If Your Partner is Experiencing Reunion GSA

Please see the disclaimer at the bottom of this page.

What’s Happening?

You might be dealing with or facing a very difficult situation.

• Has your partner or spouse connected or reconnected with a close genetic relative?
  
• Did they have minimal or no face-to-face interaction from the time at least one of them was around the age of seven into puberty, or longer?
  
• Is your partner and/or their "long lost" relative experiencing a strong attraction to, or preoccupation with the other? Are they flirting or touching/hugging a lot? Do they want to spend a lot of time together or communicating?
  

There’s a strong chance that at least one of them is experiencing reunion Genetic Sexual Attraction. GSA is real and is a common, normal response to the circumstances involved. GSA is not an indication that anything is wrong with your partner or the other person. It is not wrong to have these feelings.

Genetic Sexual Attraction happens in up to half of all situations in which pubescent or post-pubescent genetic relatives meet for the first time or reunite after having been separated since at least one of them was a child, provided the genders and sexual orientation line up. It can happen whether this person is your partner’s genetic parent or grandparent, aunt/uncle, sibling or half sibling, nephew/niece, grown child/grandchild, even a first cousin.

It’s an overwhelming attraction unlike any other experience.

A couple of words of caution are needed here:

1) Sometimes people are just excited to connect or reconnect with “blood” or kin. There may not be any sexual attraction at all.

2) If your partner/your family is being stalked/harassed by this person rather than it being a relationship welcomed by your partner, that’s not what this entry is about. Encourage your partner to block contact and seek a restraining order.


Why Is This Happening?

It is important for YOU to know that this isn’t your fault. It is has nothing to do with you or what kind of partner you have been. Your partner could be very happy and in love with you, satisfied in the relationship, and yet experiencing this.

Most people are attracted to people who look like them. Who looks more like them than a close genetic relative? The Westermarck Effect overrides this in most (not all) circumstances in which one person raises another or they grow up in the same home. Close genetic relatives who were separated won't have the Westermarck Effect countering a powerful physical attraction. Add in emotional and psychological factors involved in reuniting with a lost family member, and you have something extremely powerful. It may only happen with one of their long-lost relatives, or it can happen with more than one.

Usually, if your partner loved you and wanted you before this situation, their experiencing GSA doesn’t change that.


What Does This Mean For You?

You may be shocked or very upset, which is understandable and one of many normal reactions to your circumstances. You are better off thinking through things as calmly as possible rather than making snap or rash decisions and doing or saying things that you can’t take back or repair.

You’re in a situation that is not so rare, and is happening more and more due to the realities of today’s world. There are many other people experiencing exactly what you are.

While this blog entry can’t address every moral code to which someone chooses to subscribe, our position is that there is nothing inherently wrong with ethical nonmonogamy nor consanguinamory. If you have a knee-jerk negative reaction to those things, you might want to consider why. Our main concern here is cheating, by which we mean someone breaks an existing agreement or vow without deference to, or informing of, their existing partner(s). Even someone who’d never cheat otherwise might do so due to experiencing GSA.

Neither you nor your partner sought to be placed in your positions. You’re both dealing with something that is likely at least somewhat of a struggle. Even people who consider themselves very sexually open, liberated, adventurous, and have enjoyed ethical nonmonogamy, including with the current partner in question, may not be able to handle their partner being in a consanguinamorous relationship. Your three basic options are 1) leaving, 2) staying but only as a friend or cohabitant, or 3) staying and continuing as a partner.

Leaving

If your relationship with your partner was casual, troubled, or dead or dying, and you would consider it a betrayal/cheating or unacceptable breach of boundaries for them to have sexual experiences with their “new” relative, then it is highly recommended you accept that your relationship with them is over or changing, because if there are reciprocal feelings between them, it is very likely they will have sex.

If this “new” relative is a grown child your partner knew about but whose existence your partner concealed from you, or the result of cheating on you, then that likely introduces (or reinforces) trust issues into your relationship, and, again, you might want to call it quits.

The only reservation with that is if you have minor children together and you have good reason to not want your minor children around the new relative, because if you’re living together, you have more control over what your children experience and who they are around than if your children are spending some time with your (by then) ex partner out of your supervision. See below for alternatives to leaving.


Staying and Being "Just Friends"
There are many reasons you might have for staying with your partner, but as friends and not lovers, including having minor children together, shared finances or business, genuinely being best friends, etc. There are many other people out there living with their former lover(s). With maturity and cooperation, you two might be able to agree to treat each other with respect, kindness, and politely for the sake of whatever you still will share, especially if you set a timetable for later re-evaluation of the relationship. That might be when your youngest child reaches a certain age, for example.

