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.

Read more »

Posted in: consanguineous,freedom to marry,GSA,incest,lack of equality harms,law,marriage equality,myths,prejudice

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.

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,breaking up homes,brother-sister,children,consanguineous,family reaction,incest,lack of equality harms,law,media,persecution,prejudice,siblings,stigma

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”*?

Read more »

Posted in: allies,freedom to marry,marriage equality,politicians,prejudice,solidarity,terminology

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

Read more »

Posted in: brother-brother,brother-sister,consanguineous,FAQ,GSA,incest,love,myths,prejudice,siblings,sister-sister,stigma

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.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,brother-sister,children,consanguineous,cousins,family reaction,media,prejudice,science,siblings,stigma

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.

Read more »

Posted in: boundaries,family reaction,FAQ,incest,love,prejudice

Guilty Pleas in Absurd Prosecution of Consenting Adults

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.

Read more »

Posted in: consanguineous,courts,father-daughter,GSA,incest,lack of equality harms,law,prejudice,prosecution,UK

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

Read more »

Posted in: consanguineous,FAQ,father-daughter,prejudice

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!

Read more »

Posted in: boundaries,children,consanguineous,freedom to marry,incest,marriage equality,media,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,solidarity,stigma

Defending Stephanie Seymour

(Time to bump this entry up to congratulate Stephanie Seymour on being the the new face of Estée Lauder. ALSO see update at the end.)

Here’s an example of someone trashing the beautiful Stephanie Seymour for daring to be affectionate with her son in public. I’ll edit the quotes slightly to remove language that some people still get upset about.

One of the things that has me saying “Are you f------ stupid?” are the photos of Stephanie Seymour and her son.

She goes on…

The photos do look like she’s making out with her son. A little creepy…yes!

Why is that creepy?

Is it normal for a son to cop a feel of the boobies?

For some people, yes. Jealous?

Turns out her son is gay. Which apparently makes it ok to make out with your hot Mom on a beach.

It’s okay for any adult to be affectionate with any consenting adult on a beach. It should certainly be legal.

My question is, “Are you f------ stupid?”

Maybe they were simply having some minimal affection. Or maybe it is a sign of more. What’s the problem? What’s stupid is trashing others for sharing love and affection.

I have to admit, I’m vey curious to hear your thoughts on the pics.

My thought is that it is too bad that everyone can’t be on such good terms with their parent or child.

February 12, 2014 UPDATE...

This photo shoot has fingers wagging now.

Read more »

Posted in: boundaries,coming out,consanguineous,incest,love,media,mother-son,prejudice,stigma

How Nonmonogamous People Can Avoid Trouble

Believe it or not, there are still criminal laws in many places criminalizing consensual sex and relationships between adults.

It doesn't matter to them how loving, happy, and lasting the relationships are. It apparently doesn't matter to the people interfering that every dollar or minute they spend trying to stop consenting adults from loving each other is a dollar or minute that could instead go into protecting people, especially children, against predators.

In addition to the persecution and prosecution of consanguinamorous people, polyamorists, polygamists, and other ethical nonmonogamists can face discrimination and even prosecution.

Some awesome people put together a very helpful lists of state laws for polyamorous people in the US or considering moving to the US. First, note the disclaimer that there is an ever-present at the bottom of this blog. I'll mostly repeat it here:

The focus of this blog is consenting adults. This blog does not advocate anyone engage in activity that is currently illegal in their jurisdiction; it does advocate changing or repealing any law that prevents the freedom of association, love, and full marriage equality for adults. This blog condemns rape, sexual assault, and child molestation, and does not provide medical, therapeutic, legal, financial, or cooking advice. This blog links to other sites for informational purposes; it does not necessarily support everything at those links.

OK, with that out of the way, I'll continue as a friend.

Please keep in mind that while a state may not have a law against "fornication" (sex outside of a legal marriage), "adultery" (when a married person has sex with someone other than her or his legal spouse), or cohabitation, it might still criminalize consensual sex between close relatives (whether genetically related, steprelation, or adoptive). For more information about that, see here. Also, laws on the books may be rarely or selectively enforced, so it it s good to consult an attorney familiar with the laws of a state as well as actual criminal and civil cases in that state and general legal climate.

While most nonmonogamists never get prosecuted or sued, the threat is always there in many places.

