Talk:Incest/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Talk archives for Incest (current talk page)
<< 1 < Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 > 6 >>

Contents

Silently Seduced content for Covert incest discussions

Clinical psychologist Ken Adams PhD wrote the seminal Silently Seduced: When Parents Make their Children Partners; Understanding Covert Incest in 1991. In about 100 pages he shows the commonalities and differences between both OVERT and COVERT incest. He also has many first-person testimonials from "The Man of the House", "Mamma's Boy", "The Prince, and "Daddy's Little Girl" to show how these children were seduced into adult role reversals with Covert SEXUAL seductions.

The content below is from his book to address many of the issues raised in the discussions above. I ask that all editors carefully consider his arguments before summarily discounting this phenomomen as non-incestuous. He clearly shows how mothers can be sexually abusive in covert ways unlike fathers who tend to abuse overtly.


Chapter 2: When Is A Child Betrayed by a Parent's Love?

Incest confuses and stirs us. The word is usually used to describe sexual contact between a parent and a child. Webster's New World Dictionary defines incest as "sexual intercourse between persons too closely related to marry legally". There are both overt and covert forms of incest.

Overt incest occurs when there is sexual contact in any dependent relationship, the most obvious being between parent and child. However, other types of dependent relationships are experienced emotionally as parent-child due to the nature of the interaction. These include the religious leader and parishioner, teacher and student, therapist and client, or doctor and patient. Sexual contact in these relationships often feels incestuous.

Sexual contact in dependent relationships is never justifiable because there is always a loss of choice. People in dependent relationships seldom challenge those in positions of authority, even when they feel victimized and violated. This is especially true when the violation is between parent and child. One of the ways parents justify their behavior is to believe, "This is my child so I can do what I want."

Children are not property. They feel terrified and degraded when a parent or any adult is sexual with them. Cooperation does not mean they like it. They are either too scared, too emotionally needy, or too starved for affection to say no. Even if children report on some level that they enjoyed it, the sexual contact is still emotionally damaging. Children are generally too needy and confused as to what is appropriate affection. Their enjoying it at some level is a source of guilt and shame later in life. "It was my fault because I enjoyed it and did'nt say no. All my life I carried guilt because I thought I seduced my father. It wasn't until I went over the wreckage of my life that I realized I was a victim of incest."

Covert incest occurs when a child becomes the object of a parent's affection, love, passion, and preoccupation. The parent, motivated by loneliness and emptiness created by a chronically troubled marriage or relationship, makes the child the surrogate partner. The boundary between caring and incestuous love is crossed when the relationship with the child exists to meet the needs of the parent rather than those of the child. As the deterioration in the marriage progresses, the dependency of the child grows and the opposite-sex parent's response to the child become increasingly characterized by desperation, jealousy, and a disregard for personal boundaries. The child becomes and object to be manipulated and used so the parent can avoid the pain and reality of a troubled marriage.

The child feels used and trapped, the same feelings overt incest victims experience. Attempts at play, automomy and friendship render the child guilt-ridden and lonely, never able to feel ok about his or her needs. Over time the child becomes preoccupied with the parent's needs and feels protective or concerned. A psychological marriage between parent and child results. The child becomes the parent's surrogate spouse.

The sexual energy or tension created in a relationship of covert incest is more akin to young love than to a caring parent-child love. Eric described his story of growing up with an alcholic father and a mother who kept him close. "My mother and I fought a lot, but I would have killed anyone who put their hands on her--including my father. Sometimes I had fits of jealous rage when she paid more attention to my father or some other man. She was mine and I wasn't going to share here". Monica described her experience this way: "I always felt special being Daddy's little girl, especially when he brought home presents just for me and no one else. I wanted to be with him wherever he went. I was so in love with my Daddy."

An important difference between overt and covert incest is that, while the overt victim feels abused, the covert victim feels idealized and priviledged. Yet underneath the thin mask of feeling special and priviledged rests that same trauma of the overt victim: rage, anger, shame, and guilt. The sense of exploitation resulting from being a parent's surrogate partner or spouse is buried behind a wall of illusion and denial. The adult covert incest victim remains stuck in a pattern of living aimed at keeping the special relationship going with opposite-sex parent. It is a pattern of always trying to please Mommy or Daddy. In this way the adult continues to be idealized. A priviledge and special position is maintained; the pain and suffering of a lost childhood denied. Separation never occurs and the feelings of being trapped in a psychologica marriage deepen. This interferes with the victim's capacity for healthy intimacy and sexuality.

...The seduction inherent in these psychological marriages is subtle and insidious, as is it's effect on one's capacity for a fulfilling sexual and intimate life. Since the parent-child relationship is used to meet the needs of the parent in the psychological marriage, the child feels ashamed of legitimate needs. A child seeking to have those needs met by a parent fears loss of the parent. As unhealthy as it is, the child has no choice but to actively participate in meeting the parent's needs. The child already feels emotionally abandoned, and expressing needs raised the fear of more abandonment. Children do not have the cognitive capacity to see the situation as it is. They are trapped.

As the children become adults, this entrapment continues as long as the reality of being a covert incest victim continues to be denied. Adults continue to feel ashamed of their dependency needs and seek to fulfill parents' needs at a continued cost to their own ability to be intimate. One important ingredient in learning how to be intimate is accept one's own dependency needs. The silent seduction, if not faced directly, continues to sabotage the desire to reap the benefits of intimacy and love with another.

