Now is the Time - Solidarity is Best

This piece coincided with something I had meant to write. It is about solidarity.

This blog, and the related Facebook page, calls for relationship rights for all adults, including full marriage equality. When we say that an adult should be free to marry any and all consenting adults, we actually mean it. We have not hidden that.

I've had more than one polyamorous person think that this is great... when they realize it means I support the polygamous (or polyamorous) freedom to marry... then react negatively when they realize it means I support the consanguineous freedom to marry.

Yes, I do. I support the right of an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, to marry any and all consenting adults. So yes, I support the right of a white woman to marry a man of African ancestry, or 30-year-old man to marry a 60-year-old woman, or a man to marry a man, or a woman to marry two men, or a woman to marry the half-brother she first met when they were both adults. None of these marriages hurt anyone else. None of these marriages hurt anyone, at least not in and of themselves. There are people who aren't right for each other, there are abusers, but that has to do with the individuals involved, and not the general freedom to marry.

There are patriarchal polygynists who want support for their "plural marriages" but do not want to associate with anyone or anything standing up for the rights of LGBT people, or polyandrists, or any non-polygynist polyamorists.

There are monogamist gays and lesbians who dismiss someone else's need for polyamory or for the need of cousin couples to marry.

There are cousin couples who grew up together as much as any siblings who do not support the rights of half-siblings who did not grow up together to get married or even just be together without being criminally prosecuted.

There are many other examples like this. Everyone has their own interests, priorities, likes and dislikes, prejudices, and biases. Some people care only about their needs, not those of anyone else.

But we (including many LGBT people, and many people who are in or seeking plural marriage, a polygamous marriage, a polyamorous relationship, or a consanguineous relationship) are people who support the rights of all adults. We support full marriage equality, not just a freedom to marry for this group or that group. A decent person does not have to like the idea of every one of these relationships to support the rights of adults to have the relationships they want. A person doesn't have to want something for themselves or a loved one to have compassion for others who do need it.

Solidarity is:

1. The right thing to do

AND

2. It will prove to be the most effective way of securing rights.

Even some people who agree with #1 do not agree with #2.

Recently, a polyamorous person expressed to me her concern that my support for consanguinamorous relationships is a threat to the rights of poly people. Consanguinamory just isn't supposed to be how a relationship works, she said to me publicly. But haven't we heard these same things from some monogamist LGBT people about polyamorists? Shoot, we hear it about the "BT" in "LGBT". "Drop the bisexuals and transgendered in order to further the rights of lesbians and gays!" It is not only an awful thing to do, it is a false promise. There's the real slippery slope: allowing those who oppose equality to deny rights to anyone. 

But I was told that I was asking for too much in asking for full marriage equality, that by insisting that consanguineous lovers have their rights, too, that I was going to hurt the cause for poly people and there could be a swing of the proverbial pendulum, essentially back to the hetero-monogamous married only climate of condemning and denying rights to poly people, LGBT people, unmarried lovers, etc. Texas was cited as an example because of the recent vote on abortion restrictions. Texas is an outlier, though. Texas criminalizes consensual adult sex between first cousins, who can legally marry in about half of the states. Remember it was Texas law criminalizing "sodomy" that was stuck down in Lawrence vs. Texas. That was as recently as 2003. Meanwhile, just a year later, the limited same-gender freedom to marry began in Massachusetts after a long-building momentum.

Momentum is strong and increasing. We're not going to see a reduction in LGBT or poly rights; we're going to see a continuing advance. Including rights for the consanguinamorous will not jeopardize this; rather, standing up for relationship rights for all will strengthen the rights for LGBT and poly people. That is true because the people are evolving, for the most part, not because they no longer have their own aversions to relationships different than their own (many of them still do), but because they can think and they have thought through it and realized that consenting adults should be themselves and have their relationships and not be treated as second class citizens for doing so. When someone says we should support rights for consenting adults ...except for consanguinamorous relationships they are actually undermining LGBT and poly rights and the related freedoms to marry, because the people to whom they are making their appeal find the appeal insincere.

Almost all who do oppose or have opposed interracial, same-gender, polyamorous, and consanguineous sexuality/relationships/marriage have done so for two primary reasons:

1. personal disgust
2. their religion

Sometimes those two reasons are indistinguishable.

But when people are calmly but firmly asked to think it through, and their concerns are addressed, they realize that there is no good reason to oppose consensual relationships between consenting adults. When someone insists that it is still OK or right to oppose consanguineous relationships, they are almost invariably bringing back an argument that they just dismissed when it comes to other freedoms to marry, as Greenfield points out. To say that it is permissible to deny consanguineous lovers their rights, someone actually undermines the case for their own rights. Specifically, a polyamorous person runs a risk because the consanguineous freedom to marry takes less paperwork and adjustment than adjusting for polyamory. Also, more people have experienced consanguineous experimentation (at the very least) than have experienced polyfidelity or open coupling. 10-15% of people in their early 20s will confide in surveys to having had consensual sexual contact with a siblings. The percentages increase in older age groups (due to more opportunities as time goes by.) That doesn't include contact with cousins, aunts, uncles, or parents. Some of those people enter into lasting relationships.

Now is the time to push for the rights of ALL adults. The bigots are in retreat. There's no going back. There may be some isolated backlash, but this kind of prejudice is dying out... literally. When we respond to the stubborn bigots by saying yes, discrimination against some adults is OK, the remaining observers, who are the ones who can be persuaded to support rights for polyamorists and LGBT people, are going to lose respect for the argument for equality. So the best response to "What's next?" is "Rights for all consenting adults. Why is that a problem?" The bigots won't have a good reason. Put them on the defensive, and they'll lose.