With states that allow a legally married spouse to get an advantage in a divorce by citing adultery or sue their spouse's lover for financial compensation, the only way to be sure of avoiding a problem is to simply avoid the risk entirely by not getting involved with someone who is legally married, or, if you are legally married, not getting involved with anyone other than your spouse. Even if everyone is enthusiastic at first or at the time of the sex or relationship, someone can still use the law to get what they see as revenge should things tum cold.

State By State


All 50 US states have statutes against bigamy/polygamy (multiple licensed marriages). In most states, bigamy is a felony.

In the following states, bigamy is a misdemeanor. However, once the penalty is paid, you are back at square one.

Alaska
Arkansas
Hawaii (petty misdemeanor-- 30 days in jail)
Iowa
Maine
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New Jersey
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island (misdemeanor, $1000)
Tennessee
Texas

The following lists are ordered by which states have the most promise statutorily. The first list is the best, the last list is the worst.

The following states, have no statutes against  fornication, adultery, or cohabitation, and they also do not recognize common-law marriages (which assigns marital status to people who might not want to be considered married).

California
Hawaii
Nevada
Oregon
Washington

The following states have statutes that concern adultery, but none for fornication, cohabitation, or common-law marriage. In some of them adultery is grounds for divorce only. In others the offending spouse simply forfeits any rights to the innocent spouse's estate. In the rest of them, adultery is a crime that can only be prosecuted by the offended spouse. In a successful polygamous relationship, these need not be obstructive. If the relationship fails, however, the statutory adulterer will be charged.

Connecticut
Delaware
Indiana
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland (Adultery results in a $10 fine and is grounds for divorce)
Missouri
New Jersey
Ohio
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas (Texas does recognize common-law marriages, but apparently only if they are registered with the county clerk)
Vermont

Both states make adultery and fornication misdemeanors, although in Illinois the conduct must be "open and notorious." For interest's sake, we have listed all of the states whose statutes are no worse than Georgia or Illinois. This only means that in these states you are as likely as not, to be able to find a lawyer who will talk to you.

Arizona
Georgia
Illinois
Michigan
Minnesota
New Hampshire (New Hampshire recognizes common-law marriages, but only for inheritance purposes after death)
New Mexico
New York
North Dakota

The following states have laws against cohabitation.

Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
Florida
Massachusetts
Mississippi
Nebraska
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
West Virginia
Wyoming

The following states recognize common-law marriages, or else make adultery a felony, and are not on the previous lists.

Colorado
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Montana
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Utah
Washington D.C.
Wisconsin

How do people minimize the risk of losing in court? What can nonmonogamists do to protect themselves? Any of these steps might help...

1) Consult a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. A criminal defense or family law attorney might be someone well worth consulting.

2) Move to more enlightened states or countries.

3) Be careful who you tell and what you tell them. In the US, we have a Constitutional right against self-incrimination (see 5th Amendment) and the right to remain silent when arrested by law enforcement. It's a good idea when dealing with police to give them polite, brief "yes" or "no" or "I don't know" or "I don't remember" answers unless even one of those could incriminate you. In the US, you also have the right to an attorney and it is a good idea speak up and ask for a lawyer if you're held or taken in by police. Also in the US, unless there is imminent danger to someone, you don't have the let police into your home without a search warrant, and even search warrants can have limits. YOU may think something is obvious and gives you away, the police may even have figured it out, but staying silent about it can still protect you.

4) Be careful what you document. Many lovers enjoy taking video or pictures of themselves having fun with each other, but for the nonmonogamous, such media, if it falls into the wrong hands, can be trouble.

5) Have a cover story. Anticipate questions, whether from those you know you or those who don't who might not approve. Historically, it isn't unusual for a home to have three or more adults.

6) Know your risk in raising children. Not only will children have to deal with the prejudice of others, but children may also provide testimony that goes against you, often unwittingly.

7) Stick to private places and lock the door when you get to the fun.

Note that most ethicists say it is OK to lie to authorities who are trying to enforce unjust laws or policies. An extreme example is a Nazi SS officer asking you, "Are you hiding any Jews here?" It was ethical to say "No." Well, I think that applies here, too, though the situation is not as extreme. It is nobody else's business if adults are having consensual sex or relationships.