This stuff is completely insane. As described, nearly every parent-child relationship could be defined as "covertly incestuous." john k 00:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
To call this insane with no stated basis is gross POV. Millions of parents do indeed commit SOME covert incest against their children. Some are far more serious than others.Anacapa 02:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This book's content is lunatic. And if you're going to tell me it's NOT enforcing a very rigid family role, I will have to assume you don't really want a discourse at all. It's impossible to have almost any normal family without being incestuous under this set of definitions. Thanks for quoting this, now I definitely will try to find people saying this guy's very wrong. 24.80.109.19
To call this 'lunatic' with no basis is gross POV. As for some idea of a 'very rigid family roles', I suggest you read Chapter 7 of Pat Love's Emotional Incest Syndrome...entitled Key Differences Between Enmeshed and Healthy Families. She does a fine job of summarizing the extensive research of family systems therapist Salvador Minuchin there. She clearly shows the distinctions between healthy and incestuous/enmeshed family systems there and describes why covert incest occurs in unhealthy family systems with a few short easily readable tables. I do indeed want a discourse but one based on facts rather than demeaning innuendos. If you can find a 'healthy' family system that contains the types of Covert Incest described above I sure would be willing to be surprised. But please finish with baseless 'lunatic' characterizations and go get the facts and source them. Anacapa 02:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Anacapa, there is no rule that editors' comments on talk pages be NPOV. I have every right to think that this stuff is crazy. I don't have the right to state that in the article. At any rate, what you need to do is provide evidence that this stuff is widely accepted in the scholarly community. If it is just the opinion of some tiny minority (and given what's been quoted here, I find it hard to believe otherwise), it does not belong in this article. john k 20:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
John, of course you can say anything you please here. I notice that some of the discussions by other editors , long before these were quite ugly which to me is a waste of time. I just ask that you respect me as an editor and Ken Adams as a source by providing us specific problems rather than a global statement that the content is 'insane'. I have no idea how to do a poll among psychologists. From what I know about science, a single scientist (say Sir Isaac Newton) can rule as long his/her ideas remain valid. I know of no psychologists who have mounted sustained attacks much less successful attacks on this Covert Incest classification/issue. Maybe you will find some which should make for quite interesting discussions here. I will keep looking too. However, to have such huge problems with this one little section when there is other quite questionable content in this article makes me wonder about what personal POV you are bringing to the table here. To call it "insane" implies quite a strong POV about something or other. I would appreciate knowing your how you see Incest/Covert incest so sort of NPOV consensus is possible here.Anacapa 01:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
The key is to find sources in peer-reviewed journals, and see what they say about this issue, rather than what self-help books say. We need discussion of this issue from relatively neutral, authoritative sources - psychology textbooks would be particularly useful. All the material on the internet about "covert incest" seems to be victim support groups stuff. That's problematic. If there is no material in psychology textbooks on this subject, it is inappropriate to treat it as a generally accepted psychological phenomenon, even if there haven't been "sustained attacks" - there are lots of subjects which haven't been subject to "sustained attacks" simply because they're so far outside the mainstream that there's no need to launch a sustained attack. john k 02:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
A JSTOR search turned up no results for the phrase "covert incest" among the psychology journals listed there. A search in the "CSA Illumina" database turns up 2 articles that have "covert incest" as a keyword, and another two with "emotional incest", as compared to 3160 with "incest" as a keyword. john k 02:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

POV

There are 3 out of the many references that are in any way science-related, the rest are all about victims and victims and victims. The somewhat controversial "Royalty" historical section is upheld by one reference from the work of a single historian (apparently the Egyptians didn't do incest much, huh?)and finally use of words like "ostensibly" when talking about consensual incest is hardly NPOV. The emotional overload of the "real HUMAN" cost runs right through the article. ALL abuse is equated with "incest" (including the non-relatives!). Is this about "psychological implications" or about the phenomenon itself?

I'd like to see more science and anthropology instead, and discussion of incest in terms out inbreeding and outbreeding. Maybe it's better to split the article into the one that deals with the topic and the other one that deals with what Andrew Vacchs thinks. 24.80.109.19