Staying and Remaining Lovers

When you think through things calmly and carefully, you may not mind if they have sexual experiences with this other person, or you may mind but not enough to abandon your romantic/sexual relationship with them, or you may even like the idea. There are many forms of ethical nonmonogamy and one may suit you in this situation even if you and your partner have been monogamous until now.

Don’t be afraid to explain your feelings, concerns, and boundaries and negotiate for meeting your needs. The possibilities here are almost endless. It could be a “hall pass” arrangement in which your partner can be with their reunited relative as long as they use protection, are discreet, and you don’t have to see or hear about it or decrease your lovemaking frequency. It could be all three of you being together. It could be you also taking on another lover. There are several resources that might be able to help you adapt ethical nonmonogamy into your situation. While ethical nonmonogamy isn’t for everyone and might not suit you, if there is a chance that all three of you could be content with a form of nonmonogamy, that could be a wonderful outcome. See here if you're willing to at least think about this option.

“Can’t I Stop Them?”

You can’t control what they do; you can only control what you do. If they have reciprocal GSA for each other, chances are they will have sex or keep having sex. While we stress again that this situation is not your fault, the only effective way of steering the situation away from them having sex, if there is a chance at all, would be from you being a magnet rather than playing out the part of a scorned lover and from them not being alone together. The more your partner thinks about what you have together in a positive way, the better.  Recognise that if they do hold back or stop, they have done something extremely difficult.

Especially if “nothing has happened yet,” your partner might benefit from reading this.


Being Dumped

While we don’t advocate being a doormat, the more accommodating and kind you are, the less likely you will be dumped by your partner. Unfortunately, being dumped is a very real possibility, especially since it is always a possibility with any relationship. Add in the disruption brought by GSA, and it becomes more of a possibility.


Don’t Be a Rat

Depending on the situation, can be very tempting to rat your partner and their relative out to law enforcement if the are getting together where consanguinamory is still criminalized, but we beg you not to do that unless they pose a clear danger to you or minor children (yours or anyone else’s). Even then, you shouldn’t rat them out to law enforcement as consanguinamorous if you can turn them in for something else. Example: Your wife’s long-lost father is someone who abuses little girls. Turn him in if he violates the terms of his parole by being around little girls.

If you turn in your partner and their new lover for being consanguinamorous just because you’re jealous, you might end up with far more problems. For example, your partner, with whom you have children and to whom you were married, goes to prison for a while and gets branded a sex offender for life, making it very difficult to get a good job when they are released. How much child support do you think they’re going to be able to provide to you? How much spousal support? Cheating on you is not OK. But this really shouldn’t be a criminal matter. Do protect yourself and your children from dangerous people. The mere existence of negative feelings on your part, no matter how justified, are not reason enough to bring down the harm of unjust laws.

Likewise, do not out them unless it is necessary. You feeling scorned and jealous doesn’t make it necessary. There’s a good chance people around them will figure it out for themselves anyway.

What’s Next?

Has acting sexually on GSA ruined the lives of some people? Like all sexual relationships, the answer is yes, for some it has. Some people are not right for each other, even if they are strongly attracted to each other, and some people are abusive (sometimes that is a reason for the separation circumstances to begin with). Then there are the issues of law, prejudices, discrimination, etc. But heterosexual, monogamous, nonconsanguineous relationships and marriages have also ruined the lives of some people; that is no reason to categorically condemn them.

Though GSA and resulting consanguinamory can form an intense bond, some such relationships, or at least the lovemaking, will end due to conflicting personalities, lifestyles, or life goals, any number of other factors.

Some continue on.

Someone could be the best spouse or partner, having a great relationship, and their partner connects or reconnects with a close genetic relative, and then everything gets turned upside down. You're an innocent bystander. Yet you need to deal with the fallout of what is happening. What happens next is partially, but not completely, up to you. You can only control what you do, not what your partner or their relative does. Whatever happens, things are very unlikely to be the same as they were before all this started, and you need to adapt one way or the other.

If you want to talk with someone about what you're dealing with, you can email me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com or find me on Facebook or message me on Wire at fullmarriageequality

The Kindred Spirits forum welcomes people involved in consanguinamory as well as allies of the consanguinamorous, whether it is a reunion GSA situation or not. As long as you’re not hostile to the community, you might be able to get some answers to your questions there. See this.

These links below  may answer some questions and concerns you have.

GSA and Stepping Out
Consanguinamory is Not Sick

GSA is Not a Mental Disorder of Character Flaw

GSA is Not a Result of Someone Being “Defective”

GSA Is Not a Result of Your Partner Being AbusedGSA Doesn’t Necessarily Mean Your Partner Needs TherapyHow Common is Consanguinamory?
You Probably Know Someone Else Who Has Been Through This

GSA Happens Whether Someone Knows About It or Not

The Feelings Might Not Go Away

For the Family and Friends of the Consanguinamorous

Read More »

Florida Keeps Prosecuting Consenting Adults

It's not a crime to give birth to a child with health problems, but it is treated like a crime when genetic tests reveal that the child's parents are relatives who are "too" close. Here's an article from dailycommercial.com about such a case...

