'I'm in love with my grandson and we're having a baby'

[Drew]

When 72-year-old Pearl met her grandson, little did she realise she'd soon be 'pregnant' with his child

Pearl Carter is positively glowing with joy. She has a handsome new boyfriend, is enjoying an active sex life after many years of celibacy and, amazingly, is preparing to become a mother again.

But the retired grandmother isn't carrying the baby herself. She and her young lover have spent a staggering $54,000 hiring a surrogate to help them with their dreams of having a child.

What makes Pearl's decision to become a mum again even more shocking is that her new boyfriend is her biological grandson, 26-year-old Phil Bailey.

Phil is the son of Pearl's daughter Lynette Bailey, and the pair is braving public horror and even prison by breaking one of the last taboos – incest.

However, the pair makes no apologies for their controversial plan to start their own family.

'I'm not interested in anyone else's opinion,' Pearl says. 'I am in love with Phil and he's in love with me. Soon I'll be holding my son or daughter in my arms and Phil will be the proud dad'.

Phil adds, 'I love Pearl with all my heart. I've always been attracted to older women and I think Pearl is gorgeous. Now I'm going to be a dad and I can't wait.

'Yes, we get laughed at and bullied when we go out and kiss in public but we don't care. You can't help who you fall for.'

Pearl was 18 when she fell pregnant with daughter Lynette. She was living with her Catholic parents in Indiana and they insisted she give the baby away, so as not to bring the family into disrepute.
They organised a private adoption and Pearl never again saw her baby girl.

Pearl went on to marry, but she never had any more children. Instead she searched for her lost daughter until finally giving up hope 15 years ago.

Finding each other

In 1983, Pearl's daughter Lynette had a baby of her own, who she named Phil. She raised him as a single mother.

'My mother told me she was adopted when I was 18, and at the same time she told me she'd been diagnosed with brain cancer,' Phil says. 'I was devastated.'

Phil nursed his mum for six months before she died. It was then he decided to track down his grandmother. It took three years before he found an address for Pearl and wrote to her.

'I was stunned to get his letter,' says Pearl, who was now single. 'My heart jumped that I'd be re-united with a grandson. I wrote back immediately and included my phone number.'

When Phil phoned Pearl, the pair admits they were both rather nervous. Pearl told Phil about being forced to give up Lynette for adoption, and Phil told Pearl about his mum dying of cancer.

'We both cried but kept talking for three hours,' she says. 'When he emailed me a photo, I thought what a handsome and sexy man he was before pinching myself – he was my grandson!'

Confused, Pearl talked to a friend, who told her about an article she'd read on Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA), which occurs when close relatives meet as adults and are attracted to each other.

'I could now understand my feelings and realise they weren't wrong,' Pearl says.

In 2006, Phil met his grandmother for the first time.

'From the first moment that I saw him, I knew we would never have a grandmother-grandson relationship,' Pearl remembers happily. 'For the first time in years I felt sexually alive.'

Phil admits that he had the same feelings towards Pearl.

'I wanted to kiss her there and then,' he says. 'My feelings were overwhelming.'

The pair spent the first week shopping, bowling and eating out. During the second week, giggly on wine after a night out, Pearl decided she wasn't going to deny her feelings anymore.

Unexpected feelings

'I called Phil into my bedroom, sat him on the bed, and then I leant over and kissed him,' Pearl says.

'I expected rejection but instead he kissed me back.'

Pearl then explained to Phil what she'd discovered about GSA.

'I was thrilled and excited,' Phil says. 'I could be with Pearl and it was OK because she'd never raised me or been in my life.'

That night, grandmother and grandson became lovers.

'Making love to Pearl was a real eye-opener. It was love combined with all this sexual tension that had been building up,' Phil openly explains.

Phil, a carpenter, agreed to live with Pearl and get a job with a local building firm.

'Living with Phil as my life partner has been amazing. He cooks and cleans and we make love three times a week. We can't keep our hands off each other.'

Twelve months ago, Phil made the shocking admission that he wanted a child. Pearl told him she was desperate for a baby as well, but it was one wish that she couldn't fulfil as she'd already gone through menopause.

The determined pair then decided to use Pearl's retirement money to find a surrogate mother and buy a donor egg to inseminate with Phil's sperm. They placed an ad asking for an open-minded surrogate, and Roxanne Campbell applied. The three met up a few times and hit it off.

'Initially I was shocked,' says Roxanne on learning the couple were related. 'But they're a brilliant pair and I saw how much they loved each other. I know the baby will be loved too.'

The couple sees 30-year-old Roxanne once a month and accompany her for scans, with Pearl playing the part of a pal or the baby's grandmother.

'I am just so happy,' Pearl says.
'I am finally going to be a mum and not forced to give up my child. Phil's going to be a great dad. I never in a million years thought at 72 I'd be "pregnant" and in love with my grandson. I make no apologies and I believe God's given me a second chance.'


http://nz.lifestyle.yahoo.com/new-idea/real-life/article/-/7124792/im-in-love-with-my-grandson-were-having-a-baby/



Gross pictures in the article.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Nachos sent this to me earlier and my stomach churned for like fifteen minutes after reading it. Ugh.

[Elsymir]

part of me is like whatever but hoooooly crap.

[DCSL]

Ugh. Eww. Puke. Floppy granny titties. Makes me wonder what kind of relationship this jerk had with his mother.