I welcome POV checks on such loaded topics. My education is in the 'hard' sciences (physics etc) and I have a background in psychology too which is a 'soft' science so please let me weigh in a little here. Incest is a phemomenom that crosses many disciplines. It has biological, physiological (medical), psychological, sexual, sociological, and anthropological aspects to name a few. These specialties are ALL sciences as far as I know. I see the many references from the psychological or sex research field as no less scientific than the '3 unnamed science related references' referred to above. I see many references about both PERPETRATORS and victims which seems appropriate for a topic that Britannica says is "almost universally condemned and usually viewed with horror". 'Emotional overload' often comes with a topic that is so 'loaded', taboo and forbidden as incest is. Do you have a problem with the facts about what is indeed the 'real human cost of incest' or is this POV false to you. Do you have sources that show incest as a positive thing with no emotional overload? All the incest feature films (Sister My Sister etc) I have watched have much emotional overload and dark twisted tragedies so I wonder what you POV is here. When I came aboard this article had almost no content about the human-human aspects of incest which was a bit shocking to me as this is a human-human phenomomem that is defined by Britannica as "Sexual relations between PERSONS who because of the nature of their kin relationships are prohibited by law or custom from intermarrying". Now as to the specifics you noted above:
    1. I too would like to see other references on the historical content although given the taboo nature of incest they will probably be hard to find.
    2. I will take a look at 'ostensibly' in consensual incest.
    3. I need specifics on 'emotional overload' judgements which may or may not be in the eye of the beholder.
    4. There is no attempt to make ALL Child Abuse much less all Child Sexual abuse into incest or incestous abuse. The rape or sexual abuse children by strangers, child pornoghrapy and pedophilia is not included here. However, the rape or sexual abuse of DEPENDENT children by other elders in RESPONSIBLE ROLES is either incest (when by blood or kin relations) or incestuous in nature (when by other elders in reponsible roles) is included here for good reasons. These distinctions came straight from the linked psychological references and are valid forms of incest or incestuous abuse.(I will add source content to show this below)
    5. What science(s) do want to see more of here and why?
    6. This is about the phemomenom itself in both it's overt/contact forms and it's covert/non-contact forms AND it's psycho-sexual implications which are beginning to attract much research. I have no problem with the article including biological, historical or anthropoligical implications. What is your problem with including the sexual, social, psychological implications of incest in an article about incest? "Sexual RELATIONS between persons" include all forms of sexual relations not just contact sex. Phone sex, online sex or non-contact mutual masturbation are all forms of sexual RELATIONS between people. Likewise the use of NON-CONTACT seduction against children by parents or others in incestous relationships is a genuine and deeply damaging form of incest. It is just much less well-known to most people much as the female-male rape is much less well known. I ask that you read the references on this before you make judgements about what is or isn't incest.
    7. In Britannica 'inbreeding' and 'outbreeding?' are separate entries. To me, they are complex biological terms related (AND UNRELATED as with plants and animals) to incest that should be explained in depth there and linked to this article with content here that relates them to the incest content. Britannica mentions that "highly inbred populations have diminished reproductive success and become gene pools for hereditary disorders" in it's INCEST entry but that is about all.
    8. As for anthropology, I concur about more and better content as incest seems to be mostly about 'law or custom'. Britannica says that the widely varying beliefs about incest "caution anthropologists against narrow biogenetic explanations for the incest taboo and pose severe impediments to a UNIVERSAL DEFINITION"
    9. As for Andrew Vachess, he is just reflecting what most people think about incest and the double standards about how incest is handled legally. If you have specific suggestions about maybe making him less prominent in the intro I welcome them but to suggest splitting this article to separate so-called 'unemotional' anthropoligical science from the emotional human sciences seems a bit much. Science is far from able to define much less explain incest as it stands now. That means we are left with law, custom, and art (literature) until science takes over.
    10. I ask that you name yourself when you make a POV check as we will have to ask you to remove the POV template when YOU are satisfied that NPOV balance is attained here.

Anacapa 01:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup observations/suggestions

Some observations about this article (I'm not a POV expert, but the article does seem vaguely slanted still...)

--"However, child abuse attorney Andrew Vachss notes that in the United States, most states' penal codes give privileged treatment to parents who rape their own children. He states that despite this legal double standard, "most US citizens agree that child sexual abuse is one of the foulest crimes imaginable."

In-text citation please -- this is a very loaded opinion, and needs some backup from stats or other sources. Its placement at the beginning does colour the tone of the piece, unfortunately. Presenting it as an *opinion* with an opposing opinion would work.

I see your point here and the point of other editors above about Vachss especially in the introduction. The article needs a tone (as Britannica shows) and which was completely missing when I came aboard. However that tone need not come from Vachss in the intro. I will take Vachss out and add the tone somehow as a 'universal' tone similar to how Britannica handles it unless other editors object. Anacapa 06:14, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good! The quote could certainly fit elsewhere in the article (effects of incest?), with a citation as well.--Marysunshine 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
My inclination is to delete it altogether as the content in Law from Vachess and all the new content added elsewhere by various attorney editors seems to have clarified this.

--The "covert parental incest" could also benefit from some cited material. It also reads as quite repetitive. I recognize a LOT of work has gone into this article, and many cooks can spoil the stew, but it's more like a undergrad psych paper than an encyclopedia article. Its length, odd APA citations (why not use Wikipedia footnotes?), and jargonistic grammar are all deterrents. I'm willing to help clean that up if it's okay with everyone.

I would be glad for this help. (I added the content with another editor's help in a bit of a hurry and am not satified with it either). Please discuss the major changes you see with specifics so I can work with you on this.Anacapa 06:14, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Sure, I'll start working slowly on this. Maybe section-by-section. --Marysunshine 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I am a little confused about what you mean by 'section-by-section as there is only one subsection on Covert Incest. I cleaned up the first two PP's a lot. Are they closer to what you were looking for here? Anacapa 01:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

-- a number of therapists, psychologists, and case studies are cited -- could we trim these references? Apart from their titles, we have no real indication of the merit of their work (i.e., if they are respected within their field or not)... They don't add much to the article, apart from propping up POV statements. Just because a "professional" agrees with it doesn't mean it's neutral.

Indeed! I would like to cut as much of this as possible so that the content stands by itself. I am looking for clean tight content that just shows the content itself with sources.Anacapa 06:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Again, probably the best way to tackle this is by editing one section at a time. There's a lot of good material here, and obviously a lot of time and effort went into those cited sources. It just seems like overkill right now. --Marysunshine 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

--"Effects of Incest" -- much of this is covered under the descriptions in "Types of Incest." Please consider removing that content from the former category to avoid redundancy in a quite-long article.

Yes I did and will consider this. I would like to keep the Effects section as it is a bare-bones section that is quite likely to be expanded. Would you consider condensing the repetitive content into Effects instead and deleting it from Types where it is clearly irrelevant? Anacapa 06:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, that sounds good too, as long as one of them gets the boot.--Marysunshine 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

--The "History" section could go under "Science," perhaps. It's rather incongruous after a long stretch of modern psychology.

I took a glance at the "rape" article--it might be nice to parallel its "contents" structure, in the interests of continuity. However, that's a major change, so perhaps I'll focus on the other issues first.--Marysunshine 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

--"Incest as a topic in fiction"

 "Fiction"

There is no good reason why these sections can't be merged. Again with the redundancy.

Just a few suggestions. --Marysunshine 02:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

N.B. I am not the person who placed the NPOV template -- sorry if that was confusing at first.