A Groveland woman was arrested for having an incestuous relationship with her brother after she gave birth to a child with serious medical problems.

Notice she was arrested for consensual (to be redundant) sex.

According to an arrest affidavit, Pauline Elizabeth Martin, 33, gave birth on Nov. 21, and doctors quickly transferred the baby to Winnie Palmer Hospital for Children in Orlando because it needed specialized care.

That's too bad. It's interesting that the article doesn't specify the details of the specialized care.

Hospital officials called the Florida Department of Children and Families to investigate because genetic testing revealed the baby’s parents were close relatives.

Medical privacy only goes so far.

Lake County Sheriff’s detectives interviewed Martin at her workplace, a fast food restaurant in Leesburg, on Thursday, and she reportedly admitted being in a sexual relationship with her brother for the past five years.

That shouldn't be a crime. Unfortunately, it still is in 47 states, including Florida. She should have invoked her right to remain silent.

Detectives arrested Martin and charged her with incest and resisting law enforcement without violence.

So they go to arrest her for loving her brother and she didn't willingly leave? How about leaving her alone???

Sgt. Fred Jones with the Lake County Sheriff’s Office said detectives hope to speak with the brother as well but have been unable to reach him.

I'm sure they do. If he's protecting himself he's no longer in Florida. The article doesn't provide his age (we're assuming he's been of age for at least the last 5-6 years), nor if these siblings were raised together or are a reunion case. Fortunately, most sibling lovers are never ratted out to law enforcement.

The article doesn't bother to say (because the authorities likely didn't bother to say) if the medical problems of the baby were caused by shared genetics. It's intended for the reader to just assume they were, even though children with severe medical problems are born to unrelated parents every day, and most children born to close relatives are healthy.

While it might not ultimately matter, the official situation in the US is that we have the right to remain silent and she should have used her right and not admitted to "incest." Also, we're supposedly "innocent until proven guilty." The fact is, women can get pregnant through assault or artificial insemination (which itself might be illegal depending on the state, at least between close relatives), or by unintentionally touching semen and then inserting her finger into herself. It's supposed to be up to prosecutors to prove she had intercourse with her brother. The mere existence of a child may be enough to convince a jury, but it shouldn't be.

Babies can be born with medical issues for many reasons in addition to having parents with shared "bad" genes, including, but not limited to, environment, diet, illness, medications, and injuries. Rather than criminalizing and otherwise discriminating against consenting adults for loving each other, we should be encouraging genetic counseling and prenatal care. There's no good reason to keep denying consenting adults their rights.

Read More »

Starting or Joining a GSA at Your School

Not only are school years a time for intense personal discovery and growth, but they are usually a time of intense pressures, including the pressure to conform, and bullying.

For those reasons, Gay-Straight Alliances, or Gender and Sexuality Associations, or Diversity clubs are critical.

If your school doesn't have such an organization, consider starting one. See here and here. It's time to make plans for the next school year.

If you school already has one, consider joining and/or supporting it. Student, faculty, and parental support are all needed.

Whether starting or joining, please do what you can to make the organization welcoming, inclusive, and accepting of all whose identity, sexual orientation, relationship orientation, or existing relationship (or that of their parents) makes them a target for discrimination or bullying.

Read More »

What about France? Don't European parents provide alcohol to teens? They don't have problems with underage drinking ... or do they?

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about a UNSW study that found no evidence to support that parental supply of alcohol to children will 'teach them to drink responsibly' or be protective in any way. Instead, it found that this was actually "associated with subsequent binge drinking, alcohol-related harm(s) and symptoms of alcohol use disorder". Not surprisingly, some parents had huge issues with this and I received a number of emails and messages from Mums and Dads who refused to accept the findings. Now, as I wrote at the time, what you do with your child is your business and if you believe that it is appropriate to give your child a glass of wine with a meal then go ahead ... all I am trying to do is make it clear that if you are doing that because you believe there is evidence to say that this practice is likely to make your son or daughter a more responsible drinker in the future, there isn't!

A number of people who wrote to me raised the issue of France in their argument, usually going along the lines of that in that country there were few, if any, laws around underage drinking. There didn't need to be as the French had a very 'mature' attitude towards alcohol, i.e., it was often introduced in the home from a very early age, was almost always only consumed with a meal and the French did not 'drink to get drunk'. So is that actually the case? Do the French not have laws around underage drinking and has their 'laissez-faire' attitude towards alcohol protected them from the problems we have seen in countries like Australia?

