Do you have any evidence that having similar genes to someone produces feelings for that person? How would you (or "your body") even know that you have similar genes? Genes aren't some sort of magic link that binds your subconscious with someone elses. I'm not trying to defend incest in any way here, I just think this is a silly argument, and very similar to what the woman who coined the term "GSA" was probably thinking. Lets get back on that topic, actually, since that was a big part of the original point. Some woman coined a term "Genetic Sexual Attraction". Is this a real thing? I very much doubt it. Does being closely related to someone make you more inclined to feel sexually attracted? Why would it? It sounds to me like an excuse for and an attempt to legitimatize incestuous desires. "Oh, I'm not being perverted, it's just GSA." GSA isn't a real thing--it's something made up by a most likely not-medically or psychologically trained woman who wanted to have sex with her son.
You know when you meet someone for the first time and you think they look like someone. It could be a celebrity or an old friend. There is some evidence to suggest that this is your brain picking out familiar features just to make you feel more relaxed around someone new. How do you think you would feel if you sub conciously picked out most of your own features in somone you've just met? I'm guessing that would translate to a bit of a lightning strike feeling.
Woah dude, hold on a sec. I thought the common argument you folks put forward for homosexuality, incest, etc. is "consenting adults". There's a rather obvious problem with bestiality, in that the animal can't be "consenting". You're essentially raping it.
Not that I'm advocating bestiality, but doesn't that mean that animals are "essentially" raping each other whenever they have sex, then? Also: The same standards need not apply to animals as people, for example: we're allowed to cut the heads off of chickens but we're not allowed to do that to other people
No. A couple reasons why: 1. Animals can communicate with each other in ways they can't with humans. Thus, an animal can be "consenting" with another of it's kind, but not with a human (I thought this was obvious, and didn't see a need to specify "can't be consenting with a human" in my previous post). 2. Animals have different codes of behavior than humans. Even if certain species have non-consensual sex, this doesn't justify humans raping animals, anymore than abuse, cannibalism, etc. (which are also part of certain animals' behavior) justify humans in abuse, cannibalism, etc.
I don't buy that. People are a lot smarter than dogs for example and can probably learn to communicate with their pet dog as well as two dogs can communicate. Maybe even better. We are capable of learning languages and cracking codes more complicated than anything a dog could imagine. Dogs don't have a concept of "consent" or the rule that they need to ask each other before having sex. If an animal really wanted you to stop, additionally, it has claws, teeth, and the ability to walk away, and could probably make it known. Again, I'm not condoning bestiality. Animals don't have codes of behavior and don't even understand the concept of "code". They have things that they can do and things they can be taught to do, but do you really think a dog can understand that this can be codified into a "system"? In any event, as I pointed out in my above post, the standards for the treatement of animals are usually LOWER than the standards for the treatement of other humans, not vice versa, as in the example that we can kill animals but not humans. You can own and kill an animal, two things that you can't do with a human being. So even if bestiality *is* rape, it's not clear that *that* makes it any more wrong then selling an animal or killing it for food.
What's your evidence of this? There's actually evidence that genetic relation is irrelevant... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprinting_(psychology)#Westermarck_effect Reverse sexual imprinting is also seen: when two people live in close domestic proximity during the first few years in the life of either one, both are desensitized to later close sexual attraction. This phenomenon, known as the Westermarck effect, was first formally described by Finnish anthropologist Edvard Westermarck. The Westermarck effect has since been observed in many places and cultures, including in the Israeli kibbutz system, and the Chinese Shim-pua marriage customs, as well as in biological-related families. In the case of the Israeli kibbutzim (collective farms), children were reared somewhat communally in peer groups—groups based on age, not biological relation. A study of the marriage patterns of these children later in life revealed that out of the nearly 3,000 marriages that occurred across the kibbutz system, only fourteen were between children from the same peer group. Of those fourteen, none had been reared together during the first six years of life. This result provides evidence not only that the Westermarck effect is demonstrable, but that it operates during the critical period from birth to the age of six (Shepher, 1983). When close proximity during this critical period does not occur—for example, where a brother and sister are brought up separately, never meeting one another—they may find one another highly sexually attractive when they meet as adults. This phenomenon is known as genetic sexual attraction. This observation is consistent with the hypothesis that the Westermarck effect evolved because it suppressed inbreeding. This attraction may also be seen with cousin couples. In other words, in our evolutionary past we grew up with relatives so we evolved the Westermarck effect in order to suppress inbreeding, however today we often live and grow up with non-relatives, but the Westermarck effect still takes place, since there is no way to distinguish whether the people we grow up with are related or not.
If you do no know why it is wrong then there is no hope for you, you are lost and must be removed from main stream society at once for re education and if that does not work then full time sedation.
Yet another bizzare thread from shambrook, so tell me, is this guy tryin to pick up where D=on left off or what? Just go visit the Pope and kiss his ring already m8.....
Hey that is Shambrooke with an e on the end and i didnt make it bizzare it just sort of whent that way i dont post conspiracy stuff, at least it sparks debate that is the point isnt it or do you just want to talk about the weather.
Spose, do miss the conspiracy deal though, is D=on back yet lol, notice he shut down as soon as he was exposed as a Jehova witness or whatever they call themselves now, they are a new age religion from America which embraces ufo, alien etc and still goes on about a creator man at the end of it LOL Keeps people from taking responsibility for their actions see. Like this very subject, give them a god that forgives all and you get this schit goin on.... Religion is the oldest proffesion by the way, if they cant be conned directly then convince them of a god and its all gravy from then on LOL..