I placed the template, and it's going to stay there unless someone els removes it. I'm not convinced Anacapa should be allowed to redefine the structure of the entire article if there SO MANY objections from other editors.

I am fine about the template staying but it is your responsibility to state your specific POV issues and work toward some sort of consensus. As for objections from so many other editors please spare me as the only other editor who stated his POV clearly was John K. This is not a popularity contest...it is an attempt to sort out POV's. Covert POV is very hard to sort out much less include in NPOV content. Please state specific overt POV's you come from so some sort of consensus is possible here.Anacapa 04:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I will look through the sources that he provided myself and look up some new ones. If it proves that his PoV is indeed the persistent one in all psychology, then I'll concede and let him have the run of this place. As such it appears to be more than a little controversial. 24.80.109.19

To anonymous 'POV check', I have no interest in redefining the whole article. MarySunshine is doing the restructuring here. I plan to make no structural changes at all other than to follow some other editor's suggestions. I have no problem with content on inbreeding or the other content. I just insist that the psychological content be included as well and that no one restructures anything unless it is discussed first. Yes incest is always more than a little controversial as the literature shows. That said I have an open mind. If you or other editors can show us HUMAN societies where incest is considered healthy, consensual and respectable, I would welcome that POV too. Could you state your POV's here clearly so we know what we are dealing with? Anacapa 02:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Structure of article

Sections 1, 2, 3, 4== deal with animals and people, seem a little jumbled

Why not structure them like this--

1. Genetics

2. Incest vs. inbreeding

This can merge "inbreeding in animals" with "distinctions between incest and inbreeding." After all, we are not sure if animals engage in "incest," as a sociological phenomenon, per se, so devoting an entire section to it here seems odd. That material belongs to "inbreeding," and we can link to it there.
From the dictionary and other encyclopedia definitions of incest it is clear that incest is a HUMAN sociological phenomenom related to but distinct from inbreeding or outbreeding in animals and plants. This merge seems like a good idea. Also all inbreeding or outbreeding content should be directly related to their implications to HUMAN incest so that this article stays within scope. Long discussions about genetics/inbreeding/outbreeding belong in separate (linked) articles devoted to those topics as they cover content that goes way beyond the scope of incest itself...(eg plant and animal inbreeding are clearly not incest itself) Anacapa 23:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Look, if you're going to be removing discussions on inbreeding, since they have articles and so on, I have a great idea. Why don't you write an article on "incest-esque psychological abuse and other things that don't fit family model X" and link to that article from here. At least the genetic part is easily verifiable. 24.80.109.19
There is no reason to remove Inbreeding content IMHO. I just want to see it tied as closely to incest as possible as there are many forms of inbreeding (eg plant and animal) that have nothing directly to do with incest (a sociological phenomenom with biological consequences). What is your issue? Do you just want to demean me personally or do you have something of importance to you that I/we should be listening to. I am not here to upset your apple cart as much as you might assume otherwise. I am here to try to attain some sort of complete balanced NPOV content and I include all content in that.Anacapa 04:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

3. Incest vs. exogamy

I like this here, yet the examples provided seem to lead into either "Laws and mores regarding incest..." or "In religious traditions." My advice would be to nix all the material from "Trobriand Islanders..." and merge that with "Laws and more regarding incest," dropping the "industrialized societies."
I for one concur with this for the most part...but I imagine that Trobriand Islander content could shed much light on incest so I will have to take a close look at that content before making a call. To me it is important to show any societies that have significantly different views about incest here but I concur with dropping 'industrialized societies' because that usage to seems imply that only industrialized societies forbid incest which I suspect is false. Anacapa 23:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

4. Types of incest

--Marysunshine 18:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The basic structural changes you propose seem fine to me. I am not sure we can make this article match the rape article's structure because incest is so much more complicated than rape but I will consider that idea too. I too want to see a nice clean flow here that makes this complicated, loaded and taboo topic much more easy for most people to understand. Unless other editors oppose this I urge you to go ahead and be bold as long as you cut no key content without discussion. However, you might want to wait a while so that people have time to check this out first. Anacapa 23:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. I'll start making structural/grammatical changes as time permits this week and follow this talk page closely for discussion about the other issues to see if a consensus is reached re: the material. I readily admit that I'm not a psych expert...--Marysunshine 02:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
You are welcome. Thanks for your feedback/suggestions too. I know I/ need your kind of assistance here. However, I suggest you be careful about the structural changes as I see some issues were raised here by the anonymous editor above. I made changes to the intro to reflect our discussions. I also cleaned up some of the Covert section content because it was being edited by others. But as for the rest of the content I added (psychological) go at it. However please check with me before altering the basic content itself other than for flow.Anacapa 05:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Covert Incest placement and sourcing

To user John Kenney. I welcome your feedback and all the concerns you have raised. From your discussion page you seem to be a seasoned veteran of Wiki so I see that you might have to much to offer here as quite valuable. I, for one, would like to have you continue with hard hitting feedback so we can all challenge our POV's and make this article better.

That said, I ask that you refrain from making major changes to this content unless you complete your discussions here and attain some sort of consensus. I also ask that you use this page for discussions rather than the edit comments as per wiki protocol. Finally, I ask that you complete discussions you start before you jump in and make changes to this content...by that I mean to refrain from reactions like 'insane' (as Adams no doubt spent his career on this) remain civil and to state specifics.