In actual fact, France does have a legal drinking age, raising it from 16 to 18 years in 2009. It was raised, as the government at the time were quoted as saying, "to reduce a dangerous addiction among youths", with both drinking and purchasing ages being brought into line with most European countries. In the early 2000s, the French still viewed binge drinking as a phenomenon largely limited to those from the UK and northern Europe, particularly some of the Scandinavian countries. Then the situation began to change with the term 'le binge drinking' increasingly being used to describe the behaviour of French young people. Between 2004 and 2008 France saw the number of children under 15 admitted to hospital for drunkenness increase by 50% and alcohol-related hospital admissions for those under 24 rose by 50%.

In 2015, a study found that France's alcohol consumption had halved in the past 20 years, with just 18% of French men and 6% of women drinking on a daily basis. Unfortunately, the news was not so good for parents with 11.2% of 17-year-olds reporting drinking alcohol more than 10 times every month. Another study conducted in 2014 found that 59% of 11 to 12-year-olds had consumed alcohol, whilst 60% of 15 to 17-year-olds had been drunk at least once, and 79% of 16-year-olds claimed to have consumed alcohol within the last month. In addition, according to the European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD), a study of over 96,000 students across the European Union member states, spirits had become the favoured drink of French students.

To many French people this simply does not make sense - they have always had a sense of pride regarding their 'mature and sophisticated' relationship with alcohol. Many have chosen to blame the influence of visitors from other countries, particularly the UK, as causing this cultural change and that certainly may have something to do with it, but experts tend to believe that global factors such as the increasing influence of alcohol advertising and the growing link between alcohol and sport are also important things to consider.

If it isn't France that people bring up, it's Italy or Greece! What they are usually referring to is the 'Mediterranean Model', i.e., introducing alcohol to a child in a family setting with a meal. In 2009, Time Magazine wrote an article on the changing face of underage drinking in Italy. It reported that Milan had recently imposed a strict new local law that, for the first time in Italy, meant that parents of anyone underage caught drinking and anyone who supplied someone under 16 with alcohol would face punishment, with a fine of up to $700. This was as a result of a study that had found 34% of 11-year-olds have "problems with alcohol". Another national study had also found that 63% of underage youths get drunk on weekends, with boys consuming an average of four drinks per drinking session and girls consuming six.

When it comes to Greece, the ESPAD provides some frightening data regarding the alcohol use of young people from that country. In Greece, the study found that teens drink their first bottle of beer or wine at 12-13, before quickly moving to spirits (vodka, tequila, whisky) by the age of 14-15. In addition, around 9% of teenage boys and 5% of teenage girls get drunk for the first time at 13-years-old. The introduction of a glass of wine with a meal doesn't seem to be being too protective there!

Although many find it hard to accept, it is important to acknowledge that even in countries where the 'Mediterranean Model' once appeared to have been successful there are growing issues when it comes to underage drinking. Now do these countries have as significant a problem as others, including Australia? Maybe not, but to throw France, Greece and Italy into someone's face and say "these countries have got the whole underage drinking issue in hand" is just plain stupid!

Now some of you maybe asking yourself, but doesn't this guy usually go on about the growing numbers of non-drinkers amongst our young people? What about them? Well, they're certainly there - in fact, across the world we are seeing growing numbers of young people who choose not to drink, however, if they are drinkers, they are often highly problematic drinkers. They start earlier, drink a lot when they drink, which is often regularly and they are more likely to choose high-strength alcohol products such as spirits. What the research seems to be saying is that providing young people alcohol, even in cultures that traditionally were protective, does not seem to always have the desired effect ... What we are learning is that although family influence is incredibly important, there are so many other external pressures that bombard our kids from a very early age, most of which are almost impossible to control, that the potentially positive messages you are trying to send can become confused. It would appear that although you may be attempting to teach them to drink responsibly by providing them sips or a drink with a meal, what they are actually picking up from your actions (even in countries like France!) is simply 'Mum and Dad give me alcohol and they support my drinking ...' - most probably not the message you intended!

References:
EMCDDA/ESPAD(2016). ESPAD Report 2015 — Results from the European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs. Lisbon.

Israely, J. (2009). Italy Starts Cracking Down on Underage Drinking, Time, July 29, https://ift.tt/2pAfheu

Read More »

Lies and Damned Lies About GSA and Full Marriage Equality

This blog was cited in a nymag.com article by Alexa Tsoulis-Reay on reunion Genetic Sexual Attraction between a father and daughter. The article went viral and many media personalities have spoken about it, from the usual anti-equality bigots, to others who apply double-standards to the situation, to people who are allies. [This entry is being bumped up after being posted a while ago.]

A few haters wrote to us. Some people who are experiencing GSA for themselves have contacted us. Both of those are things that tend to happen anyway. More media production staff have been contacting us, asking for people in consanguinamorous relationships who are willing to be on a show or in a series or documentaries.