[BriarFox]

Well, that's disturbing on a number of levels.

[Nieninque]

There's no way that's true.

[Some Rogue]

Wrong, it is the story of Nachos' life.

[Latrinsorm]

Ugh. Eww. Puke. Floppy granny titties. Makes me wonder what kind of relationship this jerk had with his mother.He took care of her for months while she was dying from cancer. When he was 18. What a douchebag!

They didn't biologically produce the child, what exactly is the problem here?

[Celephais]

Nachos sent this to me earlier and my stomach churned for like fifteen minutes after reading it. Ugh.
I'm getting the same feeling.. I actually feel sick.

[DCSL]

He took care of her for months while she was dying from cancer. When he was 18. What a douchebag!

Yes, because taking care of his mother like a devoted son completely precludes the possibility of unhealthy fixations and inappropriate sexual relationships... What was I thinking!

[Keller]

[end of] APRIL FOOLS!

[iJin]

Revolting.

[Latrinsorm]

Yes, because taking care of his mother like a devoted son completely precludes the possibility of unhealthy fixations and inappropriate sexual relationships... What was I thinking!Everything stated about the guy indicates he is careful and caring, what information do you have that supports calling him a jerk, or that any of his sexual relationships are inappropriate?

[BriarFox]

Everything stated about the guy indicates he is careful and caring, what information do you have that supports calling him a jerk, or that any of his sexual relationships are inappropriate?

Biology and culture both dictate that he's screwed up. Why are you playing Devil's Advocate?

[Jack]

Everything stated about the guy indicates he is careful and caring, what information do you have that supports calling him a jerk, or that any of his sexual relationships are inappropriate?

Dude is fucking his biological Grandmother. You seriously see nothing wrong with that?

[Stanley Burrell]

I guess what's going to happen. Is going to happen.

Props to whoever impregnates their GGILF. Step up your game.

[Bobmuhthol]

I personally took one look at Pearl and immediately realized that this was the most beautiful woman in the world and I must have sex with her until she dies.

[Back]

So basically the dude is going to be the father of his uncle?

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

So basically the dude is going to be the father of his uncle?

http://s.cdn.gaiaonline.com/images/common/smilies/icon_gonk.gif

[nub]

Did anyone else look up granny porn after reading this?

[Jayvn]

http://thebeautybrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/wrinkles-beach.jpg Grandma and grandson?

[nub]

LOL I really thought that was a suite she was wearing at first, fucking GROSS haha

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Whenever anyone asks me why I don't tan/why I slather on SPF50 before heading out, I need to keep that picture on hand to hand them.

[Shari]

OMGOMGOMG.

I thought this was fake when a friend emailed it to me.

But that tanned corpse picture is freaking me the fuck out even worse now.

[TheEschaton]

So basically the dude is going to be the father of his uncle?

That is fucking mind blowing.

I can barely deal with my uncle who is younger than me. (My mother's father was the oldest of 13, his youngest brother's son is a year older than me but my uncle and my mom's cousin.)

-TheE-

[Liagala]

That is fucking mind blowing.

I can barely deal with my uncle who is younger than me. (My mother's father was the oldest of 13, his youngest brother's son is a year older than me but my uncle and my mom's cousin.)

-TheE-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7x1ETPkZsk

[DCSL]

http://thebeautybrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/wrinkles-beach.jpg Grandma and grandson?

DUDE. LOOK WHERE HER BOOB IS!

[Amber]

DUDE. LOOK WHERE HER BOOB IS!

Oh god. I hadn't noticed that until you pointed it out. I know boobs start to droop when people get older but just wow.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I'm sorry, with KFC skin like that it doesn't matter how (down by her belly button not) perky her tit is.

Jesus.

[sst]

I got through the first paragraph... knew where it was going and could not read it anymore because of the visual images that already were burned into my retinas

[Danical]

http://thebeautybrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/wrinkles-beach.jpg Grandma and grandson?

I do not appreciate throwing up in my mouth twice in a single thread. Thank you very much. :(

[Amber]

It just occurred to me that by the time the baby graduates from high school, the mom (great-grandmother) will be 90! I understand why she wants a baby, having never had the opportunity to raise one, but that poor kid is screwed.

[Fulsin]

It just occurred to me that by the time the baby graduates from high school, the mom (great-grandmother) will be 90! I understand why she wants a baby, having never had the opportunity to raise one, but that poor kid is screwed.

The best thing that could possibly happen would be for the baby's mother/great grandmother to croak right now.

[Tisket]

Hey now, she might just be an awesome person!

Or she removes her dentures whilst...well, I'm sure there are multiple reasons he loves her!

[thefarmer]

http://technabob.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/rc_stunt_granny_all.jpg

[Celephais]

http://s.cdn.gaiaonline.com/images/common/smilies/icon_gonk.gif
Just putting this reply out there, my face, your boob, it'll happen when theunimaginabl hapens, right? please say yes

besides, nothing matters, but the fact your boobs are awesome, L<3 Cel.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Just putting this reply out there, my face, your boob, it'll happen when theunimaginabl hapens, right? please say yes

besides, nothing matters, but the fact your boobs are awesome, L<3 Cel.

The unimaginable = we finally watch a rifftrax together, RIGHT? FIGURE IT OUT, MAN.