I moved the Covert Section back where it was for a whole host of reasons mostly to do with flow and the elimination of needless repetition. (I will discuss those reasons if needed). I will be glad to continue to discuss definition issues you might have but please make no new changes such as 'Covert Incest' until we have some sort of consensus here. I will also be glad to add sources such as Susan Forward's Toxic Parents or Pat Love's Emotional Incest Syndrome or others if you like...but no one has been as succinct and clear on this as Adams has which is why I used him as my main source. Please work with me to meet your concerns. Anacapa 01:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Your issues about the definition of incest raised many good issues for me. I am going to go get the dictionaries/encyclopedias and pull their definitions in for disussion here so that it is possible to scope this article based on some sort of reasonable criteria. I ask that you weigh in on this with well-reasoned sources as this definition seems to be highly loaded and subject to change as the research comes in. Anacapa 01:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

not having a NPOV is enough to delete whole article, and this section is factually inacurate too, so as this isn't a very important type of incest i think deleting it is better, if anyone disagrees, pleast tell me. --Argentino (talk/cont.) 20:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
As nobody replyed for more that 28 hours, I assume nobody opposes deleting. --Argentino (talk/cont.) 00:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Size and space issues with respect to Types section

A number of editors have raised space as concern about the Covert Incest subsection here. I print previewed the article. Covert incest takes less than 2/3 page about the same as Inbreeding. Genetics, Incest vs Exogamy, and History take a page or more EACH. It is clear that the 'abuse' content is far from dominant here. If editors have space concerns I ask that we look at the whole article in toto rather than singling out specific content on a POV basis claiming space as the issue.Anacapa 03:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The problem is not space. The problem is that the way it is presented is POV, it has not been verified from reputable sources and it may constitute original research. john k 19:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
The sources I pulled most of this Covert Incest content from are licensed psychologists with PhD's, credible published books, and many hits on google scholar. I did add content in the Effects section from a broad range of books because I no of no one who has written a book just on Effects (either OVERT or COVERT incest effects). That section will indeed need to be carefully checked by other editors up to speed on the incest literature and by me as soon as I have time. When you have POV problems with this content, please state specific problems you have as "insane" is a bit hard for us ALL to use to correct POV issues and implies some kind of personal POV reaction to this content itself. Incest is a highly loaded taboo topic that almost always inspires intense personal POV's. I have no problem with you or any other editor bringing in other POV's but please refrain from summarily tossing a POV just because you don't know it yet or don't agree with it.
I would be glad to cite these sources and I will be glad to show that this is far from original research. Could you give me one example of the correct way you would like to see me fill in your citation templates as I am somewhat new to Wikipedia? I am familiar with NPOV/POV by now. Therefore if you or other editors have sources for other POV'S please state them so we can include them all here. (For example, I notice a single source in the links that seems to show incest in a positive POV) As for reputable sources on the Covert Incest and its definition, I called Pat Love (author of The Emotional Incest Syndrome a full length book written for the general public that explains Covert Incest and family systems in detail) today to check on how her professional psychologist peers see this. Here is MY take on what she told me:
    1. When she uses the word 'incest' to describe what she calls the (covert) "violation of intergenerational boundaries" by (parents, step-parents and other related/unrelated elders in responsible roles), people, especially parents, tend to come unglued as incest is a highly loaded word. Therefore, she sometimes substitutes "enmeshment" for "incest" so she can be heard at all rather than because "enmeshment" is the correct term for what is really incest. Her experience suggested that I should expect that kind of reaction here too.
    2. I asked her what the consensus is in the psychological community about this definition and specifically what she calls this topic in speeches to her peer professional groups. She said that the correct definition is indeed "incest" and that she never has used the term enmeshment to define covert "incest" in speeches to peer professionals. She referred me to other professionals at The Meadows in Arizona, a center for the treatment of sexual disorders, to get their take on this.
    3. I told her about the issues editors here have about 'rigid family roles'. She said that intergenerational boundaries are key to healthy families in much the same way that a fence around a school playground has been shown by a famous study to encourage full exploration of that playground versus almost none when there are no fences. She mentioned the extensive research by the family systems therapist she quotes/shows in her book.
    4. I mentioned the use of the COVERT incest use of 'special' by Terri Hatcher's (see Vanity Fairarticle on links) uncle who committed OVERT incest against Terri and who committed OVERT incestuous sexual abuse against another young teenager that led to that teenager's suicide). Pat Love said that COVERT Incest (eg NON-CONTACT psycho-sexual seductions that use 'specials' to flatter young victims into letting their guard down) is often committed in combination with OVERT incest. It seems that OVERT incest perps use BOTH Overt and Covert incest tactics but that Covert incest perps use JUST Covert Incest tactics.
    5. She was busy so I didn't have time to ask her if there were professionals psychologists who argue against Covert Incest as a phenomenom. I will ask other professionals that question when I speak with them. I also welcome other editors to pull in reputable sources that show other sides of this issue but please state those other POV's and use sources to support them. Anacapa 00:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Definitions of Incest

    1. Incest is sexual activity between close family members (this article)
    2. Sexual relations between persons who because of the nature of their kin relationships, are prohibited by law or customs from intermarrying (latest Britannica)
    3. "All countries forbid incest, which is marriage or sexual relations between certain close relatives. The World Book Encyclopedia (2005)
    4. INCEST, in'sest, is a heterosexual relationship that is disapproved by society because the partners are too closely related by blood, marriage, or traditional connection (Encyclopedia American 2005)
    5. in·cest ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nsst) Sexual relations between persons who are so closely related that their marriage is illegal or forbidden by custom. The statutory crime of sexual relations with such a near relative. Middle English, from Latin incestum, from neuter of incestus, impure, unchaste  : in-, not; see in-1 + castus, pure, chaste; see kes- in Indo-European Roots. Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
    6. Main Entry: in·cest Pronunciation: 'in-"sest Function: noun Etymology: Latin incestus sexual impurity, from incestus impure, from in- not + castus pure: sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry; also : the crime of engaging in such sexual intercourse Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

To eliminate some of the round and round about definitions I pulled in a variety of definitions from other sources for comparison. Clearly there is a POV about incest in the definitions as the root word means impure or unchaste. Clearly there is a focus on law and customs as the basis for defining what incest is. Last some definitions seem to use sexual relations where some seem to use sexual intercourse.

