fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5555 ]

[ SECRET POST #5555 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5555 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 18 secrets from Secret Submission Post #795.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The thing that gets me the most about the, "They're like siblings, you can't ship them!" is:

1) You (general "you") can think they have a sibling-esque relationship all you want, but the fact remains that at the end of the day, they aren't actual siblings, be it via biology or adoption, so that argument will do nothing to sway the shippers.
2) Considering just how often people ship characters who are actual siblings all the time, the idea that somebody might be put off by shipping characters who aren't related in any way, but who might still give off a sibling-esque vibe, is...hilarious, to say the very least.

DA

But the last part, yeah lol. Every single time this comes up in the Genshin Impact fandom, people go "you can't ship them they're siblings, it's incest" and then others go "no they're not, Kaeya isn't even adopted, they're sworn brothers in the original text anyway" and I sit there thinking "they're fictional, I wouldn't have any issue shipping them if they were blood related lol".

Agreed on everything except the adoption part, unless they were adopted when they were already an adult or something, or you're using adopted in the loose sense of having the same guardian figure who they don't consider a parent (e.g. the Elric brothers with Winry's grandma in Fullmetal Alchemist after their mom dies). Siblings literally adopted into a family are real siblings, and shipping them is shipping incest. Shipping incest is fine. But being adopted doesn't mean it isn't incest.

No it's not incest. Morally questionable irl and potentially shakey on the consent front depending on the ages involved but incest is exclusively used for sexual relations between BLOOD RELATED people.
Some people call what you describe emotional incest but by the literal and legal definition, incest is only based on blood relation.

but by the literal and legal definition, incest is only based on blood relation

I don't know anything about the current legal definition of incest (in any country, not even my own), but from a sociological standpoint, this isn't true. Sociologically, incest is a particular type of sexual taboo based on the participants' pre-existing familial status. That familial status is often a cosangineous one, but not always--it varies from culture to culture.

I'm not talking sociologically though, but biologically.

That's...not really a thing. Biologically, every single person on earth is related (see: Mitochondrial Eve). That obviously doesn't mean that every single human sexual relationship is incestuous. But it does mean that there isn't a clear dividing line between incestuous relationships and non-incestuous relationships.

Instead, incest is a cultural taboo, and different cultures draw different lines around what relationships are incestuous and what relationships aren't. Hence why there have been cultures that defined uncle/niece relationships as acceptable while aunt/nephew relationships were considered incestuous, or brother/older sister relationships as acceptable while brother/younger sister relationships were incestuous, despite the fact that the degree of consanguinity was the same in each of those cases.

Ah yes, and because biological incest doesn't exist, hereditary diseases that stem from people (and animals) with too close blood relations breeding also dont exist!
Wait, they do? Strange, that.

First, that still doesn't indicate the existence of a clear line between incestuous and non-incestuous relationships. Is a relationship between cousins incestuous? Great aunt and great nephew? Second cousins? Fourth cousins once removed? Etc.

Second, incest is about much more than inbreeding, or else there would be no incest taboos surrounding male/male or female/female relationships, but those taboos obviously exist in real life.

The reason incestuous relationships are taboo in a lot of cultures is mainly because of the risk of disease. It's directly connected. And the risk is higher the closer the blood relation. Hence why parent/child and sibling incest is a bigger issue than cousin incest, which is fine in most countries.
And yes, those taboos exist as well but they're definitely more of an afterthought in the grand scheme of things, especially since the taboo of same sex relationships is still alive and well in cultures that have strangely few issues with first cousin incest in comparison, for example.

Are you genuinely suggesting that father/son and mother/daughter incest are taboo because of homophobia rather than because they're parent/child incest?

No? Learn to read.

But in case you want to continue to wilfully misunderstand: Parent/Child incest is mainly taboo because of the consent issue. And then you can add the inbreeding issue and homophobia for het and gay incest respectively ON TOP of that.

Parent/Child incest is mainly taboo because of the consent issue.

That's a strikingly modern rationale for why parent/child incest is wrong. We're talking about a taboo that's existed for thousands of years and can be found in virtually every human society, including many societies that have had very different ideas than we do regarding what consent is, whose consent is necessary, and who is able to give consent. Also, the taboo doesn't stop applying even in cases where the parent and child aren't (initially) aware of their familial relationship--see Oedipus and Jocasta for a 2500 year old literary example that still resonates with readers today.

Yes, and this is a heterosexual example. And one that defeats your argument that it's exclusively sociological - the issue is the blood relation in cases where both parties are unaware of the family ties.

Especially if we're talking hundreds/thousands of years ago, with homosexuality being largely criminalised, the issue with same sex incest would have primarily been the same-sex aspect more than the incest itself. Or not, as, for example, in some Greek mythology cases, but incest wasn't a huge issue in those cases either.

You said, "And yes, those taboos exist as well but they're definitely more of an afterthought in the grand scheme of things, especially since the taboo of same sex relationships is still alive and well in cultures that have strangely few issues with first cousin incest in comparison" which I read as you saying, "Incest taboos surrounding male/male or female/female relationships are definitely more of an afterthought in the grand scheme of things."

If that's not what you meant, then what did "those taboos" refer to in the sentence of yours that I've quoted?

Alright so:
When people talk about incest, the vast majority will think of heterosexual incest. So the homosexual variations are usually an afterthought when talking about incest in general. And in cases where the topic is same-sex incest, the discussion centers more around either the consent angle and/or the same-sex aspect and not so much around the incest itself.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #5555 ]

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?

Re: What trends in your current fandom do you just not understand?