Consenting adults of any relation can be together in Rhode Island. There's no reason they shouldn't be free to marry, and no reason why first cousins, who can legally marry in California, should not be free to be together in Texas. There's no reason for Utah to criminalize polyamory. There's no good reason for any state to deny consenting adults their fundamental rights to be together and to marry.

Those who oppose equality and have cited my blog have never explained what is wrong with what I have argued. Conversely, people have told me that I have opened and changed their minds about same-gender relationships, about polyamorous relationships, and about consanguineous relationships. I have received relieved and thankful messages from people who are so happy to find that someone speaks for them. I will not throw these people under the bus.

These disputes are nothing new to the civil rights movement. Going all the way back to when African-Americans were still enslaved, there were disputes about what rights to seek and how to seek them. "Do we fight for desegregation? For interracial marriage?" Those fighting for women's rights have had similar disputes. "Do we fight for lesbians or not?"To this day, there are people who say civil rights are for African-Americans. Not for gays, not even for Mexicans. Don't play that game. Stand up for the rights of all adults. You don't have to like the idea of interracial relationships, or same-gender relationships, or polyamorous relationships, or consanguineous relationships to realize that people should have their rights.

Standing up for full marriage equality is not only the principled thing to do, it is the practical thing as well. There are people who are suffering right now because their loving, lasing, happy, healthy relationship is denied equality or even criminalized. This is not right, and it needs to end.

Read More »

Consanguinamory and Reproduction

One of the most common reasons given to object to the right to consanguineous relationships is what I call the "mutant baby" argument. Even some people who support the right to consanguinamory and have even engaged in consanguineous sex themselves join with bigots in being strongly against close relatives having children together because of prejudiced backlash or the increased risk of birth defects.

In regards to the prejudiced backlash, the answer is not to let bigots have their way. It is for bigots to lose their power to bully, prosecute, and break up homes. Don't want children of consanguineous parents to have a hard time? Do not give them a hard time.

In regards to the increased risk of birth defects, scientific understanding is often lacking.

Most sexual encounters do not result in a birth. Many people who have relationships or marry never have genetic children together; some people in consanguinamorous relationships choose not to. So, we must recognize the differences between sex, marriage, parenting, and reproduction, and not ban the first three because of concerns about the last one.

But let's deal with that last one.

Most births to consanguineous parents do not produce children with significant birth defects or other genetic problems; while births to other parents do sometimes have birth defects. There are happy, healthy, bright, attractive people born to close relatives who are productive members of society. We all know some, whether we know it or not, and whether they know it or not. It is that common. (Sometimes, they were conceived by an abuser, but often, not by an abuser but by mutual lovers.) We don’t prevent other people from marrying or deny them their reproductive rights based on increased odds of passing along a genetic problem or inherited disease. For example, it is entirely legal in the US and most other places for someone with Huntington's Disease to date, have sex, marry, and have genetic children. How can such rights be denied to people who are genetically healthy, simply because they are close relatives?

It is true that in general, children born to consanguineous parents have an increased chance of genetic problems than those born to nonconsanguineous parents, but the odds are still minimal. (UPDATE: Please see this wonky elaboration written by a Friend of FME.) There are US states and there are countries where consanguinamory is not illegal or at least it isn't prosecuted. Sweden will legally marry half-siblings in some circumstances. A comparison of the rate of genetic problems in these places to places that criminalize and actively prosecute consanguinamory reveals no discernible increase in genetic problems in the places that embrace this relationship right.

If a natural talent or gift runs in the family, the children born to consanguineous parents will be more likely to inherit and manifest that beneficial result as well; a birth benefit. But there are increased odds of problem with births to older parents, too. There's no stigma assigned to that, and it isn't illegal for older people to date, have sex, marry, and have genetic children together.

Anyone concerned about these things should have genetic testing and counseling. People who are not close relatives can pass along health problems, too.

The "birth defects" argument also implies that people with disabilities or some other birth defect are living lives so terrible that they should never have been born at all. Yet, there are many such people who are leading happy, fulfilling, productive lives.

But a current problem, in some (not all) cases, is that in giving birth, consanguineous parents will be outing themselves to someone who is prejudiced, and there will now be evidence of their (in some places) illegal love that can be used against them.

There are consanguinamorous parents happily raising their healthy children together. But some consanguinamorous relationships face very real threats. Again, the answer is to stop the persecution and prosecution. There is no good reason to deny consenting adults their equal protection of having their relationship and reproductive rights.

Consanguinamorous or not, anyone engaging in heterosexual intercourse should be aware of the possibility of pregnancy, the various forms of birth control and other options available, and the realities if pregnancy, birth, and raising children.

UPDATE: Jane has a great essay on these topics here.

With all of that in mind, let's look at this thread on a consensual incest discussion board. (The discussion is explicit, so if you have a problem with that, you are warned.)

carebear82 wrote…

I have been sexually active with my brother for 3 years now. We have sex whenever we get the chance which unfortunately is only about once a month as we live a bit of a distance apart but whenever i am home visiting family once a month we always make a point to hook up at least once and we have always been careful to use condoms but i am seriously considering letting him go "bareback" . Sex without condoms is so much better. I know the risk but i am really considering it.