I have a few questions/issues related to these definitions:

    1. father-son sodomy, mother-son fellatio, mother-daughter sexual molestation and all other forms of overt and covert sexual abuse of children by parents is called incest in the psychological literature. If we limit this article's definition to sexual intercourse we will excluding almost all the the other forms of incest shown in the literature most of which is fairly new as in The Last Secret (mother-daughter incest) or Mother-Son Incest; the Unthinkable Broken Taboo. To me, this article's definition should be wide enough to include all forms of incest here, just as the rape article's definition is wide enough to include all forms of rape there.
    2. This article's definition (as it stands) is missing any mention of law or custom...yet these sociological sanctions seem to be the main basis for defining incest. Maybe we should add these to the article's definition somehow.
    3. Clearly from these definitions, incest is a primarily a human sociological phenomenom with biological consequences...rather than a biological phenomenom with sociological consequences. Inbreeding and genetic issues are clearly related consequences of incest but not the topic itself. (It is also important to note that biology/genetics have no bearing whatsoever on same sex incest, on NON-Contact Covert incest, or on incest between opposite sex people where conception does not occur) The main basis for this definition seems to be human 'purity' or 'chasteness' as coded in law and custom rather than in science or biology.
    4. There is no inclusion of animal or plant sex between close relatives in these definitions of incest. Incest is clearly defined as a human phenomenom. Human laws and customs would seem to be meaningless in the animal/plant world.

Whatever we decide to do with definition I hope we tighten the scope of this article with a reasonable definition that match the known definitions/recent research. I have no need to eliminate any content per say but I also have no interest in creating a whol bunch of little stubs to describe all the forms of incest either. Please discuss how to handle this. Anacapa 06:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Sourcing

Since it may have gotten lost up above, I'm going to repeat my problem with the "covert incest" material. In the first place, in its current form, it is unsourced. In the second place, all the citations which Anacapa has provided are to what are essentially self-help books. All internet hits on "covert incest" seem to lead to victim support groups. It seems clear that there are a certain number of clinical psychologists who embrace the idea of covert incest.

But I have yet to see any evidence that this concept is generally accepted by the psychological community. In particular, I think what is needed are citations from

  1. Peer-reviewed journals - a search of what appears to be a principal psychological article database discovered only a minuscule number of articles with "covert incest" or "emotional incest" (2 each), as compared to several thousand articles with "incest" as a keyword.
  2. Standard textbooks. This is even more important. If the concept is in general use, it should not be a problem to find standard psychology textbooks which discuss the idea. If standard textbooks do not discuss covert incest, that would be a good indication that it is a fringe idea which should not be given much attention in this article (although it still would probably deserve its own article). john k 22:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
John, It is false to call this material unsourced when I have clearly shown the sources above. I will be glad to fill in your fact templates. As for peer reviewed journals, I will be glad to use those where available. From my glance at WIKI's standards published works are also usable here. To limit any new idea to a textbook is a bit much given how far behind textbooks often are. (Theory of Constraints is an idea that world class corporations have been using for decades now but it barely is even mentioned in most finc/accounting textbooks because it busts the old conventional ideas in academia) Are you insisting on Wiki standards here or are these your personal standards? Also do you intend to apply the same standards to the entire article or is Covert Incest your particular punching bag here? Anacapa 03:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Covert incest is a particular punching bag because I've never heard of the idea before coming across it in wikipedia, and its presence on wikipedia seems to be entirely the result of the energy and passion of a single user (you). That combination is always suspicious, and nothing which has been presented has allayed the suspicion that this is a fringe concept. In terms of standards, published works are usable, but for a subject like psychology, where tons of nonsense is written by credentialed psychologists, I think we need to be especially careful. I don't believe the standards I'm insisting on are my personal standards, but I will admit that I've not been closely involved in articles on psychological subjects in the past, so I'm not completely familiar with what standards have been applied in the past. In terms of textbooks, I'm not demanding that it show up in a psych 101 textbook. But if no undergraduate textbooks of any kind mention the concept, I think it's fair to say that it's a fringe idea, and doesn't deserve to be discussed at any length in the main incest article, although it still might be notable enough to have its own article. At any rate, so far you have basically cited a single self-help book (unless I've missed something). Are you admitting that no psychology textbooks of any kind mention "covert incest" as an issue? I'd suggest you review Wikipedia:No original research#What counts as a reputable publication? john k 07:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
John thanks for these clarifications. I am not surprised that you never heard of Covert Incest before as incest in general is a taboo and forbidden topic that MOST people prefer to ignore thus the immense variation in how this topic is handled in even mainstream encyclopedias. You have every right to be suspicious in general and I have no problem with anyone who pushes me hard to back the content I add. However, I ask that you carefully read the sources I used (Ken Adams and Pat Love are both professionals with PhD's) before judging the content I added. The two main sources I used for the Covert Incest content were Adam's Silently Seduced and Love's Emotional Incest Syndrome. A quick search on Amazon books of 'incest' shows 406 books on this topic...Love's book is #4, and Adam's book is #9 which gives one some idea of their popularity as I suspect Amazon sorts by sales. It also clearly shows that Covert incest is being listed under incest rather than emotional or even sexual abuse. I share your concern with psychology as it is a fairly new science. I am also glad to see you make a distinction between your personal standards and general wiki standards. If there are written wiki guidelines that spell out special standards for psychology as a science I would be glad to abide by them. (I come from big business and know that most undergraduate Finc or Accounting textbooks barely mention or fail to mention Theory of constraints a powerful package of thoughtware that has been used decades now with breakthrough successes in business, the military and government...so I question how reliable textbooks are in general to keep up with current realities much less on taboo, forbidden and politically incorrect topics such as incest) However, I did review what counts as a reputable publication above which was quite helpful. Covert Incest seems to be both from academic and professional sources. I will go dig up some peer-reviewed journal articles to further meet your concerns. Pat Love's publisher is Bantam, while Adams publisher is Health Communications, Inc in Dearfield Beach FL. I have cited two sources and will cite more as soon as I do some google scholar reseach on the topic. As for textbooks, I have no idea as I am not a psychology undergraduate. In any case I hope that you will show me where in wiki standards this textbook 'test' is applied as it would appear to eliminate much of the content in this and many other articles. I will be glad to abide by general wiki standards here...and I have no problem with you being personally suspicious but please make sure your textbook test is wiki-wide before you demand that of US ALL here. Are there wiki guidelines on what you call a 'fringe' subject as I notice that animal inbreeding leads this article...a topic that seems much more 'fringe' than Covert Incest but one that might show implications for actual human incest. I will be glad to do anything possible to meet your concerns here. I have no problem with you personally...instead I welcome hard feedback as it makes the article better. I just ask that we stick to the facts and make some kind of reasonable judgments using wiki guidelines. You are/were right to push hard on this. However, I hope you will offer me a chance to respond to your specific problems with specific solutions. I also hope you will be fair-minded and insist on one standard for the whole article rather than one standard for a one section. Anacapa 05:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Google Scholar Covert Incest page 1-2/3 (bold highlights mine)

