Monday, March 10, 2014

Zambia Keeps Prosecuting Consenting Adults For Marrying

Another news item out of Zambia details the prosecuting of consenting adults in an attempt to break up a marriage. If you think this only happens in Africa, you are sorely mistaken. Where I live, in the US, many states still prosecute in these cases, and it happens in many other countries as well. Chambo Ng'uni reports at dail-mail.co.zm...

A 27-YEAR-OLD man of Kabwe and his young sister aged 20 have appeared in the Kabwe Magistrate’s Court to answer to charges of incest.
 

Aaron Musonda an electrician and Maureen Musonda a grade 12 pupil in Kabwe both appeared before Kabwe resident magistrate John Mbuzi on Thursday for explanation of the charge of incest.
The accused persons are both residents of Makululu Township and they share the same father but different mothers.

So they are half siblings. For all we know they were not raised together and this is a case of Genetic Sexual Attraction.
The police have slapped Musonda with a charge of incest by males contrary to Section 159(1) of the Penal Code Chapter 87 of the laws of Zambia.
 

It is alleged that Musonda on dates unknown but between December 1 last year and February 27 this year in Kabwe, knowing that Maureen was his sister, allegedly had unlawful carnal knowledge of her.
 

His sister has been charged with incest by females, contrary to Section 161 of the Penal Code Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia.
 
The court heard that Maureen on dates unknown but between December 1 last year and February 27 this year in Kabwe, allegedly permitted her elder brother to have sex with her.

And...? What's the problem? Notice, no explanation of harm to anyone is cited in the article.
The police at Kasanda Police Station last Friday confirmed that the two were reported to the police by their father who wanted the police to end their marriage.

What a rat. So it is OK for him to have sex with and impregnate at least two women, but not OK for other consenting adults to love each other? He should have read this.
A police source said according to their father, siblings allegedly got married last year and when their family attempted to end their affair they fled Kabwe.
 

The source said they resurfaced this year, and their family heard that they were renting a house in Makululu.

Renting a house! Oh, those scary people! Seriously, what a waste of law enforcement resources. Let them be together, and let them marry if they want. There is no good reason to deny them their rights.

Saturday, March 8, 2014

A Cruel Double Standard

I might need to add #20 to the series NOT a Good Reason to Deny (Consanguineous) Love and #22 to the Discredited Arguments page, because I've heard and read people say that people in consanguinamorous relationships (or step or adoptive relationships that have gone romantic) don't need the freedom to marry because they're already family. In addition to being as senseless as telling a woman she can't marry her sister's husband's brother (which is legal and does happen) because they are already family, the statement can bring up a very cruel double standard.

In many situations involving Genetic Sexual Attraction, the lovers are not legally family for the purposes of insurance, benefits, taxes, hospital visitation, next of kin, etc. because they were adopted into or born into (via sperm, egg, or embryo donation) different families. Also, in many places, when a married woman gives birth, the child is legally her spouse's child as well. What if, due to sex with someone other than her spouse, the woman's child is genetically a half-sibling to another married couple's child, and as adults they decide they'd like to marry?

The double standard is that, while these genetically related people don't enjoy the benefits of being family, in places that still have ridiculous laws discriminating against consensual adult incest, they are considered family and thus can (and are) criminally prosecuted for consensual sex or at least denied their right to marry.

You're not family so you can't get the benefit of being family. You are family so you are going to be prosecuted for having loved each other in sexual way. That's cruel.

As an example, if something were to happen to Melissa and she ended up in a hospital, her adoptive parents could bar Matthew and Linda from even being by her side, let alone making decisions about her care, even though Matthew and Linda are, for practical purposes, her spouses. She would be married to them if she could, but the law isn't there yet.

Those who are sharing, or want to share their lives as spouses or partners often do need the same rights, benefits, and protections as any other spouses, and there’s no good reason to deny them their fundamental right to marry. Also, marriage automatically provides for next-of-kin status, which is especially important when there is some discord between at least one of the lovers and legal family members outside of the consanguinamorous relationship.

There are many cruel double standards when trying to tell other consenting adults how to love each other. GSA or not, consanguinamorous people need discriminatory laws to be done away with, and need access to the protections provided by marriage, if they want them. This is yet another reason we need full marriage equality sooner rather than later.

Friday, March 7, 2014

Have a Look Around

Are you new to this blog? Maybe you've been here before, but have missed some of the features here.

Over there in the column on the right you can find ways to connect and to follow this blog.

There at the top of the page are tabs that take you to "permanent" pages:

There's a Welcome message and there's an About This Blog page, and you can read about the triad that originally inspired this blog.

There's a Glossary so that you can become familiar with terms frequently used here.

I explain why we need solidarity in supporting full marriage equality and I debunk all the arguments that you'll ever hear made against equality.

On the Case Studies page I feature interviews with people who have been denied their rights, so you can "meet" people who are, or have been, in consensual loving relationships who have are harmed by the lack of equality under the law.

Are you here because of polyamory or polygamy? Perhaps you're here because this blog covers Genetic Sexual Attraction or consanguinamory (consensual incest)? Do you need help?


Whether you're a family member or friend who is looking for more information, or a journalist, or are someone who is looking to help the cause, I hope you are helped by what is here.

This blog is a labor of love. There's no advertising and we don't accept monetary contributions. Want to help? Spread the word. Also, this blog DOES accept content submissions (fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com), but makes no offer, implicit nor explicit, of compensation nor guarantees that it will be used.

Tell me what you think!

Thursday, March 6, 2014

Why the South Needs Full Marriage Equality

This is why the South and the rest of the US needs full marriage equality sooner rather than later. It is an interview at The Final Manifesto with a woman who is denied the right to marry the other parent of her child.

You can read interviews I have done here.

Frequently Asked Question: Can Siblings Marry?

The following is based on my understanding. I’m not at attorney and this should not be considered legal advice.

Can siblings marry?

I’m not aware of any government that will currently marry full-blood siblings or recognize a marriage of full-blood siblings; rather, if it was discovered by the authorities after an official marriage was formed that the spouses were, in fact, siblings, the marriage would be dissolved and considered invalid. If the spouses knew they were siblings when they married, they would be subject to prosecution. If they discovered the genetic relationship after getting married, they would have to file for an annulment or dissolution or risk prosecution.

Where sibling consanguinamory isn’t still banned by law, siblings can have a wedding ceremony and live the married life, although under discrimination, as their government will not recognize their marriage and they will not get treated equally.



Sweden will legally marry half siblings under certain circumstances. I’m not aware of any country that currently has more progressive laws or laws as progressive as Sweden.