Girls out there in incestland? What do you thinik? Condoms? or no condoms?

Janel responded…

Carebear...as long as you are both disease and drug free...then ditch the condoms. But, if you are fertile, then just remember that you could get pregnant...not sure if you want that or not. If you know when you ovulate, then you just don't have sex during those 36 hours......

carebear82 added…

forsure. we both know the risks but i really want him to cum inside me. i think im going to do it. i tell you the first time i took off my clothes in front of him and he slowly gently slid his cock inside me it was heaven. what an amazing feeling.

horny guy questioned…

Is 36 hours going to be a safe enough timescale to ensure 'safe' sex with your brother? I've heard of many instances where a female has concieved in the middle of her cycle, which for you could be a disaster (unless you want to have a baby with your brother)?

Maybe you could try another form of contraception-spermicidal foam, for instance?

Hope all goes well, but be careful!

Hank5 was nostalgic…

My sister and I were lovers for 3 years whilst sharing an apartment attending the same out of town university. We made love almost daily, but neither of us like condoms and from the start we did it "bareback". The first time we did it, she went to the university health clinic the following morning to get the "morning after" pill. Thereafter she went on the contraceptive pill.

For both of us making love skin-on-skin, and me pouring my semen into her uterus, was the apex of sexual enjoyment.

Just make sure that you practice safe sex so as to avoid an unwanted pregnancy.

Carebear82 updated the situation with what you could probably guess would happen…

I just wanted to let everyone know that my stupid plan to ditch the condoms has now ended in disaster as i am now pregnant with my brothers baby.on my doctors advice i did not go on the pill because of a few of the risks of the pill involved so we were practicing the "pull out" and he usually cums on my tummy or back depending what position we are in. well one stupid time he didnt pull out in time and now its gonna be pretty hard to explain to the family.

Even if he had pulled out each time, that isn’t contraception. Sperm can leave the penis well before any orgasm.


That particular discussion board, like many others was suffering from much spam and gibberish posting. I recommend instead visiting Kindred Spirits forum, registering/joining for free. But be sure to immediately read all of the rules.

Read More »

When Someone You Love Wants To Love You More

You may have come to this blog because you think or know someone in your family or closely related to you is attracted to you, or has a crush on you, or wants to getromantic or sexual with you. You may have had a mix of reactions to this, whether you've been shocked, surprised, confused, amused, bemused, worried, flattered, aroused, creeped out, repulsed, nervous, or some combination of these. So what do you do when a relative has a crush or very strong attraction to you?


These Feelings Are Normal and More Common Than You Think

These feelings are not so rare. There’s not necessarily any reason to get them to a mental health professional because they have these feelings. They are especially common when you were not raised by one another or with each other, but even if you were raised together or by one another, it's not unheard of.


These Feelings Aren't Wrong

Their feelings are their own. It is OK for them to have their feelings, and they certainly aren't alone in having such feelings.



And your feelings are yourown.


Their feelings do not require you to act one way or another, but doing nothing at all is probably the worst way to react.

If you're feeling the same asthey are, or want to seriously consider adding this bond to your relationship, you might be better off going to this entry here.

But if you're somewhat unsure, ambivalent, wavering, or all the way over to the side of being fairly certain you want no part of such a situation, the rest of his entry is for you.


Initial Reaction

Unless you've been hoping for this moment, you should probably take some time to think it over, even if your initial internal reaction was "No!" If you've already reacted negatively to them, there's still a chance to smooth things over.


Are You Sure It is How They Feel?


As we like to say around here, thinking and knowing are two different things.

It’s pretty clear how they feel if they explicitly say that they want to get it on, or they made an unmistakable physical pass at you, or you’ve overheard them masturbating and saying your name, or you’ve discovered that they keep images of you that are sexy or explicit or are very suggestive, or the history/files on their smart phone, tablet, or computer reveals they’ve been thinking about how to get with you.

If you've got a vagina and you find that your underwear (especially used) keeps getting moved or disappears and reappears in their room, that’s a pretty strong signal on their part; there is only doubt if they are the same size as you, in which case there is a small chance they wanted to wear it (washed). If you find that your underwear/lingerie or toys keep getting moved or used, that’s a strong indicator. It is also something I advise against people against doing, just FYI.

If they've left this very essay for you to find, then it should be clear.

If you have such clarity, You can skip down to the next section.

But if it hasn’t been that clear, there's a chance they're not making a play or inviting you to. They may not even want to act even if they do have feelings for you in that way.

If you only thinkthey might be interested, it could be a misunderstanding or maybe you are misreading them (or even projecting your own latent feelings).

Flirting or behaviors that would look like flirting to the average observer ignorant of your relation might be an indication, but those things aren't definitive if not explicit or blunt.

Maybe you've found out that they like (or even create) porn or erotica with incestuous themes. This does not necessarily mean they are attracted to you and want to have sex with you and are hoping to have sex with you. It's a very popular genre. Some people enjoy such material or even have a fetish for it without actually wanting to be with their own family members. Porn is usually very different from reality, after all. On the other hand, it can be a sign of interest.