So far, I haven’t seen the haters or bigots explain exactly what is wrong with consenting adults expressing their love for each other. The bigotry is giving way to equality and freedom and the haters are getting desperate. Doing the rhetorical equivalent of jumping up and down, gasping, and waving your hands around isn’t an argument.

From Alexa Tsoulis-Reay’s original article…

Consensual incest between fathers and their daughters remains the least reported and perhaps the most taboo sort of GSA relationship. Keith Pullman, who runs a marriage equality blog, has personally talked to over 20 GSA couples and notes that he’s only had a few father-daughter couples speak out, speculating that many of them fear that others will assume the daughter must have been abused in childhood…

The only quibble I have with that is that I’ve published interviews with people in about 20 GSA situations. I’ve communicated with many more people than that about their experiences with GSA. Not everyone wants to do an interview, of course. Just look at all of the hate these lovers are sent.

For whatever reason, my father and I didn’t end up meeting for two more years, so there was no contact for 12 years — we were reunited when I was 17.

I’ve seen some people mistakenly say she was 16 when they reunited, not that the age difference will matter to the haters.

I’m curious, given the age gap and the perceived power dynamic, did you feel forced or coerced at all?

Absolutely not. He made sure I wanted to do it. We both initiated it and he kept asking me if I was okay, not because he thought I was distressed but because he wanted me to know that we could stop at any point. It was like any other man and woman having sex after they had each admitted their feelings.

What was it like afterward?

It wasn’t weird at all. It felt so natural. It didn’t even feel taboo. I felt like I had just made love with a man who I’d been with for years.

Did you think that a relationship was a possibility?

We discussed it before we had sex. I told him I was saving myself for someone who I’d be committed to for the rest of my life. It was important for me to make it clear that if I made love to him he was in a relationship with me. I didn’t regret it at all. I was happy for once in my life. We fell deeply in love.

Much of the negative reaction to this article has focused on her age. However, I know of several middle-aged women who reunited or were introduced to their genetic fathers and they have consensually acted on their mutual feelings for each other, and have since lived as spouses (although not free to legally marry). Few, if any of the people reacting negatively would change their overall reaction to this article if it had featured one of those women, because their real objection has to do with their personal biases and prejudices. Journalists have to work with the people willing to work with them. This woman was willing to work with this journalist.

Meanwhile, 16-year-old Courtney Stodden married a 51-year-old Doug Hutchison and not only is that entirely legal, but they’ve been all over television, allowed to be cast members on a reality television show.  They could do that because neither of them faced the risk of criminal prosecution.

Will you have a wedding? Do you have it planned?

Yes. I want it to represent our uniqueness, so we aren’t doing a white wedding.

This a point where the haters mock. “Who will walk you down the aisle?” What matters most in a wedding is that the people there are consenting to be there and making a commitment to each other.

Will you tell your kids that their father is your dad, and their grandfather?

This is another point where they haters mock. However, children care most about having a parent or parents who take care of them and love them, and as long as their parents raise them to be independent adults, what does it matter if the parents have more than one genetic label (father/grandfather)? What harms children more is bigotry hurled at their parents.

There are so many people having kids who will be passing on health problems, people with diabetes or mental health issues, or AIDS. My mom was allowed to have kids and both her and her mom were bipolar.

The haters chalk up this woman’s behavior to mental illness. Even if that were true this case, there are many sane women who’ve experienced GSA and have loving relationships as a result. And this woman is functional. She knows what she’s doing. She is neither ignorant nor mentally dysfunctional. But the insinuation is that if she has the same diagnosis, she shouldn’t be free to make her own relationship decisions. Who else is that applied to? Trying to dismiss her as too immature is interesting, because it is entirely legal for 18-year-olds to marry complete strangers. Really, it just boils down to the haters being disgusted, or perhaps jealous.

Were you ever sexually abused when you were younger?

No, and my dad has told me that the thought of being involved with me when I was little is appalling to him.

Of course the haters (mistakenly or intentionally) wrongly accuse him of being a pedophile, and predict he’ll go after any children they have, because they are ignorant of the dynamics involved in all of this.

Tracy Moore covered the story at jezebel.com, thankfully explaining a little bit about GSA…

First things first: You've no doubt heard of genetic sexual attraction, if not by name or abbreviation—GSA—then by concept. It's when two people who are related to each other experience strong sexual attraction—kissin' cousins!—but it's especially common when estranged relatives meet as adults, either in adoption or sperm donor scenarios, or when absent parents or siblings find each other later in life and become flooded with a witches brew of mixed-up longing.

Beejoli Shah covered the story at thefrisky.com, critiquing how the interview went…

The article may not be exploitative (that sin should be reserved almost entirely for her father, who chose to engage in a sexual relationship with a struggling teenager who he should have been protecting),

Consensual sex somehow prevents protection? I worry about people who have sex but also think sex is doing something bad to another person.