Some siblings report that they have been able to get a marriage license in places like the US based on the ignorance of the authorities, such as the siblings being born in different states or countries and/or not having a shared parent listed on their birth certificates. However, if the laws of that location do not recognize sibling marriages as valid, or if consanguinamory is illegal in that jurisdiction, a marriage license is a potential piece of evidence that can be used in criminal prosecution, and that’s sad.

If siblings want to get married, they should be free to marry. Inequality, based on prejudice, is counterproductive. All over the world, there are siblings living as spouses; there always has been, some with the knowledge and support of friends and family, some hiding the full nature of their relationship. Sooner or later, full marriage equality will be in place in more progressive places, allowing siblings to marry without discrimination or fear of prosecution. Let’s make it happen sooner rather than later.

This question may be asked many different ways. Can siblings get married? Can siblings marry? Can a brother and sister get married? Can a brother and brother get married? Can a sister and sister get married? Can a sister marry her brother? Can a brother marry his sister? Can a sister marry her sister? Can a brother marry his brother? Can you marry your sibling? Can you marry your brother? Can you marry your sister? Can two sisters marry? Can two brothers marry?

Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Possible GSA Case Makes News


Not everyone who is arrested or prosecuted for consensual sex is a sympathetic person overall. Sometimes, they've done other things that should continue to be crimes. Regardless of whether someone is a career criminal or a true pillar of the community, consensual relationships and sex between adults should not be a crime, and should not be fodder for ridicule in what are supposed to be serious news services. Stories like the one below are not justification to deny full marriage equality. For every situation like the one detailed below, there are many great people who are in consanguinamorous relationships and you never heard about them. Or, they are famous and admired, but their consanguinamory remains closeted.

Here is Lee Moran's article at nydailynews.com...

A Texas meth-head and his sister confessed to incest after they were caught passionately kissing in prison, police said.

Charlene Ellet, 25, and her brother Cameron Beck, 26, were allegedly busted locking lips between jail cell bars after getting arrested for possession of meth.

The Houston duo now faces prohibited sexual conduct charges on top of the initial drug allegations.
So this happened in Texas but is in a New York newspaper. Why?

Montgomery County Police Reporter said that the pair was picked up at a Wal-Mart on Friday after Ellet was caught stealing.

Deputies detained Beck, who'd driven his sister and her 2-year-old twin girls to the store, after finding traces of meth in his car.

Taken to Montgomery County Jail and placed in neighboring cells, deputies said they were stunned when the pair started kissing each other on the lips through the bars.

They should have learned from this. Texas is one of the worst states when it comes to consanguinamory. Here's why I think this is a possible case of Genetic Sexual Attraction...

Confirming they were siblings, Ellet said they had the same biological mom but that she had been adopted.

She revealed they struck up a pen pal relationship as Beck was in prison and hooked up on his release in November.

The couple lived in a motel room with Ellet's two daughters, and would often have sex behind a partition as the two girls watched TV.

Here's the coverage at examiner.com.

Here's the coverage at opposingviews.com.


Here's what appears to be the original source, montgomerycountypolicereporter.com.


And dailymail.co.uk had to carry it, too.

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Newspaper Editorial Calls For Hate

A newspaper in Zambia is calling for more hate in response to recent shocking discoveries that people are loving each other even though they are siblings. Here is the editorial at daily-mail.co.zm...

THE continued reports of incestuous marriages in Central Province are worrying and raise many social and psychological questions.
What is there to worry about?

We urge relevant Government organs and non-governmental organisations to carry out a research to establish if this could be widespread and unravel the factors that could be driving people in this particular province into such marriages.

Yes, it is common. What is driving them to it is usually the same thing that drives any lovers.

This kind of behaviour should not be allowed to take root because it could have devastating social and biological consequences.

Such as...? Such as...? They got nuthin'.
Human beings are not animals that are ruled by instinct. We are ruled by reason.
Some of us are ruled by reason. Others want to interfere in the marriages of strangers.

Surely, how could a brother and sister have the courage to engage in a sexual relationship and even have children between them?
I can show you video.
This does not happen even in the most liberal and morally depraved western societies.
This happens everywhere and always has.
Incest is a criminal offence in Zambia.
Not for any good reason

It is disturbing to imagine the stigma the innocent children that could be born out of such a perverted marriage would have to endure.

Uh, then stop stigmatizing them.

What a pile of crap that editorial is. I hope the person who wrote it doesn't actually get paid for that drivel.

Monday, March 3, 2014

The Invisible Asterisk

Sometimes, when someone writes (or says) that they support the freedom to marry or, marriage equality, or #Marriage4All, or “love is love” or something like “The sex lives of consenting adults is nobody else’s business.,” there is an invisible asterisk. You know, one of these ==> *

What might really be going on is this…

“Consenting adults should be free to marry each other.”*








*Unless you mean something I don’t like or think is disgusting, like polygamy, open marriage, or consensual adult incest.



I don’t do that. There is no asterisk in this statement…

I support the rights of an adult to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults, without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination.

There is no asterisk after “adult.” An “adult” includes any person, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion.

“Any and all” means “any and all”. If an adult woman can vote, be Secretary of State (or Prime Minister, which we don't have in the US), serve as a Governor, be a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, sign contracts, enlist in the military, operate heavy machinery, be sentenced to life in prison or the death penalty (which we do have in many places in the US), and can consent to group sex with three cage fighters she just met, it seems to me an adult woman should also be free to have sex with and/or marry any consenting adult(s), even if that means another woman, or two women, or two men, or a woman and a man, or a married man (not hidden from his existing spouse), or her sister, whether an adopted sister, stepsister, half sister, or full blood sister. All of this goes for men, too, of course.

This basic right means all adults having the same right to not marry at all, and to divorce, and to be free of domestic violence. The basic freedom of association should mean that adults can share the entirely of love, sex, residence, and marriaqe, or any of those without the others, and any civil union or domestic partnership that is offered. That’s a funny thing called… equality. There is no good reason to deny equality. Now is the time to get it done.
So, do you support full marriage equality, or marriage “equality”*?

An Example of the Benefit of Nonmonogamy in Nature

I am polyamorous, but not one of those polyamorists who say everyone else should be polyamorous, too. When I say I support the rights of consenting adults, that includes the freedom to be monogamous or celibate. And, as I always say, just because something is found in another species, it doesn't automatically apply to humans. With those things out of the way, I wanted to note Carl Zimmer's report at nytimes.com that flies forced into monogamy apparently lose learning ability.
Forcing male flies into monogamy has a startling effect: After a few dozen generations, the flies become worse at learning.