Hints, clues, or signs likely to indicate they're interested:

• They look for reasons to be around you, especially alone, without an apparent agenda. 
• They suggest or arrange for you two to do things that romantic couples might do, even if it they try to make it seem like an accident (such as getting the two of you in a hotel room with just one bed). 
• They have increased physical contact with you. 
• You catch them staring at you or giving you lingering looks. 
• They’ve started or increased discussions about sex with you, especially consanguineous sex and relationships, and especially if it involves “joking” about consanguinamory or something happening between the two of you. 
• They express jealousy or envy towards your (potential) dates or lovers. 
• The people they date or find most attractive have similarities to you in appearance, age, mannerisms, etc. They may even (try to) date your friends. 
• They’ve “accidentally,” or have had excuses to, come in to where you are changing clothes or showering/bathing or have tried to call you in when they are changing clothes or showering/bathing when it hasn’t been typical for you to be in those circumstances together. 
• They are dressing up more impressively than usual or in more revealing clothing around you for no apparent reason.
• They’ve started to invite you to tell them how they look or if something they’re wearing is appropriate. 
• They mention having a sexual dream that included you. Even if they play it off as funny or strange, they could be trying to see how you react.
  

None of these by themselves mean it is certain they are sexually attracted to you, but the more that you recognize them doing, the more likely they are.

If you're stillunsure and you don't want to come right out and ask them because it could be embarrassing, you can give them a chance to speak plainly about their feelings for you by talking about the subject in general. If you talk about it in a way that indicates to them that it is safe for them to talk with you about it and they can tell you anything, then they’ll reveal if they do feel that way for you. Some ways of doing this would be to say that you had a dream that included them, or that you’d consider it flattering if someone in the family thought you were attractive. You can say things like, "Is there anything on your mind you're not telling me? You can tell me anything, and I mean anything." Or something like, "You know, I've been thinking about how rare it can be for people to find a very strong, special connection to each other, and it is shame that some people think there is anything wrong with consenting adults loving each other in any way they want." There are many things you could say that will give them the confidence to be vulnerable with you.


You're Positive They Want to Jump Your Bones

No matter what your feelings are, you need to make it clear what boundaries, if any, you need to be in place.

Again, if you think you want to go for it, whether you’ve been hoping they feel that way or you’re curious or want to explore or experiment, go ahead and see this.

If you need limits on what is going to happen, when, where, etc., then you need to discuss that with them, as you should for any romantic or sexual relationship you’d have with anyone. Maybe your limits include cuddling, maybe kissing, maybe simply being naked around each other, maybe masturbating in front of each other, or touching each other or various forms of sexual contact. Maybe you want to move more slowly than you have with others (although many people in these situations end up moving faster than they have with others, and often regret that they didn’t get together sooner.)

If you think there is no way you'd want to get any more physically affectionate or romantic than you already do with them, do you know why? Consider if you’re internalizing a senseless prejudice against something that could be very enjoyable for both or all of you and bring you closer together. It might be a good idea to tell the other person you need some time to think about things. Sometimes, people who are initially shocked or have a negative reaction, after thinking it over, realize they have a mutual interest. The thought that they want you might have caught you off-guard or shocked you. Take some time of think about it. This is someone who loves you and knows you. It had to take some courage on their part to be vulnerable with you if they volunteered to you how they feel.

While there is no good reason to have laws or taboos against such relationships, you may have a reason to not have such a relationship, at least with this person. After all, each person needs to decide for themselves that they’re going to do and with whom when it comes to physical contact and romantic activities.

If you're not going to further or continue sexual or romantic affection, it would be best to let them down easy, and you probably want to let them down easy, unless they’ve been coercive in their approach. Who likes to be rejected?

Some things you might want to say, depending on the situation:

• You’re flattered 
• You love them
• You’re not upset with them 
• You just can’t go there because your feelings for them, while loving and pleasant, are entirely non-romantic and/or non-sexual 
• You’re not open to a romantic or sexual relationship anyone right now (or anymore) 
• You’re committed to someone else/others and do not want to jeopardize that 
• You just can’t take the possible risks
  

Even if you already reacted in a way that wasn’t exactly letting them down easy, you can go back to them and tell them that you’re flattered, you’re sorry you reacted that way, but you were caught off guard, then tell them one or more of the statements above.

If you take the route of not “going there,” be sure to be mindful of what you’re doing around them because you do not want to tease them or give them false hope. It is tough enough for them to deal with the rejection; don’t add to the difficulty.

Also, they may be consanguinamorous as their orientation, and even if they aren't they might pursue a consanguinamorous relationship with someone else. Here's how to be an ally.

If you'd like to contact me to discuss these matters further, you can write me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com

(Disclaimer: This entry assumes you live, or would move to, someplace where affection would not be a criminal matter.)


How To Pull Off Living With Your Consanguineous Lover

Read More »

Guilt By False Association

This post carries a ***TRIGGER WARNING*** because we will be discussing abuse and quoting/paraphrasing hateful, bigoted, discriminatory, sexist, racist, homophobic statements to expose the tactic of "guilt" by false association long used by anti-equality holdouts.


Over and over again, those opposing rights have tried to tie consensual adult relationships to assault and abuse, playing on fear and prejudices along the way.

• When we were debating interracial marriage, the fear mongers tried to equate interracial marriage with "n-----s are going to rape and steal your white women!" This is still done in some ways.
• The fear mongers said "homosexuals" were child abusers looking to victimize children playing in parks or that same-sex marriage was just a cover for people to adopt and abuse children. This, too, is still going on. They also said people would lose their spouses to "turning gay" if people who weren't heterosexuals weren't forced to stay in the closet. "You son or husband will turn into a f----t!"
• Polyamorous, group, plural, or polygamous marriage is currently presented by fear mongers as a way to have old men "marrying" multiple underage girls and keeping control of them for life, subjecting women to domestic abuse and forced servitude.
• Consanguineous relationships and marriage are still associated by the fear mongers with grown men raping children.
  

