![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ljwritesUpdate: Comments are back up, having been disabled by mistake. Thanks lb_lee for bringing this to my attention. Everyone should feel free to tell me how wrong I am on this, as I am squicked by my own conclusion and would love it if someone changed my mind.
Remember the anti-gay-marriage crowd's dire warnings that legalizing gay marriage would lead to the legitimacy of incest and bestiality, and how the rest of us pooh-poohed them as hateful backward hicks?
Well, maybe the right-wingers had a point
Via Jezebel I read this interview by someone who claims to be a woman who is engaged to her biological father. While there are some questions about the veracity of this account, that interview also led me to the blog Full Marriage Equality, which, yeah, advocates the legitimization of marriage between close relatives. The blog has stories of close relatives reunited as adults who became sexually and romantically involved, a phenomenon called genetic sexual attraction. I have a hard time believing all these stories are fake, nor that there could be no such relationships and people out there.
As I read, I couldn't help but draw parallels to homosexuality--adults in consensual relationships being told they were sick, that their desires were unnatural and sinful, unable to have their relationships recognized and living in fear of prosecution. I'm far from the only one to see parallels, either: A woman in a relationship with her biological father explicitly references the gay-rights movement, calling relationships like hers the "new frontier" for marriage equality.
And the thing is, if I believe in my reasons for supporting same-sex marriage then I don't have much of a leg to stand on opposing incestuous marriages between consenting adults. Given how GSA works, the vast majority of individuals in these relationships never shared a family life and only met each other for the first time as adults. We're not talking about a mother raising a son under her roof and then sweeping on his arm to the altar on his eighteenth birthday, which is textbook grooming.
That isn't to say incestuous marriages can't be abusive, or that grooming would never happen. In fact I'm scared at the myriad ways incestuous marriage could be abused. But is making these relationships illegal really the way to prevent these problems? Do we solve anything by shaming and punishing people who say they're in love, forcing them underground or driving them apart in shame and fear? In fact, recognizing the reality of sexual attraction between close relatives might make it easier to recognize and provide intervention for sexual abuse within families. Yes, there's a danger of predators cloaking their actions in legitimacy, but this is true of any marriage and these problems may be more easily addressed if the people involved have rights and protections under the law.
By defining marriage as a compact between consenting adults, it seems we liberals have indeed paved the way for a world in which a father and daughter can wed, or two sisters can walk proudly down the aisle. I don't know if it'll take ten years or a hundred, but there's no logically consistent way to say these couples should not be recognized by law. Disgusted as I am at the idea, I just don't see how I can say "no" to consensual incestuous marriage.
lb_lee for bringing this to my attention. Everyone should feel free to tell me how wrong I am on this, as I am squicked by my own conclusion and would love it if someone changed my mind.Remember the anti-gay-marriage crowd's dire warnings that legalizing gay marriage would lead to the legitimacy of incest and bestiality, and how the rest of us pooh-poohed them as hateful backward hicks?
Well, maybe the right-wingers had a point
Via Jezebel I read this interview by someone who claims to be a woman who is engaged to her biological father. While there are some questions about the veracity of this account, that interview also led me to the blog Full Marriage Equality, which, yeah, advocates the legitimization of marriage between close relatives. The blog has stories of close relatives reunited as adults who became sexually and romantically involved, a phenomenon called genetic sexual attraction. I have a hard time believing all these stories are fake, nor that there could be no such relationships and people out there.
As I read, I couldn't help but draw parallels to homosexuality--adults in consensual relationships being told they were sick, that their desires were unnatural and sinful, unable to have their relationships recognized and living in fear of prosecution. I'm far from the only one to see parallels, either: A woman in a relationship with her biological father explicitly references the gay-rights movement, calling relationships like hers the "new frontier" for marriage equality.
And the thing is, if I believe in my reasons for supporting same-sex marriage then I don't have much of a leg to stand on opposing incestuous marriages between consenting adults. Given how GSA works, the vast majority of individuals in these relationships never shared a family life and only met each other for the first time as adults. We're not talking about a mother raising a son under her roof and then sweeping on his arm to the altar on his eighteenth birthday, which is textbook grooming.
That isn't to say incestuous marriages can't be abusive, or that grooming would never happen. In fact I'm scared at the myriad ways incestuous marriage could be abused. But is making these relationships illegal really the way to prevent these problems? Do we solve anything by shaming and punishing people who say they're in love, forcing them underground or driving them apart in shame and fear? In fact, recognizing the reality of sexual attraction between close relatives might make it easier to recognize and provide intervention for sexual abuse within families. Yes, there's a danger of predators cloaking their actions in legitimacy, but this is true of any marriage and these problems may be more easily addressed if the people involved have rights and protections under the law.
By defining marriage as a compact between consenting adults, it seems we liberals have indeed paved the way for a world in which a father and daughter can wed, or two sisters can walk proudly down the aisle. I don't know if it'll take ten years or a hundred, but there's no logically consistent way to say these couples should not be recognized by law. Disgusted as I am at the idea, I just don't see how I can say "no" to consensual incestuous marriage.