This discovery, published on Wednesday in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, isn’t a biological excuse for men who have strayed from their significant other. Instead, it’s a tantalizing clue about why intelligence evolved.

The new study was carried out by Brian Hollis and Tadeusz J. Kawecki, biologists at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland. They investigated a fly species called Drosophila melanogaster that normally has a very un-monogamous way of life.
I do think it causes all sorts of problems to try to force a polyamorous person into monogamy. Human history has shown that over and over again. Also, many polyamorous people will tell you that living out polyamory has made them better people and taught them much.

Sunday, March 2, 2014

Ten Myths About Sibling Consanguinamory

I’ve noticed some common myths expressed about sibling consanguinamory. In this instance, by consanguinamory, I mean everything from curious exploration and experimenting to erotic romance, including masturbating in front of each other, erotic kissing, sexual touching or rubbing, oral sex, intercourse, etc.

This entry is NOT addressing molestation, assault, or abuse.

I’m referring to adult siblings, or minor siblings who are close in age, engaging in mutual affection or experimentation, without coercion, force, or intimidation. It may be two siblings alone, it may be three or more siblings, or it may be two or more siblings involved together with one or more people outside of the immediate family.

These myths need to be addressed, because they perpetuate inequality, discrimination, hardship, confusion, stigmas, ignorance, and fear.

Myth #1 “It doesn’t happen” or “It happens very rarely” or “I don’t know anyone who has done this.” Just because one person hasn’t been involved or doesn’t remember being involved with sibling doesn’t mean it isn’t happening with others. It is, and it always has. Ongoing sexual relationships between siblings are common enough that everyone knows someone who is, or has been in, such a relationship, and far more siblings than that have had an encounter or experimented, explored, or played doctor. Reality: We all know people who've been involved, whether we know it or not.

Myth #2 “Siblings don’t have sex, rather it is always that one sibling abuses another” or ”It only happens between siblings who have been abused or neglected” or “It always means they need therapy.” At the heart of this is myth is that, because of the dynamics between siblings, one sibling can’t consent to have sex with another. This ignores siblings who weren’t raised together, but even with siblings who were raised together, the claim that one can’t consent to sex with another is an unsupported assertion based on personal aversion, a personal history of abuse, ignorance, or even the absurd notion that females don’t want or enjoy sex. If an 18-year-old woman can legally consent to group sex with three male cage fighters who are strangers to her, or consent to be the mistress of a billionaire with a spouse and children, the President of the United States, or a someone who rented a room in her childhood home and was present for her entire childhood, how can we be consistent in saying that she can't consent to sex with her twin brother or sister? When it comes to minors, most family therapists don’t consider it abuse if minors close in age experiment or have sex; it is considered mutual experimentation (think teenagers who are four or fewer years apart). Abuse and sex are two different things. Sex does happen in some families. Unfortunately, so does abuse. But they aren’t the same thing. Reality: Some siblings do willingly share this at some point in their lives, and may not need therapy at all.

Myth #3. “It only happens as youthful experimentation. Adults don't do this.” While such contact is more common among siblings living together in their youth, it may continue throughout their lives or be initiated during adulthood: everything from while they’re at college to during their senior years. It can happen when siblings are introduced or reunited (Genetic Sexual Attraction,) during a time of personal discovery or experimentation, while one siblings cares for another through an illness or after an accident, during times of grieving, after a breakup or divorce or death of a spouse/lover… anytime, really. Reality: Some siblings share this throughout their lives, some starting late in life.

Myth #4 “It is unnatural.” This myth is not supported either in human history or in other species. While it is very common for people who spent their childhoods in the same residence together, whether genetically related or not, to develop a suppression of sexual attraction to each other (this has been described as the Westermarck Effect), this does not happen to everyone, and siblings who aren’t raised together are often attracted to each other; studies reveal most people are attracted to people who look like them. Reality: In many cases, nothing is more natural.

Myth #5. “It is wrong” or “It is destructive” or “It needs to be stopped” or “They won’t be able to go on to have normal lives.” Different people are going to have different moral guidelines about sex, but sibling consanguinamory is not considered wrong by everyone or all cultures. In many cases, it is advantageous compared to having the siblings involved with others. Nor is there anything inherently destructive about it, but rather some find it constructive. The only way to stop it is to have constant, direct supervision of the siblings 24/7/365. This, however, is needless. For most, the involvement is for a season and it will pass. For others, it will last a lifetime. Either way, there’s no good reason to try to stop it. The only hindrance to having a “normal life” for siblings who continue together is the bigotry of others. Reality: For some, it is the best of all possibilities, it is wonderful and constructive, and they lead perfectly normal, even unusually good lives.

Myth #6 “Only loners, losers, freaks, or ugly people do this” or “It only happens in rural, southern (in the US), poor, uneducated families.” 
Reality: Sibling consanguinamory happens in every demographic and in every part of the US and the world. There are attractive, outgoing, popular, successful, wealthy, educated people who have been, or are still involved with a sibling.

Myth #7 “If they have children, they will be deformed” or “It causes birth defects.” Incest, if it results in a birth, does not cause birth defects in and of itself. Most children born to close relatives are healthy. You know some, whether you know it or not and whether they know their own true parentage or not. Birth defects can be the result of injury during pregnancy, substances ingested during pregnancy, environmental factors, or genetic problems. It is the last one that people tend to be thinking of, usually, when they repeat this myth. That’s because when both genetic parents carry the same genetic problem, it may be demonstrated in the children. However, this can happen with parents who aren’t closely related, too. Reality: Most children born to siblings are healthy.

Myth #8 “It always ruins sibling relationships” or “A person needs a nonsexual relationship with their sibling.” Many siblings report that consaguinamory made them much closer, even if they have ceased that part of their relationship. As far as someone needing a nonsexual relationship with a sibling… that would mean that people who are only children (having no siblings) would suffer, when the studies say otherwise. Also, if someone has more than one sibling, that usually means they’ll still have a nonsexual relationship with the other. Reality: For many siblings, consanguinamory made their relationship much better, and they relate to other people better as a result.