This advice shouldn't even be necessary, but until we get to the point where we have relationship rights for all adults, including full marriage equality, nonmonogamists should think about protecting themselves. Of course, some level of trouble is necessary to make change. Laws need to be overturned in courts or changed by legislatures, but it is up to each set of lovers to decide for themselves if they want to come out of the closet and to push for those things. The more other people realize that ethical nonomonogamy is a reality all around them, the sooner the persecution will be greatly reduced.

Police officers usually have some wiggle-room when it comes to investigating or arresting people can can look the other way if they choose. Prosecutors can choose not to prosecute. Judges can dismiss cases. Juries can refuse to convict (research jury nullification). So I beg these people to let consenting adults love each other without harassment, without prosecution.

Do you have any suggestions? Any tales to tell about what you've done to protect yourself? What do you think, dear reader? Leave a comment or email me.

Read more »

Posted in: bigamy,boundaries,cheating,FAQ,lack of equality harms,law,love,open,persecution,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,swinging,US

How Consanguineous Lovers Can Avoid Trouble

Believe it or not, there are still criminal laws in many places criminalizing consensual sex between adults, and there are still police officers who will investigate people for this "crime," still prosecutors who will take the case before a court, and still judges and jurors who will convict people and sentence them to prison.

It doesn't matter to them how loving the relationships are. It doesn't matter if they love each other more than they could love others, it doesn't matter if the lovers didn't even meet each other until they were adults. It apparently doesn't matter to the people interfering that every dollar or minute they spend trying to stop consenting adults from loving each other is a dollar or minute that could instead go into protecting people, especially children, against predators.

In addition to this persecution of consanguinamorous people, there aren't any protections against other forms of discrimination against the consanguinamorous, such as employment discrimination. There are still many states that don't have protections for LGBT people, either, and polyamorous people are even less protected than monogamous LGBT people.

I sometimes forget that people don’t follow the news and law as closely as I do for this blog, so they may be unaware of these things. So I want to share with you what I've learned.

First, note the disclaimer that there is an ever-present at the bottom of this blog. I'll mostly repeat it here:

The focus of this blog is consenting adults. This blog does not advocate anyone engage in activity that is currently illegal in their jurisdiction; it does advocate changing or repealing any law that prevents the freedom of association, love, and full marriage equality for adults. This blog condemns rape, sexual assault, and child molestation, and does not provide medical, therapeutic, legal, financial, or cooking advice. This blog links to other sites for informational purposes; it does not necessarily support everything at those links.

OK, with that out of the way, I'll continue as a friend.

The vast majority of people who have consensual sex with a close relative never get "caught." 10-15% of people in their early 20s will confide in surveys to having had consensual sexual contact with a sibling. The percentages rise in older age groups. That's just the people who will confide in the surveys, and doesn't include being with aunts, uncles, parents, etc.. The percentages increase in older age groups because there are more opportunities over the years. Many of those situations involve a moment or a fling or something that just lasts for season, but in other cases they are long-term romances and lifelong spousal relationships.

While most never get prosecuted, the threat is always there in so many places, and I regularly find news reports of such prosecutions. When people do get caught and publicly persecuted and, often, prosecuted, in almost every case, the lovers were outed and handed over to ax-grinding prosecutors due to one or more of a few factors (presented in no particular order):

1) Self-incrimination.
2) Being ratted out by a claimed witness.
3) Testing and reporting of a child's DNA.
4) Being caught in the act by law enforcement.

In other words, it isn’t like the police come door to door, scan crowds in public, or are doing stakeouts to catch consanguineous lovers breaking laws against consensual incest. That's the good news. But let's take a closer look at the bad news.

Self-incrimination. One of the problems is that people either "confess" or tell law enforcement way too much that they don't have to. One or more of them admit the relationship, often not aware it is (still, stupidly) illegal where they are, wrongly thinking if they explain it was consensual then of course the police will leave them alone. For a real-life example of this, see this posting. Law enforcement may also get a hold of some media (love letters, homemade videos) that documents the sexual aspect of the relationship. That's right... doing something so many other lovers do freely can be used against these consensual relationships.

Ratted out. Someone outside of the relationship, whether a nosy neighbor, a malicious ex, a jealous or envious family member, even a professional/academic/social rival sees something, hears something, or just gets a hunch based on how the lovers are smitten with each other and they contact the authorities. See this example.