[Latrinsorm]

Biology and culture both dictate that he's screwed up. Why are you playing Devil's Advocate?If they were trying to produce children biologically, yes, there are obvious pitfalls there. They're not, so what exactly does biology have to say?
Dude is fucking his biological Grandmother. You seriously see nothing wrong with that?If no one can tell me what is wrong with it beyond "(almost) everyone feels it's wrong", why would I?

[pabstblueribbon]

http://thebeautybrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/wrinkles-beach.jpg Grandma and grandson?

Sweet leather jacket/pants.

Oh wait.

I wonder if she uses armor all.

[CrystalTears]

If they were trying to produce children biologically, yes, there are obvious pitfalls there. They're not, so what exactly does biology have to say?If no one can tell me what is wrong with it beyond "(almost) everyone feels it's wrong", why would I?
Maybe you should explain why you feel it is perfectly fine to have a sexual relationship with your biological grandmother.

[Tisket]

If it's consensual then I am indifferent to the idea. However if it were someone in my family I'd be appalled. I think most people find it repulsive because they can't imagine feeling that way about a close relative themselves. I'd be horrified if these people were members of my own family.

[CrystalTears]

I understand it being consensual and that's what they want. Hey, have fun. I just don't appreciate Latrinsorm's accusations against the people who don't approve of it since it's a societal taboo.

Besides, I feel bad for a kid whose best chance at happiness in a relationship is his 72 year old grandmother.

[Latrinsorm]

Maybe you should explain why you feel it is perfectly fine to have a sexual relationship with your biological grandmother.It is my belief that consenting adults can form worthwhile and healthy relationships, because I have been presented zero evidence to the contrary and a significant amount of evidence in support. That a particular relationship has been sacralized by tradition is a matter of dogma and coincidence, and it is my further belief that veneration of such tradition (or denigration of alternatives) is not empirically justified.
I just don't appreciate Latrinsorm's accusations against the people who don't approve of it since it's a societal taboo.If you interpret a question as an accusation, perhaps you yourself are not totally happy with your justification. :)

[4a6c1]

Yuck. I dont need a reason. Yuck. But if I did. Yuck! It would be the sound and accepted scientific reasoning of biological failure caused by inbreeding.

(yuck)

[Drew]

If you interpret a question as an accusation, perhaps you yourself are not totally happy with your justification. :)

Eric you are often the master of the specious response.

[Back]

Yuck. I dont need a reason. Yuck. But if I did. Yuck! It would be the sound and accepted scientific reasoning of biological failure caused by inbreeding.

(yuck)

Its been done to death but...

http://indigootter.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/deliverance_banjo.jpg

[Latrinsorm]

Yuck. I dont need a reason. Yuck. But if I did. Yuck! It would be the sound and accepted scientific reasoning of biological failure caused by inbreeding.

(yuck)Except in this case they aren't biologically reproducing. They're using a surrogate mother and a donor egg.
Eric you are often the master of the specious response.I do my best. Often that is not enough.

[CrystalTears]

If you interpret a question as an accusation, perhaps you yourself are not totally happy with your justification. :)
Interesting response, since I wasn't speaking about myself since I had just said that if that's what they want, so be it. But people do have a right to think it's wrong for whatever reason, as much as you have a right to think it's fine. I was confronting your need to give people shit for feeling the way they do, since there is a societal reason for it. As if for some reason they need a Latrin's seal of approval for an opinion.

[Clove]

You've got to be kidding me Latrin. Honestly?

[Methais]

They didn't biologically produce the child, what exactly is the problem here?


Everything stated about the guy indicates he is careful and caring, what information do you have that supports calling him a jerk, or that any of his sexual relationships are inappropriate?

I used to think you were a really fucked up person.

Thanks for obliterating any doubt that may have been lingering.

[Clove]

Everything stated about the guy indicates he is careful and caring, what information do you have that supports calling him a jerk, or that any of his sexual relationships are inappropriate?
The fact that it goes against societal taboos is pretty good evidence that it's inappropriate.

Additionally you mention that there isn't any biological reason why this relationship should be considered wrong, if they don't intend/cannot produce children. There are two primary flaws with this reasoning.

The first of which is you can't use biology as your basis for right and wrong without diminishing us to animals; or in other words you don't get to pick when societal taboos, customs and mores are valid as it suits you (though you can pick a different society, if you like; why don't you find one that supports sexual relations between grandparent and child). Biology has no preference against killing or stealing either, but we are more than mere biology, aren't we?

The second problem is that you assume that the only reason that this taboo may exist is solely due to biological reasons. Personally I suspect the taboo existed far before we had any advance understanding of genetics and it isn't likely that ancient man charted severe defects statistically but regardless simply because you've identified one reason (and invalidated it) doesn't mean it is the sole reason. Frankly I think this behavior demonstrates an emotional and perhaps psychological defect.

At the end of the day Latrin, you're the one challenging the accepted standards so the onus is on YOU to demonstrate why the rest of us should change the standard. It isn't society's role to explain itself to you. You're not really being philosophical here; you're being a fool.

[Liagala]

The fact that it goes against societal taboos is pretty good evidence that it's inappropriate.

I hate to cause trouble here, because I do agree with you and feel that Latrin is SERIOUSLY reaching... but saying the above isn't sound argument. Consider the "societal taboo" of interracial marriage.