Myth #9 “It is illegal everywhere.”
No, it isn’t. But where it is, the laws should be changed. Some people say such laws are needed to prevent societal collapse due to everyone making mutant babies with their siblings. As already explained, most children born to siblings are healthy. Even so, sibling consanguinamory and reproduction are two different things. In most places where consanguinamory is legally banned, it is entirely legal for brothers and sisters to have genetic children together through artificial insemination. It is entirely legal for someone with Huntington’s Disease to have children, even though the odds are dramatically higher than with a random pair of siblings that the children will have a debilitating disease. We can also look at places where it is legal for brothers and sisters to have sex and children together, such as Spain, Portugal, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. Has there been a crisis as a result in any of those places? (Snooki excluded.) Furthermore, the person who says anti-consanguinamory laws are needed to prevent widespread inbreeding makes it sound like everyone wants to have babies with their sibling, and the only thing holding them back is the law (perhaps there is something they want to tell us?) MOST people will not have intercourse with or marry their siblings, and even many siblings who do will not have genetic children together. Another part of this myth is that laws against consanguinamory prevent abuse. Abuse is illegal regardless of consanguinamory laws, and criminalizing consensual sex actually makes it more difficult to get victims and witnesses to cooperate in the prosecuting of abusers. Reality: Sibling consanguinamory is legal in several US states and many developed countries, but where stupid laws still apply, those unjust laws must go.

Myth #10 “Siblings don’t need the freedom to marry.” This is often augmented with “because they are already family.” But siblings who are sharing their lives as spouses often do need the same rights, benefits, and protections as any other spouses, and there’s no good reason to deny them their fundamental right to marry. Also, marriage automatically provides for next-of-kin status, which is especially important when there is some discord between one or both siblings and other siblings or their parents or grown children. For example, if brothers Adam & Steve have been living as spouses for years and Steve winds up in a coma in the hospital, their estranged, bigoted parents would likely be able to usurp Adam’s rights to make decisions. Finally, in relationships initiated through Genetic Sexual Attraction, they might not be considered family under the law, although in a loathsome double-standard, they may still be subject to discriminatory laws based on their genetic relation. Reality: An adult should be free to marry any and all consenting adults.

In Conclusion


There are siblings who are together right now, providing each other love, comfort, support, or their first sexual experience in a safe and reassuring environment. The biggest problem with sibling consanguinamory seems to be the prejudice and sex-negative attitudes of others. In most cases, trying to force consanguinamorous siblings apart only makes things worse. It can be a mutually beneficial way of bonding, expressing their love for each other, learning, and discovering their sexuality; it may even be a beautiful, lifelong romance.

Let’s not let ignorance cause needless concern or repression.

For further reading:

Common Objections Answered

What Family and Friends Should Know

Case Studies of Consanguinamorous Relationships

How Common is Consensual Incest?

Why Is Incest Illegal Anywhere?

Genetic Sexual Attraction

Consensual Incest FAQ

If You Are Considering It

myths lies misconceptions the truth about real true sibling brothers sisters brother-sister sister-sister brother-brother consanguineous sex incest lovemaking love marriage


Saturday, March 1, 2014

New Republic Insults Hundreds of Millions

Alice Robb wrote at "The Strange Scholarship of Incest" at newrepublic.com...
Whether or not Meryl Streep deserves to win Best Actress for her turn as the deranged matriarch in August: Osage County is up for debate, but everyone who’s seen Tracy Letts’s play or the film adaptation should be able to agree on at least one thing: It makes for some uncomfortable viewing. And of all the disturbing elements that make up this saga—alcoholism, suicide, adultery—there’s one plotline that stands out as truly disturbing: the incestuous romance between Ivy and Little Charles, who believe they’re first cousins but—spoiler alert—turn out to be half-siblings.

Why is that disturbing?

Disgust seems like a pretty appropriate response to an affair between cousins, but historically, in societies around the world, marriage between cousins has been accepted and even encouraged.

And yet she calls it disgusting anyway, insulting hundreds of millions of people, including her own ancestors. Then she gets into that big question...
Is the taboo against incest a biological universal, or is it culturally derived? And if it’s a cultural construct, why is it so widespread?

Ultimately, when it comes to whether or not consenting adults should have their rights, the answer to that question isn't relevant.

“I’m not saying that it’s fine, but I think the genetic risks of incest are probably overestimated,” said Diane Paul, a professor at the University of Massachusetts Boston whose research focuses on the history of evolution and genetics.

It certainly is.

“It’s assumed it would be higher, but there’s a huge bias of ascertainment,” she explains. “If you have a baby [that’s the product of incest] with a problem, people say, ‘Oh, that’s why,’ but if the baby is healthy, no one says, ‘Look at that healthy baby’ [that’s the product of incest].”

DING! We have a winner.

“In terms of genetic distance, a half-sibling relationship is equivalent to an uncle-niece relationship or a double first cousin relationship” [double first cousins share both sets of grandparents], both of which are quite common in different societies,” says Alan Bittles, a researcher at the Centre for Comparative Genomics at Murdoch University in Australia.

Double first cousins can legally marry in some US states.

The article then gets into Westermarck.

It is very simple... if YOU are disgusted by something, don't do it. But it is rude, cruel, and unjust to try to stop consenting adults in love from being together.

Friday, February 28, 2014

Taking the Steps

I have frequently seen the question asked, “It is incest to date my stepbrother?” or “Would marrying my stepsister be incestuous?”

Romance, dating, sex, or marriage between step relations is not literally consanguinamory, but is often subject to the same prejudices, which in some places and cases includes criminalization, as consanguinamorous relationships. With Discredited Argument #18 not a factor, the excuse to try to deny others their relationships is usually Discredited Arguments #1, 3, 19, or 21.

Although someone may try to control our relationships, we can’t effectively control what other people do with their love lives and we shouldn’t try. We don’t pick who our family members love or marry. As such, sometimes someone is brought into our lives as a step relation, such as a stepbrother, stepsister, stepmother, or stepfather whether we like it or not.

Sometimes, we like it. A lot.



Perhaps the most common connection between step relationships is when adults marry and their adolescent or young adult children, who are made stepsiblings, find they are mutually attracted. The Westermarck Effect, which describes the suppression of sexual attraction between people raised together in the same home or close quarters, isn’t experienced by everyone but doesn’t have even a chance to be experienced if young people don’t meet or don’t spend much time together until their pre-teen years or later, as often happens in these cases.

Each of us is our parent’s child. If the person we share genes with and raised us is attracted to someone, is it really surprising that we’d be attracted to that someone’s child? This is especially the case if new stepsiblings spend time under the same roof, perhaps on a full-time basis.

There is no good reason why the relationship of persons A and B should prevent the relationship of persons C and D.