Rape, assault, molestation, or abuse of any kind has nothing to do with consensual sex and relationships. An adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage (or any of those without the others) with any and all consenting adults, without fear of prosecution, bullying, or discrimination.

We must take both consent and lack of consent seriously. People in consensual relationships should not be smeared by trying to associate them with abusers.

There are people who've experienced both abuse and a consensual relationship that the fear mongers try to associate with abuse, and they can speak powerfully to the profound difference.

When someone tries to pull such a move, it can be helpful to say, "Abuse is a terrible thing, but what about consensual relationships, which are something entirely different? Why should consenting adults be denied their rights to be together?" They're not going to have a good reason.

We are not talking about abuse. We are talking about adults who want to be together, as friends and/or lovers, perhaps as spouses, in a romantic or recreational relationship, whether on a casual basis or for life. Shame on those who stoke prejudices and fears to try to deny people their rights.

If someone really, truly wants to fight abuse, they should stop wasting public resources and social energy trying to stop consenting adults from being together, instead putting that time and money and energy into fighting actual abuse. Also, lifting criminalization and stigmas placed on consensual relationships will make it more likely that abuse victims and witnesses will cooperate with law enforcement in stopping abuse, because they won't have to fear they'll be in trouble for their consensual relationships.

Read More »

Frequently Asked Question: Is This Incest?

One frequently asked question is whether dating this person would be incest, or if doing this activity with a close relative is incest. The question is posed in different ways…

Is this incest?
Is it incest to date my in-law?
Is it incest to date my adopted sister?
Is it incest to date my adopted brother?
Is it incest to date my stepbrother?
Is it incest to date my stepsister?
Is it incest to date my uncle?
Is it incest to date my aunt?
Is it incest to date my cousin?
Is it incest to kiss my brother?
Is it incest to kiss my sister?
It it incest if my sibling and I have masturbated in front of each other?

The subtext is usually, “Is it wrong?”

First of all, regardless of laws, I see nothing wrong with any kind of physical affection, contact, or companionship between any consenting adults or minors who are close in age, as long as existing vows to others are not being violated. This includes dating, literally sleeping together, seeing each other nude, hand-holding, hugging, kissing (of any sort,) contact with genitals, intercourse, living together, marrying, etc. If these people are right for each other and want this with each other, then it shouldn’t be anyone else’s place to object.

As I always point out, I’m writing about consensual experimentation, exploration, affection, making out, sex, love, dating, partnering, living together, and marriage. I’m not talking about assault, molestation, abuse, or coercion. If someone forces themselves on you, that is wrong regardless of their relation to you.

What is incest? That depends on who you ask. The definition I once found at Wikipedia was…

sexual activity between family members or close relatives. This typically includes sexual activity between people in a consanguineous relationship (blood relations), and sometimes those related by affinity, such as members of the same household, step relatives, those related by adoption or marriage, or members of the same clan or lineage

As the Wikipedia entry notes, some people or laws include sex between relatives by marriage, or related by affinity rather than blood (consanguinity,) as incest. Contrary to popular misconception, actual sexual contact between close genetic relatives is not a crime everywhere. There are places where it is legal. Not all places that do have laws against consensual incest define incest the same way. For example, some places have laws that criminalize consensual sex between step-relations, while others don’t.

There are three basic kinds of relations that are commonly called incestuous…

Genetic… if people who are genetically related because they share at least one genetic parent or grandparent, it can be labeled as incest in the literal sense. Someone who shares one genetic grandparent is a half-cousin. Someone who shares two genetic grandparents is a full first cousin.

Legal… if people are legally related through adoption or share an adoptive parent, or have parents who are married to each other (such as stepsiblings), or even if one person is or has been a stepparent to the other, it can be considered incest even though there is no genetic relation.

Social… even if there is no legal or genetic connection, some people might call it “incestuous” if the lovers spent a lot of time around each other, perhaps in the same home, while one or both was growing up. And example of this would be if a woman dated her aunt’s ex-husband, who had been her uncle through marriage for part of her childhood.

So, something can be considered "incestuous" from a genetic, legal, or sociological perspective.

Some places include relationships where there is no genetic connection in their anti-incest laws. Also, there are many places where marriage between first cousins is legal (including some US states) and even common, but other places where such marriages are still denied. There are some US states where consensual incest between full siblings is not illegal, but all states still deny this as a freedom to marry.

Some people think of it as incest if two siblings from one family partner with two siblings from another family, even if both relationships are monogamous and do not swap. Children from the two relationships are “double cousins.”

Genetic relatives brought together into a sexual relationship through Genetic Sexual Attraction or without having grown up with each other, or without one having raised the other, may not have the sociological foundation that would make their relationship socially incestuous, but it may still be considered incest in the legal and genetic sense. This is why many people brought together through GSA do not see their relationship as incestuous, but others, including law enforcement, might.

Whether someone considers a relationship between stepsiblings incestuous might depend on what age they met or whether or not they lived together as children.

Rather than asking if their relationship is incestuous, there are two more relevant questions for someone to ask…

1. Is this illegal? Consensual relationships shouldn’t be illegal, but in some places, some are. This will usually have an impact on how the relationship is conducted and how the information about the relationship is shared. Lovers need to consider what precautions to take, and their family and friends also need to be savvy about the situation. Which takes me to the second question…

2. Will you accept us or reject us? This is more personal. Will this relationship be respected by those around us, or do we need to surround ourselves with people who truly love and respect us?