Child. If someone dares to exercise their reproductive rights and have a child together, the DNA of that child is proof of parentage. Contrary to popular myths, most children born to close relatives are healthy and do not look any different than any other child. Many of the ones I've seen are beautiful children. But, if the child's DNA is tested and the results showing the parents are consanguineous reported to the authorities, depending on the circumstances it may be used as evidence against the lovers. See this example.

Caught in public. Many, many people have had sex in "public" places, usually without getting caught. Depending on the circumstances, police might send the lovers on their way. But, if in checking identification and asking questions, the police determine that the lovers are closely related (see "self-incrimination" above), they might arrest the lovers even when they would have otherwise let them go. See this example.

So what can those who enjoy consanguinamory do to protect themselves? Any of these steps might help.

1) Consult a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. A criminal defense or family law attorney might be someone well worth consulting.

2) Move to more enlightened states or countries. Moving also may get you away from those who are aware of your biological relation and would oppose your relationship. The best states in the US are Rhode Island and New Jersey. Perhaps the worst state is Texas, which technically criminalizes sex between first cousins.

3) Be careful who you tell and what you tell them. In the US, we have a Constitutional right against self-incrimination (see 5th Amendment) and the right to remain silent when arrested by law enforcement. It's a good idea when dealing with police to give them polite, brief "yes" or "no" or "I don't know" or "I don't remember" answers unless even one of those could incriminate you. In the US, you also have the right to an attorney and it is a good idea speak up and ask for a lawyer if you're held or taken in by police. Also in the US, unless there is imminent danger to someone, you don't have the let police into your home without a search warrant, and even search warrants can have limits. YOU may think something is obvious and gives you away, the police may even have figured it out, but staying silent about it can still protect you.

4) Be careful what you document. Many lovers enjoy taking video or pictures of themselves having fun with each other, but for the consanguinamorous, such media, if it falls into the wrong hands, can be trouble.

5) Have a cover story. Anticipate questions, whether from those you know you or those who don't who might not approve. There's nothing unusual or unconventional about family members living together, going places together, or frequently visiting each other. In extreme situations, consanguineous lovers might want to take on "beards," meaning pretending to have a relationship with (even marrying) others to direct attention away from their "forbidden" relationship. If someone does this, it is better not to deceive the beard(s) but rather have an agreement with someone who is fully informed. An example of an ideal situation along these lines would be if two siblings from one family married two siblings from another family. Such marriages have always gone on and were even popular in some places in the past, whether as real marriages or as beard situations.

6) Know your risk in having biological children together. Many consanguineous lovers opt not to take the risk, either for genetic reasons or legal reasons (or, like other people, because they just plain preferred not to have children). In some places, a credible defense if DNA proves a child was born to close relatives is to claim that the child was conceived through using a turkey baster or condom or sex toy that resulted in artificial insemination (the claim would be that the male ejaculated onto or into the object, which was then inserted into the female). In such places, it is the actual sex act that is criminal, not having genetic children together.

7) Stick to private places and lock the door when you get to the fun.

Note that most ethicists say it is OK to lie to authorities who are trying to enforce unjust laws or polices. An extreme example is a Nazi SS officer asking you, "Are you hiding any Jews here?" It was ethical to say "No." Well, I think that applies here, too, though the situation is not as extreme. It is nobody else's business if adults are having consensual sex.

This advice shouldn't even be necessary, but until we get to the point where we have relationship rights for all adults, including full marriage equality, consanguinamorous people should think about protecting themselves. Of course, some level of trouble is necessary to make change. Laws need to be overturned in courts or changed by legislatures, but it is up to each set of lovers to decide for themselves if they want to come out of the closet to push for those things. I have seen at least two couples come out publicly on Facebook, which resulted, in at least one of the cases, them being given trouble by some of the people who were supposed to be their friends. But the more other people realize that consanguinamory is a reality all around them, the sooner the persecution will be greatly reduced.

Police officers usually have some wiggle-room when it comes to investigating or arresting people can can look the other way if they choose. Prosecutors can choose not to prosecute. Judges can dismiss cases. Juries can refuse to convict (research jury nullification). So I beg these people to let consenting adults love each other without harassment, without prosecution.

Do you have any suggestions? Any tales to tell about what you've done to protect yourself, or being caught, or catching someone? What do you think, dear reader? Leave a comment or email me.

