with the affection one can feel for a relative, even an abusive one) can be mistaken for love. It is not. It is a survival mechanism.

In incest, victims are often encouraged to see what's being done to them as a special kind of love. That it's normal, acceptable, that people did it in X and Y and Z society, that there's nothing to be upset or traumatized over. Victims will often internalize it and believe it; I know we did!

Becoming an adult doesn't just magically flip the, "okay, it's no longer abusive!" switch. It doesn't magically confer wisdom to recognize whether you're being abused or not. It's still unacceptable to sexually proposition your kid, grandkid, nephew, or niece, even if they're an adult.

Incest within the same generation is even more complicated still--cousins or siblings, for instance. There is plenty that is still abusive, but I CAN at least theoretically accept the idea of a nonabusive sexual relationship. That said, I'm sorry, but the marriage is still illegal for a reason. It's far from a perfect system, but it prevents people from abusing their power over their relatives. (I am completely ignoring the birth defects argument, because in my opinion, it's a red herring. Marriage doesn't equal having kids.)

Am I sorry for those people who probably do exist and have a healthy incestuous relationship? Yes. But seeing how "incest is healthy and natural" is used to control abuse victims, and how incest gets creepily fetishized in a lot of media, I just don't think a "happy incestuous relationship" is something that can be represented very easily. It is an EXTREMELY delicate subject, requiring a lot of subtlety, and most of the people I see expressing the "incest is okay!" thing do not have that subtlety.

I mean, there's a dearth of properly done ABUSIVE incestuous relationships in media--a lot of it is just porn or fetish bait. I hardly think we're ready for nonabusive ones.

--Rogan

EDIT: oh god this was so long I'm sorry. But seriously, this is the kind of topic that CAN'T be covered in just a few sentences.

Re: The longest rant.

[luxshine]

Hell, no, don't apologize. And I really, really want to stand up and clap, because that's an amazingly well thought rant.

And so true.

Re: The longest rant.

[lb_lee]

The rant was spawned because a friend of ours, a very sharp woman, ran across a "marriage for all" site and asked my opinion on it, and we had a debate. (That she's the kind of person I CAN have that kind of debate with, without getting really upset, tells you what kind of cool person she is.)

Yeah, it's a really complicated topic, and very difficult to communicate. I'm glad I was able to do so.

--Rogan

Re: The longest rant.

[cloudtrader]

Thanks for the rant, that was very interesting.

Re: The longest rant.

[lb_lee]

No problem. I have spent WAY too much skull sweat and library-diving researching this crap. For obvious reasons, it's a personal, passionate subject for me.

--Rogan