When The Guardian covered genetic sexual attraction, they showcased consenting adults who met when they were truly adults — in their 30s, 40s, and 50s.

Yes, that was great, but like I already said, journalists have to work with the people willing to work with them. The hate and the criminalizing against consanguinamory tends to discourage a lot of people involved from working with media.

Remy Carreiro covered the story at uproxx.com…

There is a “thing” that can sometimes happen when family members are reunited after long separations. It is called genetic sexual attraction and it occurs when two members of the same family become sexually attracted to one another and begin dating and/or acting on that. While it may sound a bit strange (and frankly creepy), one cannot deny there is something fascinating about knowing there are people who live this. 

Much of the commenting by Carreiro expresses disgust, but it is funny how some of the people who express the most disgust covered the story in much detail.

Kiri Blakeley had the coverage for thestir.cafemom.com…

What happened between them is something called "Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA)," which is apparently a fairly common dynamic between adults and biological children who did not grow up together.

Actually, it happens between siblings as well, and others. Making it as simple as possible, it seems to happen between 1) close genetic relatives (first cousins or closer) 2) who had negligible in-person contact (if any) from age seven into puberty (could be due to divorce, adoption, one night stands, egg donations, etc.) 3) who have compatible genders/sexual orientations (a gay man will not experience GSA for his mother). When those conditions are present, there’s about a 50% chance that someone being reunited or introduced will experience an overwhelming physical/sexual/emotional/erotic/romantic attraction. It may or may not be reciprocated. (Some people are attracted to close relatives even if they were never separated, but that doesn't fall under the category of GSA. For example, there are people who marry first cousins who were always in their lives, and they can legally marry in many countries and about half of US states.)

The two also plan on having children together -- and they don't plan on telling them what's up. The teen is not worried about genetic malformations, saying it doesn't happen to everybody. (She may want to read up on the case of Aswad Ayinde, who had children with three of his daughters. One child passed away from a genetic disease, the other has lifelong problems.)

Blakeley may want to read up on the majority of children born to consanguineous parents, who are healthy, and perhaps this.

And the father clearly took advantage of that. He may love her, but he should have loved her enough to say, "I'm your father, not your lover. I'll always be there for you, but not in that way." Obviously, the man has no boundaries.

No boundaries? Really? Assumptions, much?

Samantha Allen had some of the worst coverage at thedailybeast.com, clearly letting her bigoted prejudices ruin her. Out of over 2,000 blog entries, she picked two and misleads readers about this blog’s positions.

A New York Magazine piece about a father-daughter sexual relationship has readers wondering: is ‘consensual incest’ a real thing? (The answer: No.)

Actually, yes it is, and Allen certainly knows people have have been involved in consanguinamory, even though they either haven’t told her (why would they?) or she dismisses it as somehow assault. Allen seems to ignore that “incest” isn’t just parents with their adult children, but siblings, aunts/uncles with nieces/nephews, and a lot of people throw cousins in there too.

In the mere days since its publication, the interview has already spread false and misleading information about adult incest.

Oh, this should be good.

Although NY Mag’s Alexa Tsoulis-Reay takes a healthy skepticism into her interview with the young woman—pressing her, for example, on the fact that she took her father to prom even though she herself was conceived at her father’s own prom night—she frames the interview in a way that lends too much credence to the notions of “Genetic Sexual Attraction” and “consensual incest,” terms that have little grounding in reality.

Sounds like Allen has little grounding in reality. She goes on to say there hasn’t been enough scientific research into GSA to consider it a reality. Yeah, bigotry and criminalization make that a little difficult. Just look at her, taking the time to use her considerable platform to insist there is no such thing as consensual incest, as if two half siblings who first meet in their late 30s can't mutually consent to have sex with each other. Who wants to risk attacks like this and prosecution? So most involved keep quiet about it and enjoy their love, denied their fundamental freedom to marry but living as spouses anyway.

It is clear by now that many estranged biological relatives do end up in sexual relationships after reconnecting—at least enough for the occasional exposé to appear online—and that the topic is worthy of clinical research.

So what was all of that written above?

In this light, uncritically using the term GSA and floating the unverified 50 percent claim as fact is both factually incorrect and socially irresponsible, especially because adult incest advocates regularly parrot the 50 percent claim in order to legitimize incestuous relationships.

Even if it was just 10%, consenting adults should not be denied their rights.

One of these adult incest advocates is a man named Keith Pullman, whom Tsoulis-Reay positions in the introduction to her interview as a man who “runs a marriage equality blog”—a generous description of someone whose blog focuses almost exclusively on protecting so-called “consensual incest” from criminalization.

That’s a mischaracterization of this blog. Just see the tags list, and see here.