[CrystalTears]

I hate to cause trouble here, because I do agree with you and feel that Latrin is SERIOUSLY reaching... but saying the above isn't sound argument. Consider the "societal taboo" of interracial marriage.
In some places, it's still taboo.

[Krendeli]

http://thebeautybrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/wrinkles-beach.jpg Grandma and grandson?

What armor class is that?

[Sean of the Thread]

A holyshit8 or 9 I think.

Wow.

[Tisket]

and feel that Latrin is SERIOUSLY reaching...

Hey now, have any of you guys considered that maybe, just maybe Latrinsorm has a hot grandma? His stand on the issue sounds very personal so cut him some slack!

[BriarFox]

Hey now, have any of you guys considered that maybe, just maybe Latrinsorm has a hot grandma? His stand on the issue sounds very personal so cut him some slack!

If so, his grandma's probably giving him enough "slack."

[Clove]

I hate to cause trouble here, because I do agree with you and feel that Latrin is SERIOUSLY reaching... but saying the above isn't sound argument. Consider the "societal taboo" of interracial marriage.I get it. You don't understand the meaning of "inappropriate" which is different than "right" or "wrong". It means unsuitable, which is exactly what ignoring social taboos is. Interracial marriage is still pretty much taboo in some cultures and I'm sure they'd invite you not to participate in theirs if you decide to ignore it.

That said, yes it's true that taboos, mores and customs change in a society; and they have little to do with any absolute idea of right or wrong. 30 years ago it was pretty much taboo to wear jeans to church. A couple thousand years ago human sacrifice was the custom for many mesoamerican cultures.

[Latrinsorm]

Interesting response, since I wasn't speaking about myself since I had just said that if that's what they want, so be it. But people do have a right to think it's wrong for whatever reason, as much as you have a right to think it's fine. I was confronting your need to give people shit for feeling the way they do, since there is a societal reason for it. As if for some reason they need a Latrin's seal of approval for an opinion.Let us agree that people have a "right to think it's wrong", that doesn't give me any information about why they chose to exercise that right. It's not my aim to make people feel shitty, and frankly I am a little perplexed by how touchy people are being about this.
The first of which is you can't use biology as your basis for right and wrong ... The second problem is that you assume that the only reason that this taboo may exist is solely due to biological reasons.I'm not the one using biology as an ethical system. You tell me my assumption is a problem, and yet no one has mustered an explanation for why they feel the way they feel beyond biological justifications.
It isn't society's role to explain itself to you.I'm not talking to society, and have no interest in the sociological origins of this tradition. I'm talking to you, and DCSL, and the individual people in this thread, and am very much interested in why you think the way you do.

[BriarFox]

It isn't society's role to explain itself to you.


I'm not talking to society, and have no interest in the sociological origins of this tradition. I'm talking to you, and DCSL, and the individual people in this thread, and am very much interested in why you think the way you do.

There's a misunderstanding of how society functions here. You can't separate people's social conditioning from society. We all think this relationship is gross because society thinks it's gross. There are several reasons for that: genetically, a relationship between a grandmother and a grandson is far from ideal because it would strengthen congenital defects; physically, their ages will mean that they are not good partners for each other because she won't be able to keep up with him and because they'll have different abilities otherwise; culturally, they'll have very different interests because one's interests are largely determined by one's age and one's own experience; socially, they would be an ineffective mated pair and unable to have children or raise them well together because she's old, feeble, infertile, and likely to die soon. Also, marrying and breeding within the family prevents exchange of ideas, alliances, and other benefits garnered from marrying outside the family.

Now, they've gotten past many of those problems by using a surrogate, and because the baby isn't actually the grandmother and grandson's. However, we (society as a whole) just perceive it as an unnatural birth, which drives all of my previous points back home conceptually.

If everyone here on the PC existed separate from any sociocultural construct, you could ask your question and it would make sense, but we don't and it doesn't.

[Latrinsorm]

You can't separate people's social conditioning from society.What any of us can do is separate our self-evaluative processes from society by a significant degree. I see what you're saying though, so to clarify: I am not interested in how anyone came to their beliefs, I'm interested in why they choose to stick with them now, right now, today.

I would also challenge your stated reasons, but they appear to be a description of a society's process. I do think you've done a good job of that, especially in the way they contradict each other and are unevenly applied to other potential relationships. That is certainly an accurate reflection of how societies appear to operate.

[Methais]

I am not interested in how anyone came to their beliefs, I'm interested in why they choose to stick with them now, right now, today.

Because it's fucking gross that's why.

[Cephalopod]

I haven't been reading this thread, but no matter how much I like to pretend that I'd be accepting of any loving relationship as long as it's not biologically dangerous, this story skeeves me the fuck out.

[EasternBrand]

any loving relationship as long as it's not biologically dangerous

I think it's time we got a straight answer out of you. Are you, or are you not, for zombie marriage?

[Amber]

I think it's time we got a straight answer out of you. Are you, or are you not, for zombie marriage?

Well, doesn't that fall under the biologically dangerous category?

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I haven't been reading this thread, but no matter how much I like to pretend that I'd be accepting of any loving relationship as long as it's not biologically dangerous, this story skeeves me the fuck out.

Thisthisthisthis.

[pabstblueribbon]

I think it's time we got a straight answer out of you. Are you, or are you not, for zombie marriage?

Blowjobs would totally suck.

Wait, marriage.. guess you don't have to worry about that after all.





