Read more »

Posted in: consanguineous,FAQ,GSA,help,incest,lack of equality harms,law,persecution,prejudice,prosecution,stigma

Cousins Can't Love Each Other Because it Makes Gay Babies

Or so says someone by the name of  Ropafadzo Mapimhidze writing at newsday.co.zw about the cruel treatment (including criminal conviction) recently of a couple of consenting adults in Zimbabwe, prosecuted for loving each other while being first cousins. You know, like hundred of millions of other people throughout history and alive today and legally married.

This story has generated so much debate and I decided to do a bit of research on reasons why incest is taboo, and why incest occurs despite the prohibition. And what the consequences are.

Where this is taboo, it is because of superstition, ignorance, legislative inertia, and control. It happens anyway because consenting adults love each other more than they pay attention to following unjust laws.

Such children can be born with extra toes, three eyes, and they can also grow to become homosexual, they may also have a low IQ and a potential to mentally harm future offspring, says the website. It also notes that such children can become people who are not able to interact with others or express love.

First of all, they were not prosecuted for having children. They were prosecuted for having sex. There is a difference. Also, all the columnist described above happens with unrelated lovers, too. In fact, we do not prevent people with obvious, serious, genetic diseases and birth defects from dating, having sex, having children, or marrying. But there are hundreds of millions of children from first cousins who are healthy, attractive, bright, and very social. Finally, there's nothing wrong with being gay.

The New York Times recently reported that first cousins are somewhat more likely than unrelated parents to have a child with a serious birth defect, mental retardation or genetic disease, but their increased risk is nowhere near as large as most people think, the newspaper quoted research done by some scientists.

But who needs scientists when we can listen to bigotry instead?

At least the piece does mention Genetic Sexual Attraction. Then it goes on to...

“Traditionally, such matters were dealt with by chiefs who then would find the rightful people to raise products of incest. We have to go back to our roots and see how best these matters can be dealt with the Zimbabwean way because these children are innocent victims of incest,” Kandiero said.

You know what makes children the biggest victims? When strangers use the power of unjust laws to force their parents apart and break up their home and brand their parents as criminals.

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,breaking up homes,children,consanguineous,cousins,GSA,lack of equality harms,myths,persecution,prejudice,prosecution,stigma,Zimbabwe

Will The Philippines Take a Step Backwards?

As reported by Xianne Arcangel at gmanetwork.com, lawmakers in the Philippines are considering legislation that would criminalize consanguinamory.

Incestuous affairs between family members 18 years old and above—even if done with consent—may soon be penalized if the proposed Anti-Incest bill is passed into law.

 

House Bill 3329, filed by Cagayan de Oro representative Rufus Rodriguez and his brother ABAMIN party-list representative Maximo Rodriguez Jr., seeks to penalize incest between consenting parties.

Very bad idea. Not only would it move the nation away from, rather than closer to, relationship rights for all adults, including full marriage equality, but criminalizing CONSENSUAL adult relationships will make it harder for law enforcement to stop ABUSERS because resources will be diverted AND witnesses and victims will be less willing to cooperate out of fear of law enforcement.

Rodriguez said in a statement on Sunday that an Anti-Incest law is needed to address the "rising" number of incestuous relationships occurring in families of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs).

That doesn't actually say why they should be criminalized. And the number probably isn't rising. They are just becoming more aware of the reality that has always been there.

Under Articles 37 and 38 of the Family Code of the Philippines, incestuous marriages are void ab initio—from the beginning—for being contrary to public policy.

That needs to be dumped.

The Anti-Rape Law of 1997, meanwhile, imposes the death penalty for rape when the victim is under 18 years old and the offender is a relative within the third civil degree, or when the offender is the common-law spouse of the parent of the abused individual.

So children are already protected.

Under HB 3329, incestuous sexual relations with consent between ascendants and descendants of any degree, as well as between brothers and sisters whether of the full or half blood will be prohibited and considered unlawful.  

There is no good reason for this.

In-laws, stepparents and stepchildren, adoptive parents and their children, as well as collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or illegitimate up to the fourth civil degree, are also banned from having incestuous affairs.

Ridiculous.

Violators shall be punished with prision correccional, or imprisonment for from six months to six years. 

Why? To whom are they a threat?

Jhoanna Ballaran of the manilatimes.net also covered this news.

An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults.

Read more »

Posted in: boundaries,consanguineous,incest,lack of equality harms,law,persecution,Philippines,prejudice

Zimbabwe Still Prosecuting Consenting Adults

From allafrica.com comes this report of the criminal prosecution of first cousins for the "crime" of loving each other.

