Discussion in 'Vaginarium' started by TheKr3w, Jan 4, 2006.
I've been kinda curious.. anyone done it?
I cuddled with a cousin once. But there were no genitals involved, so I guess it doesn't count.
never done it ( duh! ) but the stories on literotica are hot
i feel this is one of those things that should stay as taboo. I too find that section of Literotica to be the hottest. but to actually try anything with a sibling i think would be incredibly wrong, just my opinion.
i got to watch two sisters kiss when they were far too young and so was I. But then I fucked the older one.
I don't agree with incest at all and would never partake in it.
Never done it, kissed a cousin once when I was young. I also don't think it's the best idea, just my opinion.
I did have sex with my Dads new wifes (Stepmother) sister (Step Aunt) when I was 15. She was 21 and HOT! That was super cool, it had the feel of Incest, therefor was very arrousing, but she wasn't blood so it was all good.
I must be warped...if I had a hot sister or cousin I would fuck her given the chance....
I can't see doing anything with a sibling, but everybody's got that one hot cousin...
ya, ive got a cousin i would fuck if i was drunk enough
only met her once a long time ago
I have an identical twin sister and have been approached ABOUT the subject. There is NO WAY I could EVER go there. Not even in my drunkest, drugged up hour, just wouldn't happen. It's icky to me.
I had a little sticky finger action with two different cousions when i was a kid
Same, but you know, I'd probably be disgusted bythe idea if I actually did grow up having a sister or a female cousin.
not for me
I saw my female cousin in her undies once.
she got freaked out yelled at me and said Close the door.
I think I was 14 and she was 18. I was gonna change into my bathing suit and go swimming in the lake. someone was in the bathroom so I just went into her room... and there she was changing into her suit.
The following is an explanation behind the factors influencing one's beliefs regarding one's standing with regards to incest, which lead me to my own personal conclusion, and are to be taken with an open mind.
I've realized what the factors involved in one's supposedly "willed" position are. Let me first go over these two principal factors involved in such a decision. The first factor is cultural/societal/environmental/peer molding. Society's rules are mainly based on the biological need, for these so-called rules, so as to avoid multi-generational incestual reproduction which would be detrimental. Though some societies or portions of society can sometimes do away with these rules to a certain degree(ex: royalty, cousin marriages, etc.). The pressure of peers is also involved, "What will my mom think?", "What will dad think?", "What will the local voodooman/priest think?", "What will my friends think?", "What will my family think?", this pressure when combined with that of authority "what will God think?(probably the logical answer... )", "This is not legal" "This is not moral(it is or is not for morality is relative and yours can be molded to fit society without you being exactly aware of it)" these can mold human behavior quite effectively.
A series of experiments scientifically proved the overwhelming power of authority, these experiments are now regarded unethical and so are no longer practiced, the original one was called the Milgram experiment. The conclusions are quite significant, and shocking, up to about 66% of humans will simply willingly kill a stranger given the original setup of the experiment, it varies depending on authority/victim closeness/presence(no one actually dies, btw. It's considered unethical due to the shock that can occur while the unknowingly simulated seemingly real murder event is taking place and afterwards). While it is true this number drops with modifications to the setup, significantly worse off if given the most distant authority and closest victim, the opposite is also true.
Furthermore when taken in similar to initial setup, but with the addition of peer pressure(in this case strangers, if it'd been really close peers such as family or friends the pressure would've been substantially stronger), the percentage of humans who'd willingly commit murder jumps up to, from what I've heard, 90+%. The peers consist of strangers who're seemingly in the same circumstance as one, but're not they're actually actors, seemingly committing murder right next to one within the bounds of the experiment. Seeing other peers, even stranger, simultaneously take such a decision strongly predisposes one to do the same. Remember these are strangers, if one'd involved close family members, friends the number would most likely be shockingly HIGHER.
Now one says wait a minute, those stats are just unbelievable, and I'd agree, they are. But this is the reality, most individuals would not even consider murder acceptable, but when it comes to it, they walk a different pack from that which they think and talk.
So as we can see, if incest was not taboo, and was actively promoted by family, peers, religious institutions, it would logically be more acceptable. Yet there is that strange uneaseness that 'seemingly' arises from one when presented with such a situation. But is it really a willed by one?
Nope, one's simply being molded by another factor, that also predisposes, but this one is an internal factor. It's known as the westermarck effect, just like we've all heard of many a small animals that will think the first object they see is their parent, something similar happens to humans. This is known as imprinting, and when it comes to animals it is often comically portrayed by having a small bird, etc, hatch in front of an individual and follow him around thinking it's his mother.
The aforementioned form of imprinting is known as filial imprinting, but there are others such as sexual imprinting, but when it comes to things like incest between siblings it is called reverse sexual imprinting. Individuals who spend the vast majority of their childhood together, particularly early childhood, will experience the 'yuck' factor when it comes to it, and will as such avoid maiting. This is natural of course, the simple outcome of the evolutionary process, of the behavioral pressure genes should exert so as to avoid inbreeding. Again the problem is not with the act perse, but with the factor of 'reproduction', this factor is also what is truly at the root of the societal norms themselves, not the sexual act perse. Inbreeding if taken longterm jeopardizes the entire species, by compromising genetic quality, as such mechanisms evolved to avoid such, society for this reason too tended to memetically oppress such to guarantee its continued existence. IT's not truly the individual that matters really, nor his relationships, when it comes to it, it is the distant/remote longterm success of the species given that such individuals may desire to reproduce, and collectively if such took place repeatedly it would jeopardize such as mentioned. The sexual act between siblings had to be tied with 'wrongfulness', as a side effect of the possible consequences of longterm sibling reproduction/inbreeding, what was actually wrong was the longterm consequence of collective longterm inbreeding which could've even lead to the destruction of society, long-term inbreeding in a population not sex between individuals is what's actually wrong. But the latter had to be associated, in the past, to stop the former given no effective means of birth control.