BOOK] Silently Seduced: When Parents Make Their Children Partners- Understanding Covert Incest - group of 2 » KM Adams - 1991 - books.google.com ... SEDUCED When Parents Make Their Children Partners Understanding Covert Incest Kenneth M. Adams, Ph.D. Health Communications, Inc. Deerfield Beach, Florida ... Cited by 4 - Web Search - Library Search - UC-eLinks

[CITATION] Sexual Addiction and Covert Incest: Connecting the Family Roots of Alcoholism, Neglect and Abuse. KM Adams - Focus on Chemically Dependent Families, 1987 Cited by 2 - Web Search

[CITATION] Covert Incest in Women’s Lives: Dynamics and Directions for Healing. ND Hyde - Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 1986 Cited by 1 - Web Search

Child sexual abuse and the multidisciplinary team approach: contradictions in practice - UC-eLinks - group of 2 » M Jacobson - Childhood, 2001 - chd.sagepub.com ... Covert incest, a new term coined in the 1980s by sexual abuse experts, is a "hands- off" derivative defined by a boundary violation between parent and child ... Cited by 4 - Web Search - BL Direct

Pastors and Sexual Addiction MRK LAASER - Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment …, 2003 - Taylor & Francis ... Their sexual addiction represents role reversal from the overly erotic atmosphere of the covert incest experi- ence. When assuming ... Cited by 2 - Web Search - UC-eLinks - BL Direct

The sex killer - UC-eLinks RV Langevin, MHV Ben-Aron, PV Wright, VV Marchese, … - Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 1988 - Springer ... Revitch (1965) stated that he is preoccupied with maternal sexual contact as well as with overt and covert incest; he was guilty about sex, rejects sex as ... Cited by 14 - Web Search

CTS - group of 9 » A ABUSE - fadaa.org ... Covert incest and sexual abuse involves seemingly accidental touching, comments that have sexual connotations, and exposure to sexual activity or pornography. ... View as HTML - Web Search

From Obsession to Betrayal: The Life and Art of Pablo Picasso - group of 3 » MB WILSON - Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment …, 2004 - Taylor & Francis ... Adams (1991) describes covert incest as occurring when a child becomes the object of a parent’s affection, love, passion and preoccupation. ... Web Search - UC-eLinks - BL Direct

[BOOK] The Politics of Survivorship: Incest, Women's Literature, and Feminist Theory R Champagne - 1998 - books.google.com ... Chapter Two The Law ofthe (Nameless) Father Mary Shelley's Mathilda and the Incest Taboo 53 Chapter Three Covert Incest Frankenstein after Oedipus 9 1 ... Cited by 6 - Web Search - Library Search - UC-eLinks

Sexual Addiction and ADHD: Is There A Connection? - group of 4 » RF BLANKENSHIP, MF LAASER - Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment …, 2004 - Taylor & Francis ... Adams (1991) documents the phenomenon of covert incest. ... Silently seduced: When parents make their children partners— understanding covert incest. ...

The emergence of a new paradigm in sex therapy: integration GR Weeks - Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 2005 - Taylor & Francis For example, a woman might be the survivor of covert incest (Courtois, 1988). During the course of therapy she might mention something ... Cited by 1 - Web Search - UC-eLinks

Sigmund Freud and Psychiatry a Partial Appraisal - UC-eLinks SE Jelliffe - The American Journal of Sociology, 1939 - JSTOR ... One finds here a meeting-ground for much that is still called heredity, for many involved emotional repug- nances, peculiar covert incest prohibitions, murder ... Web Search

Memory of Childhood Sexual Abuse among Clinicians: Characteristics, Outcomes, and Current Therapy … - UC-eLinks - group of 4 » LS Little, SLS Hamby - Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 2001 - Springer ... after this survey.” One woman tried to explain her response by commenting: “I am new in the field and experienced subtle, covert, incest—mostly comments ... Web Search - BL Direct

THE PATHETIC AND THE TRAGIC P Patheticness - International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 1993 - pep-web.org ... bore any significance beyond 'decompressing' her bad back.2 During this period, the patient returned to the theme of covert incest—sometimes focusing on a ... Web Search