Two cousins who were involved in an incestuous relationship which resulted in the birth of a girl and current pregnancy will perform 630 hours of community service. The two's fathers are brothers and traditionally are expected to treat each other as brother and sister. Ashley Feremenga (19) and her cousin Robson Feremenga (21) were living as husband and wife in Dzivaresekwa before neighbours alerted Ashley's father Jonasi.

I wonder what the love lives of those neighbors are like... if they have a love life in the first place. Must not be very fulfilling if they have time to rat people out for loving each other.

I'm sure their child is healthy. Otherwise, you can be sure this report would have noted any problems.

The duo was convicted after their own plea of guilt when they appeared before Harare magistrate Mr Aidonia Masawi who sentenced them to a 36 month-imprisonment term.

What a waste of the court.

Ashley's father Jonasi only came to know about their relationship after being advised by his neighbours.

He filed a police report leading to their arrest.

Rat. The lovers should keep his grandchildren away from him.

Fortunately, very few US states have ridiculous laws criminalizing consensual sex between first cousins. About half of US states will legally marry first cousins, and such marriages are common in many countries today, and have been very common throughout history. Prosecuting consenting adults for loving each other is outrageous.

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,breaking up homes,children,consanguineous,courts,cousins,family reaction,lack of equality harms,love,prejudice,prosecution,Zimbabwe

Why Not Solidarity?

Here's an older entry on the blog that is still relevant, so I'm bumping it up.

Here’s a question that touches on prejudices and solidarity as they relate to marriage equality.

How come the right to marrige fight only includes gay marriage and does not include the right for bisexuals to marry both sexes, or adult incest marriage and even more so polygamy? It obviously is not about the right to marry, so why do we lie.

I am here, fighting for full marriage equality. But it is true that there are people who only want the freedom to marry extended in a way that benefits just them or their friends. You’re right; they aren’t really fighting for the right to marry or for marriage equality, just their own freedom to marry. But there are others who fight for full marriage equality.

The question got some responses.

Mike Jones says…

Equality marriage is not about marriage equality at all. It is about promoting the gay agenda and they do not support bisexual or trans gender issues either.

The “gay agenda” - ? – You mean, like going to work, paying taxes? But even Mike can see that others are being thrown under the bus.

A polygamy according to them, should have the right to marry all that he loves and the mother of all of his children. An adult incest couple should have the right to consummate their love inmarriage, both father adn daughter and mother and son. This is all under the equality marriage banner, but they dare only raise their gay flag.

We do need solidarity. Even if someone can not tell us what "a polygamy" is.

Smooth T says…

Simply because polygamy is not our fight and neither is incest.

I see. So Martin Luther King, Jr. should have only asked for civil rights for African-Americans, not Asian-Americans or Latinos?

Incest is disgusting and it’s A FAMILY LINE THAT SHOULD NEVER BE CROSSED

Some people say that about two men having sex. You don’t have to like it to recognize that consenting adults should have their rights.

polygamy is just a patriarchal thing that puts the woman as a slave to her husband and isn’t beneficial for anyone but the man.

That would be your concept of polygyny. Full marriage equality would also allow polyandry and group marriage, and again, what consenting adults do in private should not be subject to the prejudices of others.

Alexis says…

Bisexuals *already* have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, just not the same sex.

They should have both.

Second, incestuous and polygamous marriages being denied is not a violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. I’m not even necessarily saying that I have a problem with them being allowed, but it’s simply not a matter of Constitutional law being broken. Denying same-sexcouples the right to marry, on the other hand, *is*.

Why is that so? Merely stating that doesn’t make it true. I’m still waiting for a good reason.

Wolfie says…

Incest marriage is self-destructive and goes against how families work.

No proof is offered, just an assertion.

Nothing wrong with Polygamy, if it is regulated and everyone is treated equally.

Well at least Wolfie is open to that.

In discussion after discussion, we fail to see a good reason why the freedom to marry should be extended to some, but not all adults. Get on the right side of history and support relationship rights for ALL adults! Support these lovers and so many others. Here's how.

Read more »

Posted in: marriage equality,prejudice,solidarity

Coverage of Genetic Sexual Attraction Case

Ignorance abounds when it comes to Genetic Sexual Attraction, as evidenced by both many of the journalists writing about the Mistie Atkinson case and certainly the people commenting on the stories. Outlets all over the word have covered the story, most just reprinting versions of the same two or three articles. [I am bumping this up because a news outlet decided to print this story as if it just happened.]