Lovers should not have to be concerned with the prejudices of outsiders, whether those prejudices are enshrined in law or not. If people are happy together, that’s all that should matter. How do they treat each other? Proximity, bonding, trust, love, privacy, mutual attraction, common backgrounds, and shared interests and outlooks on life can form the basis for a strong, happy, lasting spousal relationship or a mutually satisfying fling, or something somewhere between. Whether lovers share a custodial guardian or genetic parent, met through someone else’s marriage or relationship, or simply met one day while on a nice walk, what matters is what works for them. Is it incest? It shouldn’t matter.

Read More »

If teens really want to drink alcohol, they're going to find a way! It's just important to not make it easy for them ...

Recently after having given a Parent Information Evening I was contacted by a mother who wanted to say 'thank-you' for the talk. She also wanted to share something her 17-year-old niece (who had been babysitting) had said to her regarding the provision of alcohol. Here is an extract from the mother's message ...

" ... (she) asked us all about it and was really interested to hear about it. We mentioned about how it is imperative that parents don't give kids alcohol to take to parties etc. and she was adamant that she "would not recommend" we send our kids to parties without alcohol! I was taken aback but she said that in her experience if the kids didn't have alcohol and wanted to drink they just get alcohol off other kids. I guess this is a real issue to consider ... I thought it was an interesting response."

I always find the 'if you don't give them the alcohol they'll get it from somewhere else' argument quite bewildering. Realistically, if your child wants to drink alcohol, no matter what you do they will find a way - but does that mean you should just throw your arms up in the air and give it to them? That's certainly the response that your teen will want and, unfortunately, all too often that's what happens in many families. Some parents believe that if they give them the alcohol that somehow this makes it 'safer' than if they get it from somewhere else ... Alcohol is alcohol, it doesn't matter if you give it to them, they get it from a friend or they buy it themselves - it's still the same product! Now, if you feel comfortable providing them alcohol and it's what you want to do, that is totally your business and no-one can tell you to do otherwise - but if you don't think it's the 'right-thing' to do then you should never be forced into doing it simply because your teen threatens you ....

Sometimes I get the whole 'drink spiking' argument thrown at me, i.e., if you provide the cans or bottles, at least you know that the drink hasn't been interfered with in some way. Have you seen how teen parties operate when alcohol is around? Are they realistically going to carry the two bottles around with them for the whole night to ensure that the two drinks you gave them are going to be 'safe'? Of course not! Another argument is based around the provision of low alcohol-content options. Give them low-alcohol beers, ciders or ready-to-drinks (RTDs) in an attempt to keep them away from more problematic spirits. Some young people have told me that if they are given these by their parents they simply trade or sell them onto younger groups and then purchase the drinks they actually prefer.

For many reading this I guarantee that your parents didn't want you to drink alcohol, wouldn't provide it for a party and so you found your own way around their rules and boundaries and did it anyway ... It's highly likely that your first drink of alcohol with friends was in a park, squatting behind a bush or tree drinking a 'box of wine'! It wasn't a particularly pleasant experience, there wasn't a great deal of alcohol available and all in all, it was pretty scary.

I believe that young people of today are much smarter than we were when it comes to finding new and inventive ways of drinking alcohol, particularly in a party or gathering setting ... as I always say, it would appear that very few of them want to drink in a park if they can possibly help it, preferring instead to drink with their friends at someone's home! To illustrate just how clever some of these kids are getting I just thought I'd share a couple of the more inventive ways they are now smuggling alcohol into a party setting. Here are just a few:

• hip flasks - these have always been around but have become the latest fashion accessory for some young women and can be bought online from many websites. I'm talking to 14-year-old girls who own one of these and this appears to be the number one way alcohol is snuck into sleepovers ...
• 'a present room' - when your teen requests a special room at the party for presents - be wary! Amongst the wrapped presents they have been given there could be 'liquid gifts' ... The teen usually ensures that this is a room that is made 'out-of-bounds' from everyone apart from those they want to take in themselves so that they can share with them what has been so generously given. A number of parents have contacted me to let me know about this ingenious strategy, most of them totally bamboozled as to how some of the partygoers were becoming intoxicated until stumbling upon the drinking that was going on in the 'present room'
• fruit injected with alcohol - this is a really clever one (apparently it's all the rage at sporting events, with men in their 20s injecting oranges with vodka to avoid alcohol restrictions at cricket games and the like!), with grapes being the preferred fruit for 15 and 16-year-old parties (but teens have told me that they have seen watermelon, strawberries and even nectarines used). And you thought your teen was on a health kick when they asked for a fruit platter at their birthday party!
• a range of devices bought online - some of these are truly bizarre. You can now buy tampons that are hollow inside that hold one standard drink, a hairbrush which has been designed to carry liquid, as well as a range of other products usually worn under clothing that can be used to conceal alcohol. The most outrageous of these devices are the range of bras that can be purchased, where each cup can be used to hold a reasonable amount of whatever drink the wearer desires (apparently, usually vodka!)! These also come with a 'tap' to ensure easy access to their drink of choice ...

But my personal favourite story about creative ways of attempting to get alcohol into a party (and how the elaborate plan was foiled) is as follows ... Here is an edited version of an email that Martine, a mother of a 16-year-old daughter, wrote to me over the Christmas break ...