But what about when one person ends up having two lovers from the same family? That can happen if there is a relationship between a stepparent and a stepchild, including cases in which the stepparent never knew the stepchild as a minor. (As always, I’m talking about consenting adults in this entry, or minors close in age to each other.) Perhaps things didn’t work out between the stepparent and the parent, or the parent died, or there’s a polyamorous situation, meaning the parent is still involved. Sometimes, someone’s stepparent is actually from their generation or at least closer in age to them than their parent, due to their parent having entered into an intergenerational relationship. The important thing to remember is that we are talking about consenting adults in these cases. One person’s prejudice against intergenerational relationships or against someone having more than one lover from the same family should not have any control over such consensual relationships.

Relationships like these have existed throughout history. There are also other relationships that have meant someone has (or has had) more than one lover from the same family. Traditional polyandry usually involves brothers marrying the same woman, and many polygynous males marry sisters. Having both mother and daughter or father and son as lovers is a common fantasy, and does happen. (I have had my own experience.)

Someone considering a relationship with a stepsibling, stepparent, or adult stepchild should make many of the same considerations as I have encouraged people to make when it comes to consanguinamorous relationships, and, if applicable, what I wrote about intergenerational relationships.

Parents may not like it when their stepchild gets together with their child, but the parent should remember that it wasn’t the children that created the environment in which they found themselves. Isn’t it better they get along rather than fight? Anyone upset about step relations getting together should read this.

Family strife is one thing. Law is another. There is no good reason to have laws discriminating against adults for their consensual relationships.

Are you, or have you been, involved with a step relation, or someone who later became one? Tell us about it by commenting.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Guilty Pleas in Absurd Prosecution of Consenting Adults


Incest charges pair photo
Frank Humphreys and Eleanor Jackson

To update a case we last reported here, Duncan Bick reports at newsandstar.co.uk that law enforcement official in Cumbria, England have gone ahead with their ridiculous and unjust prosecution of consenting adults for having sex with each other in private. Outrageous.

Frank Humphreys, 51, and 23-year-old Eleanor Jackson both pleaded guilty to a charge of “having sex with an adult relative” during a brief appearance at Carlisle Crown Court.

The pair, of Princess Street, Cleator, appeared at the same court last year and denied the charge but they changed their pleas yesterday.
There's no victim! Why is this a crime?

They spoke only to confirm their names and enter their pleas in front of Judge Peter Hughes QC.
They had sex between December 2011 and February 2012.
So they had sex. And what terrible thing happened as a result??? Judge Peter Hughes QC should've thrown this case out! They will be sentenced in April. Absurd.

THIS is exactly why we need rights for all consenting adults, all over the planet. They should not only be free to be together and love each other as they see best, but marry if that is what they'd like. Instead law enforcement resources are wasted in prosecuting them.

Facebook and Twitter and More

Have you joined the Facebook group yet? Join "I Support Full Marriage Equality."

You should also like this page, Full Marriage Equality, and we meant that.

Are we Facebook friends? I want to be friends with all who support full marriage equality and relationship rights for all adults. Here I am.

Are we connected on Twitter? Here I am.

Are we connected on Tumblr? Here I am.

If you don't want to connect, still feel free to send me a note. I can be reached at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

You can also follow this blog by scrolling down in the column on the right and clicking on "Join This Site" under "Followers."

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Ally for Equality in New Zealand

Adam Bennett reports at nzherald.com about a political party's leader speaking up for equality.

New Act Leader Jamie Whyte is standing by his comments that incestuous relationships between consenting adults should not be illegal and says it would be "intellectually corrupt" of him not to be honest when asked such questions. 
In an article published on The Ruminator website, former philosophy lecturer Dr Whyte was asked whether the state should intervene if adult siblings wanted to marry each other.
Good for him.
Dr Whyte told the Herald his response was based on his belief that: "I don't think the state should intervene in consensual adult sex or marriage, but there are two very important elements here - consensual and adult".
We need more people to speak up for full marriage equality.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Is Being Poly Genetic?


The Ferrett addresses, “Polyamory Genetic? Is Homosexuality Genetic?”

My thoughts on a genetic polyamory link are the exact same as my thoughts on a genetic homosexual link:

I don’t care.

Right! We have many things, including the technology I’m using to write this and you are using to read this, which are not part of our genetics. What difference does it make? See Discredited Argument #5.

Even if the gays were, as some suggest, all conspiring in one big plot to annoy us fine-thinking straight people, wincing as they sucked distasteful d--- and reluctantly chowed p---y out of some misplaced form of rebellion, it should still be allowed.

The truth is, gay sex is between consenting adults, and it hurts no one but those adults – there are way more deadly car accidents caused by beers than queers. You may consider gayness to be a bad choice, but two people should be free to make bad choices together. And what people want to do for fun in their private life is something that should be allowed, no matter how distasteful it may be to me.

Agreed. See Discredited Argument #1.



We often get caught up in the “nature vs. nurture” aspect of gay and transgender issues, forgetting that this is playing to the conservative bent. What’s important is that people all over the world should have the freedom to live their lives as they see fit assuming they’re not actively harming anyone, and as such Teh Gay Should Be Okay.

So is gay genetically disposed? I say probably, but it doesn’t make a damn bit of difference.

Getting to polyamory…

I’m sure there are tendencies genetically towards certain aspects that encourage polyamory, but polyamory is such a complex term, encompassing so many styles of relationships, that I don’t think a single set of genes could really cover it.

I think we have enough evidence that some people are not monogamous; it goes against their nature, whether being polyamorous can be found in their genes or not.

But it’s irrelevant. I’ve heard it said that after gay marriage gets settled, they’ll be coming after the polyamorous relationships next.

We can only hope. Actually, I’d like to see it all settled at the same time; full marriage equality.

Miranda commented…

For people questioning their identity, I can see how it would be helpful to know that this is what is natural for you. But do we have to use it to justify ourselves with the opposition? I’d rather not anyway.

Yes. It doesn’t matter if someone is turned off by something, or thinks it is harmful to the lovers. An adult should not need to get permission from some politician to be who she or he is and love the person(s) she or he does in the ways to which they mutually consent. An adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults, without prosecution, persecution, and discrimination.



Is polyamory natural Is polyamory genetic Is being polyamorous natural Is being polyamorous genetic Is polygamy natural

Monday, February 24, 2014

The US Supreme Court Should Rule for Equality

In June 2013, the US Supreme Court took baby steps forward towards full marriage equality. Since then, federal courts and the Obama Administration have been taking more steps forward. But there is still a long way to go and still wasteful resistance to progress.

