Talk:Incest/Archive 6

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 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 > 6 >>

Contents

confusing the facts

the article itself and the discussion of it is making five dangerous assumptions: 1- that any discussion of incest well never be treated as NPOV unless it condemns incest 2- that incest is the same as child sexual abuse. it is not. child sexual abuse can manifest itself as forced non-consensual rape of a close genetic relative, but not all incest is non-consensual, forced or done with children. 3- that incest brings a much higher margin of birth defect rather than health affect. 4- that incest is also something besides sexual contact. it is not. emotional abuse is emotional abuse. incest is incest. there is no such thing as covert incest no matter how credible and well documented the labeling source. incest is ONLY sexual contact. emotional abuse and sexual abuse are NOT synonymous with the subject. 5- that american views on incest are THE views on incest and that if no taboo exists for the subject at hand in a non-western or lesser developed country, then their cultural view is simply backward, discounted and non-academic.

example: the USA is the only country on the face of the planet that defines sex or marriage to ones first cousins as incest and has restrictive laws to exhibit this odd (my POV) view. FDR married his cousin, Eleanor. Einstein married his cousin, Elizabeth of England hers, and so on. in fact, the more wealthy and powerful one is, the more prevalent cousin-cousin and even sibling marriage is and has been throughout political families and private sector life and it is NOT incest, except by recent POV, but regardless of your obvious POV it is and will be practiced and remain accepted. to digress: it seems that first cousin and sibling marriage is something reserved only for elite bourge, while if practiced by the goy it labled anything that is convenient on part of the labeler and criminalized.

consider: in levi (tanach) incest is clearly defined. cousin relations did not make that list, and in fact not only did it not make the list, but cousin relations were not only approved of, but ordered.

it is suggested that you do your own legwork and research the facts for yourself. research, by the way, does not mean only going to sources with whom you agree with and ignoring sources you disagree with, nor does it mean that you have license to redefine anything for the public at large, or to foist xenocentric POV upon the majority of the planet from a bully pulpit or from the POV of western culture, while turning a blind eye to the facts of history that go beyond a scope that serve your POV.

74.195.223.201 00:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you read the exhaustively referenced Incest: Origins of the Taboo (2005) by sociologists J. Turner and A Maryanski to address some of these issues. They seem to report most of the overall science on incest that is available to date. They address many of the issues you raise above (in an attempt to make their particular parochial points about incest.) Here are a few fast responses they offer that appear to address your concerns about "confusing the facts".
There are a lot of other facts collected in this book. Could we discuss conventional facts with non-conventional facts to arrive at some sort of NPOV balance between the incest 'abhorents', the incest apologists and the incest romanticists?
    1. "Breaking the incest ban strikes at the core of the family and society, if not the viability of the species (bf mine), and people's implicit sense of what is at stake makes this taboo especially formidable." Species viability seems about as 'dangerous' as one can imagine to me. They show how condemnation follows from this potentially catastrophic danger.
    2. They say there are indeed distinctions between incest and child abuse. They discuss these distinctions, related definitional problems revevant to the points they want to make about incest and some of what they see of the politics of these distinctions.
    3. under their section The Harmful Effects on Offspring of Incestuous Relations they say "The effects of inbreeding on humans are dramatic and immediate." They show conclusive research that inbreeding leads to horrible forms of human birth defects that are absent in normal human breeding.
    4. They show many forms of covert non-contact incestuous abuse found in the scientific literature. For mother-son incest (which they see as the most serious form of incest) they list 10 overt behaviors versus 18 covert incestuous behaviors (from other researchers) including "Making the son feel responsible for the mother's emotional well-being." For THEIR specific research purposes THEY decided to restrict THEIR definition of incest to one that is much more limited than the one that this article and most other encyclopedias use...that is they limit their working definition to include only acts that include "actual sexual intercourse" and exclude all other forms of overt, covert or homosexual incestuous activities.Their definition, while useful to make their parochial sociological case is much to narrow for a full treatment of all the literature on the topic.
    5. They say "Tales, myths, folklore, poetry, and both canon and civil law can be seen as addressing the potential problems of incest throughout most of recorded human history. We can assume, therefore, that humans were also thinking about problems generated by incest long before they could write those thoughts down." They use the rest of their book to show why.They also show the history of how MANY other cultures/civilizations have created and enforced the incest taboo.The "American" view of incest is, no doubt, partially a product of the West's Greco-Roman history so I ask that you review this history so you can better inform us about other non-conventional or alternative POV's in the literature.
    6. Incest between cousins is, indeed, a criminal offense in many jurisdictions in both the US and Europe if the earlier sources from lawyers on this discussion page are credible. We can of course show the contradictions in cousin incest statutes. However, cousin incest seems to be a side show since parent-child and sibling incest are far more serious and far more common forms of incest.
I did my legwork for you. I ask that you do your leg work for me too...facts do help to clear up confusion. I also ask that other editors who might take an apologist, or romantic view of incest offer us some good credible sources so that we can all better understand what these POV's are and who holds them. Thanks 128.111.95.138 02:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply to preceding

Well the last anon editors put in an anti-incest POV, which is not supposed to be here. I tries to start fixing it. Also, I removed the Ohio law; I don't see why Ohio is more important than any other state, and in any case, such specific laws require citation. The way, the truth, and the light 14:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