"Matilda was desperate for a 16th birthday party and since she hadn't ever had a party at our house we decided to go for it. We pulled out all the stops and wanted to make sure it was as special as possible. At the same time we made it very clear to her that there would be no alcohol. Some of her friends had had parties and parents had permitted BYO and had tried to control it. None of them worked out well, with one ending up with the police shutting it down. She didn't like it and we certainly had a couple of tantrums but as the night grew closer she seemed to accept our decision."

"On the Friday before the party (Matilda was at school) we had a company come to the house to erect the marquee and as they were putting in the pegs into the garden they hit a bottle of vodka buried beneath the ground. After the first bottle (and a couple of cans) were found we decided to do a thorough investigation. It took us a while but we ended up finding an absolute treasure trove - bottles of vodka and bourbon, UDL cans and an assortment of other bits and pieces! We decided to say nothing to Matilda and simply watch what happened on the night ... Watching those teens desperately digging through that garden searching for their alcohol almost made up for the huge disappointment we felt in Matilda! Nothing was said on the night and I truly believe that most of the kids had a great time (we believe it was a core group of about 6 kids who knew about what was going on - at least they were the ones that were obviously distressed!). What surprised me was how organised these kids had been - one bottle in the dirt or a couple of cans hidden in the bushes maybe, but hundreds of dollars worth of alcohol carefully buried? They're certainly far more clever than we ever were!" 

As I said, teens will find a way if that's what they want to do - we did and so will they!

If you don't believe that giving them alcohol is the right thing to do - make it clear that you don't want them to drink before a certain age and that you won't be giving it to them. Let them know that if they decide to break your rules and drink and you catch them then there will be consequences. Will this mean that they won't break the rules and they'll do everything you want them to? Of course not, for many young people there will come a time when they will decide to experiment with friends, no matter what you say or however strong your relationship, but I can guarantee you that if they do choose to drink, for the most part they are likely to be a lot more careful with how much they consume because you have made it clear as to what will happen if they get caught!

We know through research that when you provide alcohol to teens the only message they get from that is 'my parents give me alcohol' - they certainly don't get any messages about safer or responsible use. Of course, at some point you have to trust your child to 'do the right thing' - at 17 many parents start changing rules (no matter what their values) because it is 'the year of the 18th' but at 15 or 16 I find it hard to believe that anybody would think it would just be easier (and safer) just to send them off to a party with alcohol. It may sound like a good idea at the time but if it should go wrong and something terrible happens to your child - and remember, we lose one 14-17-year-old due to alcohol in this country every weekend - you will never forgive yourself ...

Read More »

Quick Fish Tacos; semi-homemade

Everyone in my home loves tacos; any kind! We love vegetarian tacos, bean tacos, fish tacos, chicken tacos.. You name it, we like it; except the ones with meat in it. You see we don't eat meat.

Tacos are nothing but some kind of vegetarian or meat filling in the middle of a small tortilla ( roti) that is usually topped with lettuce/shredded cabbage, onion, sour cream, taco sauce and shredded cheese. When I make tacos at home, I make it healthy by switching the sour cream with Greek yogurt and using low fat shredded cheese. I sometimes skip the cheese in mine altogether. I also substitute lettuce with shredded cabbage. I also sometimes top it with baked butternut squash. You can make a vegetarian version using just butternut squash and the shredded lettuce and sauces.

acos are perfect for weeknight dinners when you don't have much time or patience and want to rustle something quick and easy.

I often keep some organic, least processed breaded fish fillets in my freezer for quick use. I also almost always have some organic corn tortilla in my refrigerator handy.
Today, I am sharing with you one of my easy, quick to rustle taco recipes.

Servings: 2 ( 2 per person)

Prep time: 5-10 minsCook time: 15-20 minsTotal time: 20-30 mins

Ingredients:

Corn tortillas: 4 (in number )
Breaded fish stick or fish fillets: 4 in number
Greek yogurt: 1/2 cup ( may not need all)
Chopped onion: 1/4 cup
Shredded cabbage: 1/2 cup
Taco sauce: 1/4 cup ( may not need all)
Shredded low fat Mexican blend cheese: 1/2 cup ( may not need all)
Roasted butternut squash cubes: 1 cup ( may not need all), ( optional)

Method:

Cook the breaded fish sticks in the oven or the microwave as per the instructions on the package and keep ready.

If you wish to add roasted  butternut squash(optional), roast it in the oven in a single layer at 350 degrees for 30mins. Keep ready.

When the fish is cooking, finely shred /chop the cabbage/lettuce and keep ready.

Assembling the tacos:

Warm up the corn tortilla on a griddle or for 10 seconds in the microwave.  

Place the tortilla on the serving plate.

Apply a layer of Greek yogurt. 

Now, place one piece of cooked breaded fish. 

Top it with 1/2 tsp chopped onion, 1 tbsp shredded cabbage and 1 tbsp shredded cheese.

If using roasted butternut squash, add it to the taco before the cheese.


Drizzle taco sauce on top.

Do the same with all 4 tacos.

Serve and eat immediately.

Cooking made easy:

Tacos are usually assembled by the individual who is eating it. Tacos made ahead of time becomes soggy.

Tip for healthy living:

Tacos can be made gluten free by using corn tortillas. You can totally skip the yogurt and shredded cheese and make it vegan by substituting it with a cabbage slaw.