The Court should consolidate and consider many federal cases now in the system. We want the US Supreme Court to make the best possible ruling, which is to recognize relationship rights, including full marriage equality, for all adults nationwide.

The Court should rule that…


An adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults, without prosecution, harassment, or discrimination.

There are many reasons why the Court should do this.


1. There are American adults, and in some cases their children, suffering right now because of discriminatory laws preventing them from marrying or even just being together. If we really care about children, equality, stability, security, and valuing family, we will let people decide for themselves what kind of relationships they will have, including marriage, if they want to marry.

2. As Court precedent states, marriage is a fundamental civil right.

3. As Court precedent states, consensual sex is part of the liberty protected by due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.

4. As Court precedent states, when the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, the usual deference to the legislature is inappropriate, and the Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.

5. Freedom of association for consenting adults is a basic Constitutional right. Just as there is no good reason to ban interracial relationships or marriage, there is no good reason to ban same-gender relationships or marriages, polyamorous relationships or polygamous marriages, or consanguinamorous relationships or consanguineous marriages. There is no good reason to limit marriage to narrowly exogamous heterosexual couples.

6. Freedom of religion is a basic Constitutional right. One group’s religion should not deny the rights of other consenting adults to be together or marry. Conversely, some religions recognize or promote marriages currently banned under laws in most or all fifty states, depending on the marriages.

7. A Court ruling recognizing relationship rights and full marriage equality for all adults will provide what the Constitution requires: equal protection, rather than a piecemeal approach of this freedom to marry or that form of civil union. Equality just for some, or in some aspects but not others, or in this state but not that state, is notequality. The Constitutional principles of equal protection, freedom of association, freedom of religion, and the right to privacy, along with basic fairness, rational reflection, and compassion, necessitate that the US government ensure the rights of all adults.


8. The momentum within the US, neighboring countries, and the modern world is for marriage equality. Full marriage equality is inevitable, as even many opponents of equality admit. So it is pointless to drag the fight out. The Court can end the uncertainties and inconsistencies, and end the hateful, destructive, confusing, costly state-by-state fights that often pit older generations against younger generations, by putting the US on the right side of history sooner rather than later and recognizing relationship rights for all adults. More and more US states are adopting the limited same-gender freedom to marry. Many others have domestic partnerships or civil unions. Utah's law criminalizingpolyamory has been overturned, but that ruling is being appealed by the state, while other states allow polyamory but do not protect polyamorists and deny the polygamous and polyamorous freedom to marry. Some states allow first cousins to marry monogamously without restriction, other states allow them to marry with restrictions, some states ban this freedom to marry entirely, and a couple of states even criminalize sex between first cousins. Some states allowing any adults who are closer relatives their sexual rights with each other while other states ban those rights.


9. Full marriage equality will end inequalities and confusion in immigration policies.

10. Recognizing relationships rights, including full marriage equality, for all adults is good for business, as many businesses have publicly stated. Their employees will no longer be treated as second-class citizens, their human resources departments will not have to deal with state-by-state conflicts, and employees will be free to move (temporarily or permanently) from one location to another without facing different restrictions on their relationships.

11. Government employees, including the men and women serving in our military, will not have to face different restrictions on their relationships from place to place.

Nobody should fear being arrested and imprisoned for having a consensual relationship with other adults.

Nobody should be denied the freedom to marry other consenting adults.

There are people who love each other, who have been living as spouses, even have children together, who are denied their rights, who need and want full marriage equality.

Let’s get on the right side of history sooner rather than later, and put the hate, bigotry, and bullying behind us. The US Supreme Court should protect the rights of all adults in all states.

Sunday, February 23, 2014

Why? Many of the Same Reasons Anyone Else Does It

Vicky Wireko wrote at myjoyonline.com under "Reality Zone: Why would a father sleep with his biological daughter?"

Without yet getting to the text of the piece, the terms need to be defined. By "sleep," she no doubt means intercourse. But is she referring to rape or is she referring to consensual sex?  Rape and lovemaking are two different things. Rape should always be illegal. Lovemaking should never be illegal. But "biological daughter" can mean a woman the father didn't meet or didn't have a relationship with until she was an adult, or at least hasn't had a relationship with since an early age. Consanguinamory initiated through Genetic Sexual Attraction has a different dynamic than consanguinamory growing from an existing sociological relationship.

Why would a father make love with his biological daughter? I'm talking about CONSENT ADULTS here.

For many of the the same reasons a man would have sex with any woman:

He's a heterosexual male and she's a receptive or initiating female he finds attractive.

They love each other.

It feels good and is fun. This is especially true when it comes to consanguinamory.

To bond.

To express love.

To have children.

Some of them have been brought together through Genetic Sexual Attraction, some of them haven't.

There are many reasons, but they shouldn't need to justify it to anyone else. Why is ultimately theirs to share, not anyone else's business. Perhaps a better question is why wouldn't/shouldn't he? Sex is not a bad thing. Those who think it is are probably doing it wrong.

What did Wireko have to say? Let's see...

Everything is certainly wrong with a father sleeping with his blood daughter.
 Does she give a reason?
It is repugnant apart from the fact that it is a taboo in our custom.
Ah, Discredited Arguments #1 and 2.

However, when a father’s love for his daughter straddles beyond parental love veering off to lust, to the extent of sexual abuse, it becomes horrendous.
Abuse and lovemaking are two different things. She goes on to write about abuse, without giving a good reason as to why consenting adults shouldn't be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage. Don't like it? Don't do it. But there ARE adult women in loving spousal-type relationships with their biological fathers, despite what prejudiced bigots think.

Please also see Intergenerational Relationships Can Work 



why would a woman sleep with her father why would a father and daughter have sex why would a parent have sex with an adult child why would a woman have sex with her father

Saturday, February 22, 2014

Has Your Partner Experienced Consanguinamory?

I used be active at a certain Big Internet Portal's Question and Answer service, until someone who couldn’t handle me answering questions truthfully when it comes to certain romantic or sexual topics decided to get me "suspended" using a weakness in their automated system. I still will check to see what questions are being asked there, even though I can't participate in any way or even contact anyone there unless they have somehow provided an email address in their question or answer. I will not link to the service, but I will quote it. Someone named Lauren asked this question...

Ok.....complicated one, recently found out my husband and his younger sister had sex for a number of years between the ages of 10-12, this is what he's telling me tho I'm aware this may have more to it? We are a young couple married with two children (boys) my relationship with his family has never been great and this hasn't helped! Can anyone give me any advice or your thoughts on how you would deal with this news? I'm up and down and so confused.....