Here it is at dailymail.co.uk. The headline?

Mom who made sex tape with son, 16, is jailed for four years... but says it was just a case of 'genetic attraction' after they were reunited after 15 years apart

That makes it sound like she was making a video to show others.

Mistie Rebecca Atkinson, 32, was sentenced to four years and eight months behind bars in Napa County Superior Court, California on Wednesday.

It came after she was found in a Ukiah, California motel room with the 16-year-old boy, who had recorded his mother giving him oral sex on his phone.

 So he recorded it.

Here's the coverage at nydailynews.com.

Here is it at newsone.com.

Here it is at ktvu.com.

Even a site called eastafricanmoviedatabase.com printed the article.

Seamus O'Riley blogged the NY Daily News article.

Here is one of the comments...

equinox displayed complete ignorance of GSA... 

When is a rose not a rose? Incest by any other name smells so sweet. Let's play innocence by semantics today! 

Must be nice to be so sure that nobody else could possibly experience something you haven't.

And there were several comments from people who said she must have intended to assault him from the start. After all, why else would a woman care about seeing the person to whom she gave birth? Ignorance abounds.

Here is the inquisitr.com coverage, and the kolotv.com coverage, and the bossip.com coverage, where she is called crazy. Finally, see this blog for the same sort of thing, where she os called "sicko."

This was most certainly not incest in the sociological sense. She was not the boy's guardian. She did not raise the boy. She should be treated no more harshly than any other 32 year-old woman who does the same things with a 16 year-old boy in the state of California. If anything, the sentences in GSA cases that don't involve violence should be more lenient and focus on counseling.

Read more »

Posted in: California,consanguineous,courts,family reaction,GSA,incest,law,mother-son,myths,prejudice,prosecution,reunion

19 Responses to Anti-Polyamory

Much thanks to MultipleMatch.com for running my defense of ethical nonmonogamy, such as polyamory, polygamy, and so on.

Click here to read "19 Responses for Answering Anti-Polyamory & Plural Marriage"

Bumped up.

Read more »

Posted in: group,myths,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice,swinging

Update on Zambia Attack on Family

Bertha Chipapuka, 35, with her 11-month-old baby and her ‘brotherly’ husband Mukuwa Nicholas Bulaya, 38, appeared before Serenje Magistrate’s Court for incest.

Authorities in Zambia continue with their attack on a family, which we wrote about here before. Chambo Ng'uni reports at daily-mail.co.zm...

SCORES of residents yesterday thronged the Serenje Magistrate’s Court to hear the case of incest involving Mukuwa Nicholas Bulaya and his younger sister Bertha Mwenda Chipapuka. 

Some residents arrived at Serenje Magistrate’s Court before 08:00 hours and scrambled for a few seats inside the courtroom when the doors were opened while others stood on the doorway and windows to hear the case.

So much interest. Are they voyeurs?

Mr Ngosa said the court decided to hear the cases against Bulaya and Chipapuka separately in the interest of justice since the two siblings are separately charged.

And the victim is....? Is...? No victim! No crime!

“I am asking for my sister to be released so that she can look for the things that the child needs and also bring me food and soap since no one from our family has visited us since we were arrested,” Bulaya said.

Mr Ngosa rejected the application and told Bulaya that he had no powers to release his sister (Chipapuka) because her case was being heard by another court.

Infuriating.

Let them go and apologize for ever interfering. Of course, even if that happened, their lives have been ruined by the outrageous bigotry and invasion of privacy to which they're being subjected. There is no good reason for this to be a matter for law enforcement to begin with.

Ten Myths About Sibling Consanguinamory

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,breaking up homes,brother-sister,children,consanguineous,family reaction,GSA,incest,lack of equality harms,love,prejudice,prosecution,siblings

Martin Luther King, Jr.

In the US, Monday is a holiday, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. He was a giant in the fight for civil rights.



Over four decades after he was assassinated, the fight for civil rights continues.

History is on our side. Consenting adults will be free to exercise their rights to share love, sex, residence, and marriage.

Are like those who kept trying to keep some people second-class citizens, or are you like the people who marched with King?

Read more »

Posted in: allies,marriage equality,prejudice,USA