Food for thought:

Nothing is possible until you do. Maya Angelo

Read More »

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. Please see this about talking with police.

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 »

Why Do I Feel This Way?

Has anything like these ever happened to you?

• You wake from from an erotically charged dream, feeling strange or confused because it featured a close relative or family member.
  
  
• You're close to orgasm, whether you're alone or with at least one other person, and thoughts of a relative pop into your head, taking you to climax.
  
  
• You've found yourself admiring your relative "a little too much," whatever the setting or occasion.

If you have experienced anything like any of those, you're not alone. This is more common than many people think, because far more people have such thoughts than will admit to most people they know.

If we're talking about someone who recently came (back) into your life and you, they, or the both of you were essentially raised through childhood apart, then it could be reunion GSA, which is very common in such situations. See this page for more information. Most of this entry also applies to you, but is more focused on people who were always in each other's life, or for the most part have been.

Is It Normal?



Are sexual dreams with relatives or family members normal? Yes.

Is it normal to have fantasies or thoughts of getting together with a close relative or family member?  Yes.

Is it normal to think of a close relative or family member in a sexual or romantic way? Yes.

Is it normal to have feelings or crushes for a close relative or family member? Yes.


By "normal" we mean that there isn't necessarily anything wrong with you for having these thoughts and feelings and that they are very common, so much so that you know many other people who've had these thoughts and feelings, whether they've told you or not.

What Does It Mean?

You can have the above experiences without actually wanting to have sex. If the only thing you've noticed are dreams, then it might be that the dreams are only symbolic, not that you actually want to get sexual with your family member. There is also the possibility that the dreams are revealing to you latent desires, especially if you have waking feelings or thoughts and especially if the dreams, thoughts, or feelings are persistent.

In addition to any of the above sounding familiar to you, there are other possible signs you want to be with this person or these people as more than just family:

• You enjoy being around them and doing things with them. This might include evenings/weekends together at home or going out together in what might look like a date in the view of stranger, taking trips and vacations together, etc.
• You enjoy their scent, whether their hair or their cologne/perfume or any scent associated with them
• You enjoy touching them and touch them more than you touch other people; you might even look for excuses to touch them and be close to them, even to do something like tickle them
• When out on a date or with friends, you wish this/these family members were with you or you feel like you'd rather be home with them
• You're envious of their dates, especially if you think you'd treat your family member(s) better or they are dating beneath their status/quality
• The people you date or find most attractive resemble or remind people of your family member(s)
• You seem to be attracted to their friends (this, like previous one, can be seen as displacement)
• You want to want to hear about their dates/love life, whether from them or their partners (dating them vicariously)

These are just some signs, not an exhaustive checklist. If you don't recognize any of them in you, you might still have an attraction but if you do recognize any of those in you, especially combined with the erotic feelings and thoughts, then you likely have a serious attraction to your family members(s). The more you identify with these statements, the more likely you've uncovering the truth that you are attracted and you do want to have sex, or at least be romantic, with them.

Accept That You Are Attracted to Them


Does that worry, bother, or confuse you? As you no doubt know, and what may be troubling you, is that some people are completely averse to the thought of their family members, or, to be more precise, anyone raised together in the same home with them, as a sexual partner. That is because they are experiencing what is called the Westermarck Effect. However, not everybody raised together experiences this, or at least not strongly enough to suppress attractions to all in/from the home. People who weren't raised together don't experience this effect. And so while a taboo exists in many places when it comes to acting on these feelings, and many people at least partially internalize such prejudices, many people do act on them anyway.

What Do You Do Now?

Should you act on it? That depends a lot on your personal situation. This might help you decide.


Whether you pursue sex or a love life with another consenting adult should be entirely between you and that person. It is possible to have a mutual sexual attraction and to discuss having sex without actually doing it. There is no good reason why people shouldn't have their rights to such relationships, but you might personally decide it is best not to pursue a sexual relationship with a certain person. Sometimes, it is better to leave a fantasy as a fantasy.

"Why Am I Feeling This Way?"

Attractions can be complicated. You've seen people who have been head over heels in love with each other and you just don't get it, yourself, haven't you? Someone might tell you that you just need to get out more and meet other people. If you're young and inexperienced, they might be right. But on the flip side, maybe the reason you don't have other love interests is because you want this this person or these people more. There are also polyamorous or otherwise ethically nonmonogamous people who do have other love interests and sex partners and still have these desires for a consanguineous connection. It could be as simple as your crush being extremely attractive in general. Some studies indicate that most people are attracted to people who look like them.


You could be attracted to this person and that person just happens to be a relative. It is also possible that you have a consanguinamorous orientation, especially if people who aren't closely related seem to generate little spark for you.

A Note To Survivors of Abuse

Abuse victims do sometimes have these thoughts, but it isn't at all true that someone is only going to have these thoughts if they were abused. Quite the opposite can be true. Someone might have these sexual thoughts because this family member is so kind and loving, so protective and nurturing in contrast to the abuser. Also, it is possible for someone who was abused by one relative to have healthy feelings for another relative, just as someone who was abused by a supposed friend can have healthy feelings for a true friend.

See Jane's  Essay on Self-Realization
See Jane's Essay on Feelings of Guilt

See Also:

Consanguinamory FAQ
Let Dad Have His Fantasies
A Message to Family and Friends

You are also welcome to contact Keith at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com or on Facebook to discuss these topics further.

You can find others who've had the same feelings at Kindred Spirits.

Read More »