Questions like this come up more than people might think. Person A is dating or married to Person B and Person A suspects or has found out that Person B has been sexually involved with a sibling or other family member. Person A usually wants to know what they should do.

It is important to clarify the situation by determining the answers to some questions.

1) Is this something that is suspected or has it been confirmed?



Not all families have the same behaviors and boundaries when it comes to physical affection, personal space, joking, and otherwise talking. As such, Person A can look at how Person B interacts with a sibling and think, “I wouldn’t interact with my sibling that way, only a partner” and so think that Person B must have sexual experience with their family member. It isn’t necessarily the case, though. On the other hand, with as common as consanguineous experimentation and sex is, it isn’t unreasonable to wonder.

Unless someone comes right out and makes a clear, credible statement either way, there probably isn’t an easy way to get the truth that will not cause some embarrassment.  One way of handling it could be in expressing needs and negotiating boundaries. Even if someone is monogamous, they should never assume their relationship is monogamous unless that has been explicitly discussed. So perhaps one oblique way of trying to determine if there’s anything current is to say, “I need monogamy. Is that going to be a problem?” Or, if polyamorous, saying “I need to know exactly who else you are going to be having sex with.” Trying to determine if anything happened in the past is going to take being a little less vague. It might be helpful to say something like this, in a nonjudgmental tone: “I was reading that a surprisingly high percentage of people have had sexual experiences with a close family member, enough that everyone knows somebody who has. But I’m not aware of anyone I know who has. Are you?” Depending on how serious the relationship is getting, the questioning can get more direct, because if someone is going to be creating a family with someone else, they should be talking about the dynamics and family history of both families.


2) Was this something that happened in the past or is it ongoing?

If confirmation is obtained, it is important to know whether the sexual aspect of the relationship is likely over for good or if it is ongoing or could easily resume. If it ended, when, why, and how did it end?


3) Was this consensual activity or was it assault/molestation?


I don’t classify assault or molestation as sexual activity or experimentation, as I think those are entirely different things. But as far as abuse or molestation goes, there is a difference between a 12-year-old grabbing his 10-year-old sister once to upset her and realizing it was a terrible thing to do and a 14-year-old forcing themselves on a 7-year-old repeatedly and trying to excuse it with “kids will be kids.” If someone is planning to raise kids with their partner, they should not ignore a history of child abuse.

Some kids engage in mutual exploration or experimentation. Most therapists don’t consider it abusive if minor family members close in age explore by mutual agreement. A 13-year-old and a 12-year-old might be curious. A 20-year-old and an 18-year-old might be in love. And that brings us to another question.


4) If this was a consensual thing in the past, was it a one-time event, a casual family-with-benefits thing, a love affair, or what?

They may have engaged in everything from a one-time instance of playing doctor or some other game, or had an ongoing love affair that they thought was going to last forever. Or perhaps there was something in between. That matters.


Discovering that your partner is cheating on you, deeply in love with a sibling, is a different matter than finding out that your partner used to masturbate in front of a sibling when they were teens, for mutual enjoyment, and both are different than finding out that your partner assaulted three relatives.

Going back to the question that prompted this entry, it wasn’t clear whether both of the siblings were "10-12" or not. Assuming they were close in age, it was not a matter of abuse, and everything ended before they were even teenagers, then there’s nothing for Lauren to do, unless she thinks it is causing ongoing problems in her marriage, in which case she should seek marriage therapy and perhaps individual therapy. If he is a good father and a good husband, she should be happy knowing that he chose to marry her and loves her. That should outweigh what happened in his childhood, even if she thinks what happened is wrong.

All of the above refers to interaction with siblings, cousins or even aunts/uncles who are close in age. There is a different dynamic if the involvement was with an older aunt/uncle, parent, or grandparent (or, in the case of someone who is older, an adult child). Again, abuse is a whole different matter than consensual sex between adults. But consensual adult intergenerational sex does happen, perhaps not as often as intragenerational, but it happens.

If someone is not in a committed relationship, but is rather just dating someone, and they think the other person is “too close” to a family member, they are entirely free to stop seeing them. A casual outsider is not going to change family dynamics, and trying to do so will likely make everyone unhappy. Who wants to be suspicious that their partner is cheating with anyone, let alone a family member? A consanguinamorous bond can be an especially powerful one, and if someone suspects they are dating someone who is has such a bond, issuing an ultimatum will likely mean the dating will end.

Like anything else about a partner’s sexual history, it comes down to knowing what you’ll accept and what you won’t (and what you need to know to begin with). While you may be missing out on a great partner if you “can’t” accept some of the consensual sex in their past or that they will not tell you something, it isn’t a good idea to get in deeper with someone if you’re going to end up holding that aspect of their past against them.

Conversely, if you'll love them and let them know they can be honest with you about their past and whether or not it (still) holds an erotic charge for them, you can have a great time or a great life together, especially if you are willing to sometimes play off of that history in fantasies.

Friday, February 21, 2014

Novels to Buy

[Bumping this up... just because!]

I’m not going to pretend I can give an unbiased review of Diane Rinella’s new book, Time’s Forbidden Flower, which completes the story began in Love’s Forbidden Flower, the novel I first blogged about here. After all, I have been in ongoing contact with Rinella and the plot of the works involves something near and dear to my heart. Also, I may have influenced this latest work. There’s a third work involved: "Love’s Erotic Flower," a short story which was released between the two novels and is a sizzling detailing of the sexual coupling (over multiple encounters) between the main characters.

One need not read the novels to enjoy "Erotic" nor read "Erotic" to enjoy the novels, but both novels should be read in sequence, and to only reason to avoid "Erotic" if you enjoy the first novel is if you hate to get aroused by fiction.

I can’t recommend all three works more strongly. I even like the cover art.



Lily and Donovan are soulmates, complete with a mutual erotic and romantic attraction. They happen to be brother and sister as well. Yes, this story involves consanguinamory, which is something some people find shocking or disgusting, but is something that is experienced on some level by enough people that you do know someone who has been, or is involved, whether you know it or not.

That’s why these works of fiction are more than just something that is engaging. They are important. They are important because there are people who will identify with the characters and will no longer feel so alone. Although the forbidden nature of the issue is addressed multiple times, the “i” word is never spoken, nor is there a lecturing of the reader on all the points you will find here. I don't recall that she ever explains that in Rhode Island, the home state of the characters, their love is not criminalized as it still is in most US states. This is a story about forbidden love from a writer with strong empathy that may get people to think and feel differently than they did when they picked it up, but not a contrived polemic.