Thats what I hear anyways. Never been married.

[CrystalTears]

Let us agree that people have a "right to think it's wrong", that doesn't give me any information about why they chose to exercise that right. It's not my aim to make people feel shitty, and frankly I am a little perplexed by how touchy people are being about this.Perhaps because people are perplexed that you seem to be the only one in this thread who's hunky dory with it. We really have to explain why it's unacceptable behavior? Really?

[Tea & Strumpets]

What any of us can do is separate our self-evaluative processes from society by a significant degree. I see what you're saying though, so to clarify: I am not interested in how anyone came to their beliefs, I'm interested in why they choose to stick with them now, right now, today.

I would also challenge your stated reasons, but they appear to be a description of a society's process. I do think you've done a good job of that, especially in the way they contradict each other and are unevenly applied to other potential relationships. That is certainly an accurate reflection of how societies appear to operate.

It's nice to see someone enlightened enough to evaluate the ideas/taboos that they've been indoctrinated with since childhood. Most people find it easier to just follow the herd, rather than take the time to put any serious thought into the situation.

Sincerely,

A Sheepfucker

[Cephalopod]

I think it's time we got a straight answer out of you. Are you, or are you not, for zombie marriage?

With proper restraints, I don't see why not.

Unless it's your zombie grandmother. God, that's freaky.

[Clove]

I'm talking to you, and DCSL, and the individual people in this thread, and am very much interested in why you think the way you do.Fine. But you criticized DCSL for considering it inappropriate, when that is exactly what it is. It is inappropriate because it is taboo. Why is it taboo and why should it continue to be considered taboo may have been the question you intended to ask, but you came off sounding accusative simply because DCSL (and most others) are upholding a sensible taboo.

Why is it sensible? My own opinion is it became taboo in our society the same way that teacher/student relationships have; because for a variety of reasons such relationships are generally very harmful. I think the potential damage that such relationships represent make them dangerous to encourage by allowing some rare cherry-picked cases that seem harmless. This granny/grandson scenario happens once in a great while between separated siblings too. It's an unfortunate (and confusing) tragedy for very rare individuals balanced by eliminating overwhelmingly bad relationships in general.

[EasternBrand]

This granny/grandson scenario happens once in a great while between separated siblings too. It's an unfortunate (and confusing) tragedy for very rare individuals balanced by eliminating overwhelmingly bad relationships in general.

This is relevant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-aAPUkahPk&feature=watch_response_rev

[DCSL]

I didn't really intend to add more fuel to the fire but other than the eww factor and the potential psychological defects that this may be a symptom of, I didn't see one of the other major reasons that I think this is wrong. The future child. I don't mean from a biological standpoint. I mean, how could they do this to a child? They want a child as proof of their love and because she wants a child to raise. It sounds incredibly selfish. Me me me, I want!

What's going to happen to this kid? In elementary school in the US, we do a lot of talking about family. We do reports on our own families, our family trees, what does mommy/daddy do, et cetera. It's a good way to become used to basic learning and researching techniques by relating to something familiar to us. What happens to this child when he does a report on close-to-dead Mommy and young Uncle Daddy?

They can claim that "oh, we will love this child and we'll all get through it together!!1!" but why would you put someone you supposedly love through that pain? And what if their whole school life is nothing but torture?

As a child, I had a secret that I knew set me apart from the other children on the playground. I remember sitting on the jungle gym thinking, "I'm different from that girl over there." Growing up, I learned that statistically some of those other children had to have had something similar happen to them, but still, I felt disconnected and separate from my fellows.

This kid won't have the comfort later of knowing he's not completely alone in having to deal with it because, honestly, how many other times does this happen? He'll be the only one in his state to have experienced something like this, probably. You can say he'll get through it with the loving, caring support of Uncle Daddy (because, let's face it, Mom's not going to be around; she will die before having to face the consequences of what she's done) but what if the kid doesn't find this a source of strength? What if he's not one of those plow-through-and-think-of-the-bright-side-of-everything people?

What's left is a kid who will have a legitimate reason to be emo. Let's face it; we don't need more of those.

[Celephais]

Incest leads to emo... makes sense.

[DCSL]

Incest leads to emo... makes sense.

INORITE?!

[ElvenFury]

Uncle Daddy
Wouldn't that be Nephew Daddy?

[DCSL]

Wouldn't that be Nephew Daddy?

You're right, but Uncle Daddy still serves to illustrate the twisted nature of the relationship. Plus, I just like saying "Uncle Daddy."

[ElvenFury]

You're right, but Uncle Daddy still serves to illustrate the twisted nature of the relationship. Plus, I just like saying "Uncle Daddy."
In that case, I'd be happy to let you call me Uncle Daddy.

[Nieninque]

It's nice to see someone enlightened enough to evaluate the ideas/taboos that they've been indoctrinated with since childhood. Most people find it easier to just follow the herd, rather than take the time to put any serious thought into the situation.

Sincerely,

A Sheepfucker

I missed you.