On his blog, Pullman regularly questions news reports of a relative allegedly raping another relative—even when one party is under 18—in order to raise the possibility that there could have been a consensual relationship involved.

To be clear, when the sole crime is reported as “incest”, without indicating a "degree" that stipulates it was not consensual or not involving an adult with a minor, and with no rape or assault charges, this blog does question whether we are talking about an assault or consensual sex, since many reports do not indicate one way or the other. In some cases, all adults who've had sex with each other are charged. Does it make sense to charge rape victims? No, so it is likely in those cases it was consensual. In some cases, the charge is specifically using a section of law that refers to consensual sex rather than an adjoining section that refers to assault. (Note that even if the article or police report indicates it was consensual, Allen would apparently still deny it was.) This blog almost always does this in reference to cases involving adults or cases involving minors close in age. This blog has been clear about being against abuse and does not argue against age of consent laws. Please note that many jurisdictions allow people the age of 16 or 17 to have sex with people older than them, and if a 16-year-old can legally consent to sex with a 25-year-old stranger, this blog does question the prosecution of consensual sex between that 16-year-old and a 19-year-old half-sibling they met for the first time a year ago.

In one post, Pullman reacts with uncertainty to a New Zealand case in which a man was convicted on incest charges and one charge of rape that occurred later in their sexual relationship:

“Okay, if a jury in a court of law said it was consensual and convicted him of incest rather than assault/rape, why does the news article call it rape? Is this a bias against Genetic Sexual Attraction? As it turns out, if I’m reading it right, it looks like they believe it was an ongoing, consensual relationship that involved one incident of rape.”

Just one, he suggests, as if it mitigates the seriousness of the charge.

No, not at all. Allen’s implication is that if a woman consents to sex with a man for a year, and then he rapes her after a year, that woman couldn’t possibly have consented to sex with him for that previous year. This blog takes rape more seriously than Allen, who wants to equate consensual sex with rape. Go read what was actually written on this blog in context about a specific case and how it was reported.

In another post about a 32-year-old California woman who was charged with incest after allegedly performing oral sex on her 16-year-old biological son, Pullman also equivocates:

“There are 16-year-old boys who dream of this sort of thing, but that shouldn’t matter. … I don’t generally argue for changes to age of consent laws because the line has to be drawn somewhere. However, I don’t think they should always be applied. Just as I do with cheating and GSA, I give special consideration here. … Ten years down the line, they could be a happy a couple, for all we know now.”

Again, if you want to read this blog’s coverage of that case in full, go here and click through to any previous entries.

Pullman tries to boost his marriage equality credentials by also promoting the legalization of same-sex marriage but a more apt description of affairs would be that he wants to hitch incest to the same-sex marriage wagon.

We promote full marriage equality. We support the rights of all adults. Allen is really grasping at straws. There are many great blogs out there thoroughly covering LGBT issues, and this blog links to some of them. We mostly fill in the gaps here. Funny how she ignores polyamory. There are more and more great blogs about polyamory, too. I've been over this before here. If she's bothered to check social media associated with this blog, surely she's seen that the majority of it has been addressing the limited same-gender freedom to marry and polyamory, but this blog does fill in the gaps of the overall full marriage equality situation.

As psychotherapist Robi Ludwig told CBS at the time of the Mackenzie Phillips story, “By calling incest ‘consensual incest,’ [Phillips is] still protecting the person who abused her. … But you can’t say it’s consensual, because there’s always a power imbalance when it comes to a parent and child.”

She keeps bringing up the Phillips case, as if there aren’t millions of other relationships that had and have different dynamics.

Like so many others reacting to this case, Allen doesn’t bring up a single argument that hasn’t been discredited. Early in her piece, she said  that the original article had “spread false and misleading information about adult incest,” but Allen doesn’t give any example, but rather simply asserts that there’s no such thing as consanguinamory, only abuse.

Is it really Allen’s position that if two people meet in a bar and go home and have sex, it couldn’t have been consensual if they later discovered they are close genetic relatives? That’s what her position has to be if there is no such thing as consensual incest. Does Allen insist that everyone must get DNA tests before having sex, just to be sure? Oh, by the way, there are people who've experienced GSA who did not know of their genetic relation until after they'd become involved.

Allen simply asserts that adults are cognitively unable to consent to sex with each other if they're closely related. How closely, she doesn't make clear, but it would be interesting to know because different people have different definitions of incest. Her assertion doesn't make it reality.

Wouldn’t it be delicious if Allen had a long lost sibling out there and learned about GSA first hand?

Trying to equate what consenting adults choose to do with each other with rape or with child molestation is insulting to everyone. We do not support abuse. People who abuse, or rape, or assault, or molest should be locked away in a very bad place for a very long time. We support the rights of consenting adults, no matter who thinks what they do is disgusting.