Rinella does not chicken out by going the stepsibling route or through some other escape hatch. Lily and Donovan are blood siblings, who grew up together. However, there are twists I didn’t see coming. I thought things might go in one direction and they went another. This is not a simple straight line, but neither is it something that is convoluted to the point of losing the reader. The characters seem real, complete with real flaws. Not everything happens exactly the way the reader might want when wanted, and not everything is tied up in a pretty bow by the end. Yet, the satisfactory payoffs are there. It is just that Rinella draws the reader in to make them feel the hot and cold of a good multi-course meal, rather than spoonfeeding them lukewarm junk food.

I noticed that at least one character is polyamorous in the sense of being able to truly love more than one person at the same time.

The novels are for anyone who wants to read a modern tale of still-forbidden love, or anyone who wants to read a realistic account of consanguinamory, or anyone who is in or knows someone who is in or has been involved in such a relationship. Or, maybe you simply prefer a good story about love and family that pretty much spans the lifetime of the main characters.

They are not for anyone who is absolutely unwilling to give a romance between siblings any consideration. (If that is you, I’m surprised you’re still here reading my blog.)

How nice it is to have something that treats this love between sibings with dignity and depth. I would very much like to see these works adapted for the screen.

Have I been clear enough?  Buy all three!

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Discovering Consanguinamory in the Family Tree

I am [or, had been] active on [a certain Big Online Portal's question and answer service], especially when it comes to explaining the importance of relationship rights, full marriage equality, and decriminalizing consanguinamory. Someone had this question...

Family Tree Concerns..?
My Grandfather recently passed away and my Grandmother told us all that her and my Grandfather were never married, they had always celebrated an anniversary (or so we thought,) but didn't understand while she waited till he died before telling us. After further research into my family tree I have discovered that my Grandmother married her Uncle (is this incest!?!), my Mother feels all weird because it feels like her life has been a lie and the only person she could have asked and got a proper answer was her Dad but now he's gone so we are both just looking for some advice or if anyone has been or is going through a similar situation...
This was my answer, which was chosen as the best answer (thankyouverymuch)...
= = = =
Here's what matters: Was your grandfather a good person? A good spouse to your Grandmother? A good parent? A good grandparent? THAT is what matters, not any genetic or legal relation to your grandmother. There's no lie about any of that. Your mother's life is no different now than it was before she knew that information. She's just allowing cultural prejudices to influence her reaction. Your grandparents had what is called a common-law marriage. As long as they were good to each other, that is what matters.

You didn't make it clear, but it appears you mean your grandfather was the brother of one of your grandmother's parents (he would still be an "uncle" to her if he had, at one time, been married to one of your grandmother's parents' sister without any biological relation to your grandmother). Assuming there was a genetic connection (though it is possible he had been adopted into the family, too), that is still no reason for alarm. This is much more common than people think. People are finding out about this through DNA testing and family records, although family records don't always reveal the truth. If you go back further, it is virtually guaranteed you'll find you have consanguineous ancestors.

You don't have to go too far back in anyone's family tree to find these kinds of things. I doubt there is a person out there whose ancestry has nothing like this.

In other words.... you and your family are as normal as everyone else.
= = =

Just about everyone has incestuous childbearing in their family tree. In some cases, someone was raped, which  of course is a horrible,  or there was cheating. In other cases, it was true love between people who were not cheating on anyone. If the law prevented them from legally marrying or from telling the truth, that is a problem, a terrible problem, of the law, and just one of many reasons we need full marriage equality. It is not something wrong with the lovers.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Bus Sighting at Media Matters

Luke Brinker at mediamatters.org, in responding to an anti-equality column by twice-divorced-now-in-third-marriage radio talk show host and author, Dennis Prager, threw polyamorous and consanguinamorous people under the bus.
Prager's prediction dovetails with those of other marriage equality opponents who similarly suggest that necrophilia and bestiality might become commonly accepted practices if gay couples are allowed to marry. But in the 10 years since Massachusetts became the first state to legalize marriage equality, there hasn't been a rush to legalize polygamous unions. Meanwhile, most states that allow incestuous marriages are right-leaning states where same-sex marriage currently isn't allowed.
As Slate's Dahlia Lithwick has observed, the problem with "slippery slope" arguments of the kind advanced by Prager is that they ignore the deep differences between allowing a committed, loving same-sex couple to get married and permitting, say, a brother and sister to get married. Incestuous relationships, Lithwick notes, are often exploitative and psychologically destructive, with severe consequences for children's health.

Here is how I responded in the comments (with links added here for further reading)...
 
The response to bigots when they bring up polygamy and consanguinamory is "What's wrong with letting consenting adults marry?" Please note that under our broad legal systems, corpses and other species (necrophilia and bestiality) are not considered consenting adults. However, a consenting adult might want to marry more than one person, or marry a close relative. When (white) women got the right to vote, there wasn't a rush for voting rights for people of color, and when Loving v. Virginia knocked down bans on monogamous interracial marriages, there wasn't a rush to grant to same-gender freedom to marry, but there should have been.

It is unfair to say that incestuous relationships are often exploitative and psychology destructive. That is ABUSIVE relationships in general, which can include complete strangers and interracial couples same-gender couples. Also, it is the abusive relationships that tend to come to the attention of law enforcement and counselors. Nobody in a good relationship is calling up a shrink or law enforcement and saying, "Hey, I just want to tell you I'm in an incestuous relationship and it is great!"

The "mutant baby" argument is a smokescreen. First of all, some consanguinamorous relationships involve only people of the same gender. Yes, they are gay marriages, so to speak. I have interviewed people in these relationships myself. Secondly, marriage shouldn't be equated with baby-making. Not all mixed-gender relationships birth biological children. Thirdly, contrary to myth, most births to consanguineous parents do not produce children with significant birth defects or other genetic problems (I know some of these children, and so do you, whether you know it or not); while births to
other parents do sometimes have birth defects. Heterosexual couples with obvious, series genetic diseases are not prevented from dating, having sex, having children, or marrying, so the "mutant baby" argument is not a justification for stopping genetic half-sisters who didn't even grow up with each other from marrying.

I expect more from Media Matters than to throw some consenting adults under the bus to assuage bigots. There is no good reason to deny that we must keep evolving until an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, monogamy or polyamory, race, or religion is free to marry any and all consenting adults. The limited same-gender freedom to marry is a great and historic step, but is NOT full marriage equality, because equality "just for some" is not equality. Let's stand up for EVERY ADULT'S right to marry the person(s) they love. Get on the right side of history!

Categories