[Latrinsorm]

Perhaps because people are perplexed that you seem to be the only one in this thread who's hunky dory with it. We really have to explain why it's unacceptable behavior? Really?Yes, I would appreciate it.
But you criticized DCSL for considering it inappropriate, when that is exactly what it is.I am of the opinion that DCSL is mature enough to receive a frank appraisal of her position and not take it as a personal attack. If it did come off like a personal attack, I surely apologize.
What's going to happen to this kid? In elementary school in the US, we do a lot of talking about family. We do reports on our own families, our family trees, what does mommy/daddy do, et cetera. It's a good way to become used to basic learning and researching techniques by relating to something familiar to us. What happens to this child when he does a report on close-to-dead Mommy and young Uncle Daddy?If you ask what is going to happen to any kid, the answer is that they are going to at some point be treated miserably by other kids. I wouldn't (and didn't) let a bunch of slobbering idiots (read: children) dictate how I live my life, I see no reason to demand anyone else does. As painful as it is, ostracization is absolutely preferable to self-mutilation. Haven't we all tried both?

I feel safe in saying that nobody here would advise interracial couples against having children. I also feel safe in saying that everyone would agree that the social ramifications of that situation were many times worse than this. I am left dumbfounded that anyone would recognize the historical progression of that taboo and choose to endorse this one. How do you reconcile these thoughts?

[Some Rogue]

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a64/lrenzo2/Stooges.jpg

[CrystalTears]

I am left dumbfounded that anyone would recognize the historical progression of that taboo and choose to endorse this one. How do you reconcile these thoughts?
Let me know when ANY family member is allowed to have sexual relationships with ANY other immediate family member in this country and people stop considering it inappropriate.

Luke and Leia Skywalker don't count, however I'm sure most of us said "EEEWWWW!" when we saw the re-release of Empire Strikes Back.

You have reached maximum creepiness with being so adamant to defend this.

[Tisket]

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a64/lrenzo2/Stooges.jpg

I see your triple and raise you thermonuclear facepalm.

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w66/Sassy_Photos_2007/zzzzzNuclearFacepalm.jpg

[BriarFox]

I feel safe in saying that nobody here would advise interracial couples against having children. I also feel safe in saying that everyone would agree that the social ramifications of that situation were many times worse than this. I am left dumbfounded that anyone would recognize the historical progression of that taboo and choose to endorse this one. How do you reconcile these thoughts?

1) No one would agree with you that racial intermarriage is worse than incest. 2) They're "reconciled" by recognizing that there's a vast world of difference between racial bias and incest taboos. Your equation of them is disingenuous.

[Tisket]

I think Latrinsorm (in this thread) might be the most successful troll ever.

[DCSL]

I also feel safe in saying that everyone would agree that the social ramifications of that situation were many times worse than this.

Yeah, you shouldn't feel safe with saying that. Wow.

[Lumi]

Yes, I would appreciate it.I am of the opinion that DCSL is mature enough to receive a frank appraisal of her position and not take it as a personal attack. If it did come off like a personal attack, I surely apologize.If you ask what is going to happen to any kid, the answer is that they are going to at some point be treated miserably by other kids. I wouldn't (and didn't) let a bunch of slobbering idiots (read: children) dictate how I live my life, I see no reason to demand anyone else does. As painful as it is, ostracization is absolutely preferable to self-mutilation. Haven't we all tried both?

I feel safe in saying that nobody here would advise interracial couples against having children. I also feel safe in saying that everyone would agree that the social ramifications of that situation were many times worse than this. I am left dumbfounded that anyone would recognize the historical progression of that taboo and choose to endorse this one. How do you reconcile these thoughts?


1) No one would agree with you that racial intermarriage is worse than incest. 2) They're "reconciled" by recognizing that there's a vast world of difference between racial bias and incest taboos. Your equation of them is disingenuous.

Stole the key word right out of my mouth.

[Latrinsorm]

Yeah, you shouldn't feel safe with saying that. Wow.How many people have been killed for engaging in a relationship with a member of a different "race" vs. how many people have been killed for engaging in a relationship with a family member. It's no contest.
They're "reconciled" by recognizing that there's a vast world of difference between racial bias and incest taboos. Your equation of them is disingenuous.It would be if I had made one. What I in fact equated is the acceptance of a given taboo based on the consequences of the majority agreeing with it. It is immaterial whether the taboo is right or wrong.

Do you think everyone who was against interracial marriage was a racist? Do you not see that is entirely feasible that they could have made the same arguments from prudence as presented here?
Let me know when ANY family member is allowed to have sexual relationships with ANY other immediate family member in this country and people stop considering it inappropriate.Just look at the words you're using. Is allowed? You were rightfully upset when you thought I was demanding that people get my approval before they took a philosophical position on something, where is that outrage when a demand is made that consenting adults get approval before they love each other?

[BriarFox]

How many people have been killed for engaging in a relationship with a member of a different "race" vs. how many people have been killed for engaging in a relationship with a family member. It's no contest.It would be if I had made one. What I in fact equated is the acceptance of a given taboo based on the consequences of the majority agreeing with it. It is immaterial whether the taboo is right or wrong.

Do you think everyone who was against interracial marriage was a racist? Do you not see that is entirely feasible that they could have made the same arguments from prudence as presented here?Just look at the words you're using. Is allowed? You were rightfully upset when you thought I was demanding that people get my approval before they took a philosophical position on something, where is that outrage when a demand is made that consenting adults get approval before they love each other?

You're making a utilitarian argument- "incest has historically led to fewer deaths than racism." That's because people don't kill their family members, even if they're gross. You just stop inviting them to the Xmas parties.

Judgment here all depends on the ethical standard one uses. Yours has been pretty unclear until now.