Read More »

Living Consanguinamorously - Keeping the Closet Door Closed

Someone came to this blog recently searching...

How my aunt and I can hide our incestuous relationship

The answer below will apply to consanguinamorous relationships of any composition, not just aunts and nephews or aunts and nieces.

Unfortunately, people have been compelled to stay closeted due to prejudice and bigotry, sometimes enshrined in law. Whether someone has had to hide or downplay their gender identity, their sexual orientation or their "forbidden" relationship, the oppression is harmful in many ways, but some people just can't come out of the closet, at least not at a specific time in their life. In some places, it is literally a matter of life and death. Even for places where consanguinamory isn't criminalized, many people in these relationships have good reasons to hide them from at least some of the people around them. As a result, many people don't realize they know people who are in consanguinamorous relationships.

In a perfect world, people would be able to simply love other adults without such problems, but we're not there yet. Civil rights, including things like full marriage equality, are generally advancing, at least on most of the planet, but there is still a ways to go.

Much of the answer raised by the question in the search was answered in an earlier entry about how consanguineous lovers can live together, so check that out.

There's also this entry on how consanguineous lovers can avoid trouble.

I'll try to avoid repeating too much of what is in those entries.

How you hide consanguinamory can depend on who you're with and whether or not this is a reunion situation or this person has pretty much always been in your life, and what your relationship looks like. For example, if your relationship is more of a family-with-benefits situation, hiding those "benefits" is going to be different than if it is more like a spousal relationship.

1) Move Away. As detailed in "living together" entry, moving away with your lover(s) to where people don't know of your relation is the most effective way of "hiding" the romantic or sexual side of your relationship. The good news for first cousins is that most US states don't criminalize their relationships and many states will legally marry them. People in consanguinamorous relationships have fewer options if they want to be safe from the possibility of prosecution. Whether you move away or not, though, some of these other considerations might help.

2) Move Out. If you're living with roommates other family members and you don't want those family members to know what's going on, move out, even if your not going to be moving away. If your roommates know this person is your relative, you can always find new roommates who don't know that, if you need to share a place. Who has keys to the place where you're getting together? Are you behind locked doors when you get affectionate in a way that would seem consanguinamorous?

3) Plausible Deniability. Relatives live together or spend time together for various reasons. Have one or more of those other reasons to be together. Obviously, living together is different than not living together and having dates or booty calls. If you're living together, you can say it is convenient or cost-effective to do so, or if one of you is big and strong and intimidating compared to the other(s) it can be claimed to be for security. If you're not living together, one of you can be said to be helping the other with something like home repairs or improvements, studies, or work. It might be worth your while to take up a hobby or interest together, or at least appear to do so. This is especially important for intergenerational relationships. If you're close in age, it's more likely to be believed if you simply claim to be good friends as well as relatives. It is important for you to agree on a cover story to answer otherwise revealing questions. This will be especially important if you end up having children together. See here for more about having children.

4) Keep Quiet. If you don't want Person B to know, then it might be a good idea not to tell Person A, even if you think Person A will be OK with it. If Person A knows Person B, and Person A knows what is going on, they might reveal it, even inadvertently, to Person B. Even if you think they've figured it out already, sometimes it is better to leave things unsaid. Even if they flat-out claim to know exactly what is going on, it can be better to stay silent or deny it, depending on what they are likely to do with the information. You might feel like telling everyone about your amazing relationship, but it's best to keep quiet.

5) Be Careful What You're Documenting. We live in an age in which personal communications are being hacked and "wire tapped," in which people have devices in their homes that are always listening to them, in which people are checking themselves into places on social media without even thinking about it, or allowing other to tag them and/or check them in. Microphones and cameras are everywhere. Who can track your automobile? Your phone or tablet? Who can log into them or your online accounts? Do you have your settings on social media so that people can't tag you or check you in somewhere without your permission? When you text or send a private message, you could be creating a record that others will see, or your might send your message to the wrong person. Be careful! There are messaging apps and email services that are more secure than others and that allow for things to be encrypted and to be erased after the message has been delivered. It's tempting to sext each other or take pics and video when you're lost in each other or missing each other, but you need to be careful. Technology is wonderful but there are certain risks that come along with using it.

6) Think Through What To Do if You're Caught or Otherwise Outed. Considering the likely ways your cover would be lifted can help you to improve your tactics to prevent being discovered in the first place. But sometimes, the best plans still go awry. Who is most likely to figure it our or catch you? How are they likely react? What can you say to them to discourage them from taking negative action? Can you answer their objections to your love? Always feel free to refer people to this blog to answer their questions, especially this page. Would you have to move? Some people take the extreme response of pushing the red button.

Whether you're in a relationship already or considering it because you realize you're in love with someone special or someone special is in love with you, being cautious can save you a lot of trouble.

Read More »