[BOOK] Betrayed As Boys: Psychodynamic Treatment of Sexually Abused Men - group of 2 » RB Gartner - 2001 - books.google.com Page 1. CriticalAcclaim fo rBet ra yedasBoys “This volume provides important tools not only for clinicians working with individuals ... Cited by 14 - Web Search - Library Search - UC-eLinks - BL Direct

Deconstructing and Locating Survivor Discourse: Dynamics of Narrative, Empowerment, and Resistance … - UC-eLinks - group of 2 » NA Naples - Signs Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 2003 - journals.uchicago.edu [Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 2003, vol. 28, no. 4] © 2003 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. 0097-9740/2003/2804-0010$10.00. ... Cited by 2 - Web Search - BL Direct

[BOOK] Struggle for Intimacy JG Wotitiz - 1986 - books.google.com Page 1. STRUGGLE FOR INTIMACY ThisOne IIIUfl IIIII Page 2. STRUGGLE FOR INTIMACY Janet Geringer Woititz, Ed.D. p 4l Health Communications, Inc. ... Web Search - UC-eLinks

[BOOK] Adult Children: The Secrets of Dysfunctional Families J Friel - 1990 - books.google.com Page 1. Aduib GHILDREN TheSecretsof Dysfunctional Families____ IOHNFRIEL&LINDAFRIEL Page 2. ADULT CHILDREN The Secrets of Dysfunctional Families 4 John C. Friel ... Cited by 6 - Web Search - UC-eLinks

[BOOK] The Intimacy Struggle: Revised and Expanded for All Adults JG Woititz - 1993 - books.google.com Page 1. THE INTIMACY STRUGGLE Revisedand Expanded ForAllAdults JAN116.WOITIIL ‘4 iL Health Communications, Inc. Deerfield Beach, Florida Page 2. ... Web Search - UC-eLinks

[BOOK] Sexueller Missbrauch und seine geschlechtsspezifischen Auswirkungen SB Gahleitner - 2000 - books.google.com Page 1. Silke-Birgitta Gahleitner Sexueller Mißbrauch und seine geschlechtsspezifischen Auswirkungen Tectum Verlag Page 2. Sexueller Mißbrauch undseine ... Cited by 3 - Web Search - Library Search - UC-eLinks

Google scholar gives 27 hits for "covert incest" and another 62 for "emotional incest." This compared with over 60,000 hits for "incest" alone. It seems fair to me to say that this is not a widely recognized issue in the scholarly community. It obviously does have some scholarly backing, though. My main issue is this: whether or not people recognize "covert incest" as existing, it does not fall under the generally accepted definition of incest. Our "types of incest" section is about different types of straight-up incest. As such, the "covert incest" stuff should go somewhere else. It also needs to be sourced, and its larger place in the psychological literature needs to be made clear. We shouldn't say "psychologists say such and such." We should say that it is an issue recognized by some psychologists. We also need to cite sources for the various claims made in the section. john k 16:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
John, I would suggest to you that incest as a topic in-toto is barely recognized at all as a significant research subject in the scholarly community. The researchers I read seem to have to fight tooth and nail to be able to do research on this taboo, forbidden and politically incorrect topic...especially on Mother-son, Mother-daughter and Father-son forms. A glance at the other encyclopedia articles below clearly shows this as there is considerable confusion among a wide range of disciplines (For example, one article says genetics are insignificant and another says genetics are significant, another article defines incest as just HETEROSEXUAL relations, etc). Clearly, as Brittanica mentions there is no basis yet for ONE 'generally accepted definition of incest much less a single standard for it's scope or scientific basis. I suggest that before we decide on Covert/Emotional incest or any other content in this article we settle on a single definition/scope for the article. I note that the old traditional definition that the FBI uses to report rape now looks pretty absurd given what we now know about female-female, female-male and male-male rape so I expect similar evolution here too. I pulled all the different definitions in that I could find in the Definition section above and added three encyclopedia articles below. I will note that their has been an explosion of incest research in the psychology/sex research fields in the last decade or two from a glance at the Amazon literature. Do you want to propose a single 'incest' definition that could include all the research on a topic being called 'incest' (including those of relatively recent researchers) for this article?
That said, I concur that Covert/Emotional incest is a relatively new form of incest that needs to clearly shown as classified in the 1980's by the psychological profession so that people know where it came from, what it has in common with overt incest and how it differs from overt incest. I will glad to source the claims, show Covert Incest's relative significance in both the psychological literature, the public literature (eg sales) so that people see it's place inside the larger article. I am unwilling to move it somewhere else as it is clearly being classified as 'incest' (rather than something else) by the psychological professionals and as (to my knowledge) no one has mounted a significant scholarly challenge to this classification despite a couple of decades of chances to do so. Also it is quite clear from my conversation with author Pat Love and a glance at Terri Hatcher's Vanity Fair article that some overt incest perps use covert incest in combination with overt incest. For flow, to show relationships between both types of incest and to eliminate needless repetition vi a vi Effects, I placed the Covert incest section just below the Overt incest section. I am fine with 'some psychologists' vs psychologists and we might say psychologists who specialize in sexual disorders and sexual addiction to make it even more specific. You also helped raise another question for me which is to make a distinction about the law vi a vi Overt and Covert incest which I will try to do when I edit the Covert incest content to meet your other concerns. I am also considering many of the other points you and other editors made above to see how to better frame this so that readers know family systems research about 'functional' vs 'disfunctional' families that seem to form the basis for research on Overt and Covert incest in the psychological literature. I will go edit this Covert content to address as many of your concerns as possible. Please push back where you see fit but please hold back from judgements about inclusion until we have a single sound definition for 'incest' with which to scope this whole article. Anacapa 06:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)