[Latrinsorm]

I am responding to the utilitarian argument that an incestual relationship should be decried because of how they fare in society. It is only reasonable to respond on the same terms.
Judgment here all depends on the ethical standard one uses. Yours has been pretty unclear until now.I don't think it's a question of a standard or system at all, I don't think people function that way. For each of us this is one person holding one position, a position totally susceptible to being discarded as each person chooses. You (BriarFox) are a free man - a heavily conditioned and trained free man, but a free man nonetheless.

[BriarFox]

I am responding to the utilitarian argument that an incestual relationship should be decried because of how they fare in society. It is only reasonable to respond on the same terms.

All right, then. Here's another argument that's not utilitarian: People find incest disturbing because it violates closely held conceptual categories important for defining their place in society and for making sense of the world: the family versus the not-family, us versus them, sexual versus asexual, and so forth.


I don't think it's a question of a standard or system at all, I don't think people function that way.

People cannot function without conceptual systems. There can be no judgment, no opinion, without at least an implicit structure with which to judge.


]For each of us this is one person holding one position, a position totally susceptible to being discarded as each person chooses. You (BriarFox) are a free man - a heavily conditioned and trained free man, but a free man nonetheless.

The first (free to choose)and second (conditioned) parts of this statement, while not entirely contradictory, are not entirely accurate, either. One's social, cultural, economic, geographic, educational, etc ad nauseam background conditions one to certain responses. Certain theories (Late Marxism, a la Frederic Jameson) argue that people cannot be "free" of that background. Of course, this level of conditioning becomes so individual (as Marxism will argue) that it can seem as if there's freedom. Now, you're free to disagree with Marxism if you can take on its arguments, but even if you can, you still have to account for these influences.

In sum, here's another argument against incest, and here're some problems I see with your philosophical stance.

[CrystalTears]

Just look at the words you're using. Is allowed? You were rightfully upset when you thought I was demanding that people get my approval before they took a philosophical position on something, where is that outrage when a demand is made that consenting adults get approval before they love each other?
Okay let me rephase. Let me know when anyone can be in a sexual relationship with someone within their immediate family without being ostracized, shunned and ridiculed in society for their inappropriate decision.

Just because they "can", does not mean they "should".

[Clove]

I am of the opinion that DCSL is mature enough to receive a frank appraisal of her position and not take it as a personal attack. If it did come off like a personal attack, I surely apologizeI am of the opinion that your ridiculous criticism of her obvious conclusion extends to any of those of us who are capable of recognizing social taboos and assigning appropriate/inappropriate values to people who observe or ignore them.


I feel safe in saying that nobody here would advise interracial couples against having children. I also feel safe in saying that everyone would agree that the social ramifications of that situation were many times worse than this. I am left dumbfounded that anyone would recognize the historical progression of that taboo and choose to endorse this one. How do you reconcile these thoughts?Why would you feel safe in saying that? DCSL already gave a detailed explanation for why the child of such a relationship would have an epic challenge. Interracial couples may still carry some stigma in some communities in this country, but I don't think anyone could claim that, today, they are taboo nor are their children. You cannot say the same about products of incest or incestuous relationships.

In my opinion interracial relationships were largely taboo because of a mistaken belief that different "races" of human beings were superior or inferior to others. Opportunities over time demonstrated this belief to be false and eventually the taboo became obsolete.

The same cannot be said for incestuous relationships. Increased chances of passing on recessive genetic flaws aside (which really isn't a reason in and of itself) there are other reasons that make incest incredibly dangerous. I mentioned before that incest was similar to student/teacher relationships. A teacher is a powerful authority figure for a student which makes it very easy for a teacher to manipulate a student selfishly, and very difficult for a student to defend himself from such manipulation (or at times even realize he is being manipulated). The same is true of doctors and patients... parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, aunts and nephews etc., etc., etc. In fact siblings probably have the most evenly matched status, influence and power in a family and even they are rarely complete equals. In situations like this, even when the parties involved appear willing and satisfied, it's not always clear if the powerful party isn't exercising undue influence and even if they aren't at the moment it is all too easy for them to abuse the weaker party at any time.

The undue influence a senior family member can have on a junior one, is simply one example of how incest is terribly dangerous. Let's be clear, we all know that lovers are rarely equals and often people end up in terribly destructive relationships with partners that are domineering and malicious but this disparity of power is a chance amongst unrelated lovers- it is built in with immediate family members (and between doctor and patient, teacher and student etc.).

The threat in incestuous relationships is very obvious to most and I don't think society is ever going to be willing to play with this sort of "fire" on a case by case basis simply so that the very rare individual has more options for satisfaction. There are other matches for the grandson, and his grandmother; safer ones. It truly is disappointing that with all your education, intelligence and reason you cannot grasp what even the dullest pre-adolescent understands intuitively, Latrin. Shame.