What is supposed to be here is an explanation about the common points of view that exist about incest. Clearly, incest is an almost universally condemned form of conduct from any credible NPOV source. To show anti-incest facts about incest as part of the real story about incest is indeed NPOV if that point of view is common in most cultures. I ask that you discuss specific issues before your go about deleting them. I welcome pro-incest sources that are credible and reasonable. Please bring those sources in so we can see what you are so concerned about. I have read authors who have romanticized and apologized for incestuous behavior and I have no problem including them here in proportional balance. However this article is no soapbox for unsourced opinions of those who are pro-incest. Please offer some sources to back your positions. 128.111.95.138 02:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC) 128.111.95.138 02:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
You are confused. I did not edit the 'Covert Incest' section, nor did I add any pro-incest opinions.
However, it is POV to want this article to be a condemnation of incest. The way, the truth, and the light 02:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Warren Farrell

User:69.138.226.246 continues to add an inappropriate citation to the sentence about Warren Farrell's research. That link is to a self-published web site whose sole purpose is to attack the men's rights movement, including Warren Farrell. I don't consider this an acceptable source. I question whether the sentence should even be in this article, unless it is neutrally expanded on to make it clear that the purpose of its inclusion is not to disparage Farrell. The way, the truth, and the light 20:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I dropped 69.138.226.246 a note about their number reverts today. About that source, The way, the truth, and the light is right about that webiste - it isn't allowed under the external link policy becuase it is partisan. But the reference for the info is: , "Incest: The Last Taboo" Warren Farrel Interviewed by Philip Nobile in Penthouse, December 1977, Volume 9, Number 4. The sentence needs to be expanded because it seems to be misrepresenting the article and is selective of Farrell's points--Cailil talk 22:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The sentence is now gone. The way, the truth, and the light 11:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Sibling incest studies

I modified the statement in the 'Sibling incest between children' section to reflect what I recall from that and other studies, even though I don't have the actual reference (there wasn't one before either). The way, the truth, and the light 11:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

added Psychic incest to Covert section

From a quick review of the literature it looks like father-daughter PSYCHIC incest has been a fairly hot topic in some circles. What seems to be missing, as usual, are non-sexist treatments of the topic. Here is Robert Bly's take in Iron John:

"Our culture has paid attention in recent years, and rightly so, to men's physical incest with their daughters, which is hideous and revolting in it's range and damage. And we have paid some attention to psychic incest as well between father and daughter. We are aware of a disturbing rise in the number of sons who report sexual abuse by mothers, as well as fathers, uncles, and older brothers; but the culture still does not take very seriously the damage caused by psychic incest between mother and son."
"Mari Sandoz in These Were the Souix mentions that the young Sioux boy never--after the age of seven or so--looked his mother in the eyes. All requests were passed through his sister. 'Would you ask Mother to repair these sandals?' 'Dumbo wants his sandals fixed', and so on. When the task was finished, the mother did not hand the sandals to the son, saying 'Here are your sandals', but again, the object went around a circuitous route. Much sexual energy can be exchanged when a mother looks a son directly in the eyes and says, 'Here is your new T-shirt, all washed'."
"Such precautions between mother and son seem absurd to us, unheard of, ridiculous, inhuman. And yet the Souix men, once grown, were famous for their lack of fear when with women, their uninhibited conversations in the teepees, their ease of sexual talk with their wives. We recognize that the Souix women were more aware of the possibilities of pyschic incest between mother and son than we are."
"I've mentioned that American mothers sometimes confide details of their private lives to their small sons, details that might better go to adults their own age. Frank disclosure is often better than silence, but it becomes harmful if the son feels he has to do something about it. The boy in many a kitchen gets drawn to his mother's side, and he says in some form those terrible words: 'Mamma, when I'm grown up, I am going to have a big house for you, and you'll never have to work again.'"

Bly goes on to show how American mothers often use their sons for 'fulfillment', for emotional satisfaction and for soul companionship. In short, she hopes he will become "a better lover to 'his woman' than his father was or is." "Who could 'his woman' be?" Bly asks.

Because psychic incest shows up in many sources, I added this term to complete the Covert section. 128.111.95.138 03:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

POV and globalize templates

I removed these, since no one seems to be discussing either. Please feel free to reinstate them if you can state a reason for placing them there. Joie de Vivre

Re: incest in folklore

I have strong doubt about the validity of the reference to "Hon Vong Phu" in Vietnamese folklore. I'm a Vietnamese, born and raised in Vietnam and the only legend related to "Hon Vong Phu" (at least the most well-known one) is about a lady whose husband is a soldier. The husband is killed in action and never comes home but the wife waits for him with his newborn until she turns into stone. The legend is all about the loyalty of a wife to her husband and nothing to do with incest. This legend is very popular amongst Vietnamese as well as a number of songs written about it. 210.49.191.145 10:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Upon more researches, I found out that there is indeed another legend about "Hon Vong Phu", which is related to incest but I strongly believes that this second version is much less known in Vietnam. I would think the reason for that is incest was very much a taboo in ancient Vietnam, thus was not mentioned much in literatures, compared to other themes such as loyalty. Perhaps there should be a separate page for the legend as I believe most people who type "Hon Vong Phu" into Wikipedia would expect to see the first version of the legend. My reference: http://www.vietnamtravelguide.com/article_detail.php?cat=1&show_cat=1&sub_cat=1&article_id=303. 210.49.191.145 10:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Archive
Archives