Now you have gone and done it, now i feel sorry for him my mother tried to make me a jehova, didnt work i saw right through it and became a ma athiest much to her discused lol
Yeah, they think they got an answer for everything, no matter how bizzare - god did it, made it pffff, Unfortunately America is captured by this new age religion crap. No chit, guess what religion their pollies follow really? Yep thats right, and becouse of it we cant function as a planet even at the recorded age of 2009. The most powerful country in the world follows a story book GULP lol, Democracy is a double edged sword.. Perhaps thats why people dont get further into it, cos they know some religious morons will be driving the bus down their desired path.. Let me tell you why its all religious fascist rubbish, becouse the jehova people who are behind all American religious offshoots and now dominate politics in U.S.A believe in the annunaki my friends, thats right, thats whats at the end of their teachings you see. Their religion and these conspiracies are the same thing... GULP LOL .........
The last time Map had a thread on bestiality it was discovered (some weird poll) that most people who indulged preferred to be takers rather than givers. Kind of blows away your conceptions of bestiality there. You can lead a horse and all that!
The more that you accept the weired things that some people get up to the weireder (is that a word?) that it gets, i think that there has to be a line and these freaks have well crossed it, i would not want these people living anywhere near me. Here is some feedback from the original news artical. Incest - Genetic Sexual Attraction? Posted by: Stelz, Melbourne Vitoria, on 16/10/2009 9:36:27 AM The idea of incest is so sickening and I cannot believe that certain people think it is okay. It is more like Genetic Sick Attraction. Surely these people would realise it is not normal when having a child together the child is more likely to have some medical isssues. Surely nature tells them that is not meant to be. There has to be some mental issues with these people. Father, daughter? I feel sick just thinking about it. The people who think it is okay need help, truly. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is GSA and incest the same thing or not. Posted by: Maddie, Sydney, on 16/10/2009 9:36:24 AM GSA and incest are the same thing. My parent and I met after 40 years of separation and we have no sexual attraction to each other whatsoever. We know we are parent and child. People who claim to have GSA need to realise that it's blatently obvious that they'll have similiar personality traits and genetical features as their parents or offspring. This shouldn't be confused with sexual attraction. They need to recognise that they haven't found their 'soul-mate' but rather that they have found a relative. Having sex with a relative is incest, it's as simple as that. I don't buy into the malarky that incest involves a process such as grooming and manipulation. As far as I'm concerned, that's pedophilia which sometimes involves incest but not always. People who claim to have GSA should stop lying to themselves and others and face up to the fact that they want to be involved in an incestuous relationship rather than trying to convince the rest of society that it's all good. It's illegal! Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- incest Posted by: joe, sydney, on 16/10/2009 9:36:24 AM These people who meet as adults and commit incest may mount an argument that what they do in private is their business. However children born from such relationships are bound to suffer the consequences physically and mentally. For this reason alone incest must remain forbidden. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- incest & GSA ...has the world gone mad??? Posted by: frenchie, south hedland, on 16/10/2009 9:36:08 AM I can't even bear to imagine the thought of it...I feel sorry for GSA victims, but it still shouldn't be allowed...how disgusting... Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FILTHY Posted by: Blah, Wangaratta, on 16/10/2009 9:34:45 AM GSA, please dont tell me we are now making an excuse for incest... What a JOKE... Incest, GSA or whatever you want to call it, it is DISGUSTING, revolting, filthy, unnatural, wrong, horrible, repulsive and completely UNACCEPTABLE whatever term you use to discribe it. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GSA Posted by: Shazzy, Riverwood NSW, on 16/10/2009 9:33:08 AM GSA is a form of incest still! You don't have sex with your family. Thats That. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GSA and Incest Posted by: General, Bourke NSW, on 16/10/2009 9:32:36 AM We live in world village that desires to have freedom with no boundries.I love music but if I played an instrument without staying in the boundries of the designed notes it would sound shocking and freedom to play beautiful music is lost.When we love we have boundries to love freely in different ways.We love our pets different to our grandparents, we love our mother different to our girlfriend.If we choose to operate outside proven moral boundries that have been written into our created history we will destroy all life and lose our true freedom for lack of dicipline and right choices. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GSA vs Incest Posted by: Happywoman, Brisbane, on 16/10/2009 9:32:33 AM Of course there is no difference. Incest is always wrong. There are very few things in life about which one can be completely certain, but that's one of them. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GSA/Incest Same same but different Posted by: Georgie, Syd Parra, on 16/10/2009 9:31:59 AM GSA or Incest same thing! You just dont do that! I have no room for thought on this I dont agree that this is normal! Seeing this article made me feel sick to think people can grow sexual feelings for their family members. Report comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deaves case (GSA) Posted by: Matty, Seaford, Victoria, on 16/10/2009 9:30:33 AM Firstly I would just like to say that incest is when two people of very close genetic makeup (directly related) are either in an intimate relationship or a sexual relationship. It does not have anything to do with wether or not you grew up with that person. For example if I were adopted and I had no genetic relation to my adopted mother and we then had an intimate relationship that would not be incest however it may be frowned upon. If you have sex with your genetic father I’m sorry but that IS incest! No two ways about it! In my opinion the scariest thing is what birth defects or abnormalities the offspring may suffer from. On a further note what are you going to tell the child, are you going to explain that Daddy is also Mummies Daddy? I am not saying that you are wrong, you may have feeling for your father but you should not be acting on those feelings. There are more comments here is the link if you want to read them. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/876197/get-over-incest-australia-deaves#ugc_comments
OK you quoted me on that post but actually made no real reference to it so I'll quote myself. You still haven't