[Latrinsorm]

People cannot function without conceptual systems. There can be no judgment, no opinion, without at least an implicit structure with which to judge.I seem to have misunderstood what you mean by "system", by which I meant "a coherent and consistent set of beliefs". In the sense of "an apparatus", I retroactively agree with your statement, but it is not useful here. I am not in any sense disagreeing that taboos violate very closely held concepts, that is after all what makes them taboos rather than improprieties or faux pas. I am not in any sense disagreeing that these concepts are almost always the product of environment. I must disagree if anyone, even the esteemed Dr. Jameson, says that people are incapable of eventually changing their responses, even when those changes explicitly violate their most fundamental cognitive axioms. This is only impossible for a rigorously systematic being, which actual humans are not.
I am of the opinion that your ridiculous criticism of her obvious conclusion extends to any of those of us who are capable of recognizing social taboos and assigning appropriate/inappropriate values to people who observe or ignore them.Yet you are capable of so much more, and you're so close to it. :(
Interracial couples may still carry some stigma in some communities in this country, but I don't think anyone could claim that, today, they are taboo nor are their children.I didn't say today. I said "historical progression of that taboo". In the past, interracial relationships endangered the lives and well-being of their participants. In the present, this is (mostly) no longer the case. This happened one person, one choice at a time, flying directly in the face of what was "safe". People suffered terribly, and people were killed. Prudence is great for crossing the street, or for flying an airplane. Prudence is lousy for this.
In situations like this, even when the parties involved appear willing and satisfied, it's not always clear if the powerful party isn't exercising undue influence and even if they aren't at the moment it is all too easy for them to abuse the weaker party at any time.I suppose I should be thankful no one posted a thread about D/s relationships. Let us put that aside: I will of course agree that familial relationships necessarily carry inequalities of power, but I must point out that the relevant familial relationships are not necessarily biological. You are welcome to say that society refuses to deal on a case-by-case basis, I still don't care about society. You can generalize as much or as little as you want.

It's perfectly understandable if you have no intellectual reason to dislike this particular relationship, that you just don't like it. We're all made almost exclusively of meat.

[Latrinsorm]

Okay let me rephase. Let me know when anyone can be in a sexual relationship with someone within their immediate family without being ostracized, shunned and ridiculed in society for their inappropriate decision.I will be happy to. You say you are indifferent towards these relationships, so you and I make 2. Only 3.399999999 billion to go for a simple majority!

[Tea & Strumpets]

I will be happy to. You say you are indifferent towards these relationships, so you and I make 2. Only 3.399999999 billion to go for a simple majority!

I don't know why you are still trying to educate these prudes.

[Latrinsorm]

I am reasonably sure it is due to my not having a capped character in GemStone III.

[Sam]

I will add that I too am not bothered by this and feel that two consenting adults should get their jollies however they see fit.

[Clove]

I didn't say today. I said "historical progression of that taboo".Yes, you did...


I feel safe in saying that nobody here would advise interracial couples against having children.The reason nobody would advise against interracial couples having children today is because today it isn't taboo, but incest relationships are. The natural question that follows was, why was it worthwhile for individuals to suffer for a period of time to neutralize that taboo and not this. I believe I presented you with an answer.


I suppose I should be thankful no one posted a thread about D/s relationships. Let us put that aside: I will of course agree that familial relationships necessarily carry inequalities of power, but I must point out that the relevant familial relationships are not necessarily biological. You are welcome to say that society refuses to deal on a case-by-case basis, I still don't care about society. You can generalize as much or as little as you want.

It's perfectly understandable if you have no intellectual reason to dislike this particular relationship, that you just don't like it. We're all made almost exclusively of meat.You don't have to bring up D/s relationships since I already observed that there is no guarantee that non-incestuous relationships can't follow the same harmful dynamics; only that incestuous relationships have dramatic inequality built in (which is one very clear reason why they are so dangerous).

I can generalize as much and as little as I like and I agree with the taboo even when it involves couples in which I do not obviously perceive harm. My reasons are the same as society's- it is too dangerous a relationship to encourage or to cherry pick. Period. And everyone with the exception of this couple and you seem to comprehend this.

[AnticorRifling]

Man I can't wait to pay for this kid. Do it up fucktards we'll foot the bill.

[Showal]

I hope this isn't an increasing trend because

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_J5OkhWgvcxM/SnYv2hxqloI/AAAAAAAABOg/NWcMFTaYSs8/s400/25503_512x288_manicured__XHsugBOPwkeY3ARkbXw65Q.jp g

we can't have a bunch of old pregnant bitches running around. That's crazy.

[4a6c1]

Omg. Eric!! <3

You know I heart your brain. I recognize your valiant attempts at facilitating reason in the place of evolutionary genetics but you arent going to change the way human beings instinctually react to 'harmful physiology' today or tomorrow or a week from now.

We are survivors of a million year, tumultuous genetic war in which the primary weapons were prejudice and the prize was survival of the species. Turning off those instinctual triggers is an honorable feat but in order to do so mankind would first have to reach a evolutionary climax. Are we done progressing as homo sapiens? Also what is the meaning of life etc. etc.

My point is the instincts to have prejudice will not and should not go away until we are a better race of people. I opine that it will happen in time and that it is not US that are being utilitarian, but nature. You are just ahead of your time, sweety. More evolved (or less evolved if we are still talking about survival). Just quit telling us the earth is round, because that's pretty scary. :)

[BriarFox]

In a way, this whole thread is people talking around each other, now that I look back. Latrin sees incest taboos as socialized prejudices and thinks people should be able to step away from them, while most other people (including me) have been providing reasons why those prejudices exist or agreeing with them. Some of my earlier posts take issue with the ability of people to do what Latrin would like them to do, though.

[josephwright12]

I am just stunned after reading this shitty crap... How a grand mother and his biological grandson can be sexually active and planning for a baby...? This is just ridiculous.