Consider the following for a moment... what if your brother/sister was not your real brother/sister, for example when it comes to adoptions kept in secret. There'd really be almost no difference from a friend that shared the house, or lived close by. Your 'yuckiness' would be a bit irrational(as it is, when you go to the bottom of it), wouldn't it? There'd be no reason why such could not be your romantic partner(besides the imprinting), that is no rational reason would exist. In fact given that you've shared so much, and know so much about each other already, especially if you had a good relationship, it'd be an ideal outcome. In fact 'genetic sexual attraction' is a phenomena seemingly related to this form of reverse imprinting, should a brother/sister actually grow up somewhere else, especially without knowing of each others existence, and they happened to meet as adults, they'd find each other extremely attractive due to the similarities that extend to the genetic lvl, and may very likely choose to start a romantic relationship, if they've no knowledge of their connection, or feel perplexed by such a so-called 'wrongful' attraction, if they became aware of it.
Consider the following, also, for a moment... what if your current romantic partner/girlfriend/wife was actually your long lost brother/sister or half-brother/sister you never knew you had and you still didn't know so at the moment? What if you became aware of it? Yes, think about it for a moment, would you be repelled suddenly or would you accept it. Wouldn't breaking the relationship just because of that (especially if you've months or years of enjoying each other, and your relationship is going smoothly), be irrational, when you come down to it? Now, in this world nothing is 100% certain so that information may not even be true, you may've simply broken up because of an elaborate lie. Would it have been worth it? I'd personally say no, it wasn't really worth it to break up for such a dumb simple reason. Yet if within one scenario it is to be logically accepted by us, incest is in essense, accepted by us logically. This serves as a crack from which to view the rest of the wall, and see it's really standing on loose ground.
Now, that we've hopefully become more aware of the reality behind our beliefs, we can think rationally and hopefully understand the reasons behind the following properly, without the regular bias caused by society, that is if one read the previous with an open mind and reads the following with an open mind. Even if one does not accept the following, which is understandable the aforementioned pressures are strong enough to bend the will so strongly as to be nigh impossible to divert one's moral standing.
Sex, when you go to the bottom of it all, is just simply a plesurable experience just like eating ice cream or going to the movies. It just so happens that without precautions it can also lead to pregnancy, which leads to a new generation. This central role in the perpetuation of society has given it a ridiculous level of importance, that most don't realize just how ridiculous it is. If shaking hands would lead to pregnancy, we'd probably all have gloves, be sexually excited by hands, and it'd be taboo to shake hands with family. Of course we can easily see how silly it'd be if shaking hands was considered taboo, after all it's just something we do everyday with anyone.
Without the ability to reproduce( say natural sterility, advanced birth control, sterilization) the outcome of such an experience assuming no-stds(which will eventually all be cured by medical advances, and as such will eventually be a non-issue.), is simply the satisfaction of sharing a pleasurable experience with a family member, same as going to the beach, eating ice cream watching a movie, playing videogames. That's it, that's what its all about when you come down to it. Nothing wrong with sharing such with any other consenting individual. Right now the social brainwashing, and the authority, peer and genetic pressures make one feel a bit uneasy about it even if one comes to the logical/rational conclusion that there is no valid reason for it not to be accepted, but the way things are going, it seems one day this may no longer be so, and as the antiquated notions of sexuality our ancestors had, these notions we have will, likely, too be left in the past as we move on into the future. One day people may look back and think of our taboos as silly, just as we today look back and think of many a sexual attitude and taboo of the past as silly.
Nougat's post is hard to follow up on, but I'll try...
Luckily, no one in my immedate family is attractive enough for me to want to mess around with..
But, here's a thought: Do "Step" family members really count as incest?
I wouldn't call it incest, but I think it's still inappropriate considering once they are "step" they become part of your family...blood related or not.
True. Good point.
No one that you know of . Your brother/father/uncle/cousin/nephew/etc could easily donate sperm, and could easily do so frequently, this is ignoring the possibility of illicit relationships. If he started doing so at say 18yrs, which he may actually do privately without telling you or other family members, there could be many a related individual many closely related which you would probably find impossibly attractive if you met and would probably become romantically and sexually involved with if you've not done so already due to genetic sexual attraction.
I've never done it, never thought about it, and never plan on it
That's interesting. My mother had a son in Highschool and gave him up for adoption. We met 6 years ago and I must say he's a hottie and had I met him BEFORE finding out about being half siblings, I probably would have gone to that level with him had the opportunity arrose. Seriously makes you think. Hmmmm...
You have an identical twin sister, and a half brother you didn't know about till after you met him?? You have a really interesting life! Neato!
After some guy falls in love with you and turns out to be your uncle and also a millionare... just remember the name... naughtyrn.