My friend. Please be careful lmao, this is a weapon.
(nearly wet me shorts, some dummy will see this while driving and generate a news story, etc.)
Haha! I am glad you liked it as much as I did my friend!
Well, enough Internet for this week
Wait, wut
Why does she give off 👽 vibes
Reminds me of the alien in American dad playing a new part, what he looks like with a wig and makeup on
It’s a complete lack of eyebrows.
We’re
Smh
Well, since he’s only one person, “We’re both drowning” (she and her man) makes a certain grammatical sense, although it would make saving him more difficult.
Maybe that’s inbreeding grammar, what do we know
Be mindful, those might be muricans 😉
Where*, right? 👍
W’erh’e
Whore!
(What do I win?)
why, an STD
Enough internet for today. Let’s get back to work
Aww… were [sic] just getting to the good part, tho
based on how they look, I’ll say it’s a fmily tradition
Hank, why do you drink?
To get…
a taste of my sister’s pie?
Incest! It’s fun for the whole family!
We’re both drowning
There is no sign of land
You are coming down with me
Hand in unlovable hand
Habsburg or Alabama?
Saarland
Das Land das so groß ist wie ein Saarland?
Convenient
Roll Tide!
On the one hand anything between consenting adults is good and valid.
On the other hand, incest is too ingrained of a taboo for me yet.
The increased chance of birth defects seems a bit immoral. Also there’s a good chance childhood trauma is at play for siblings to want to bang, or at the very least some questionable power dynamics, that are worth at least looking into. Supposing none of that is an issue I guess I’m not going to yuck someone else’s yum even if I feel weird about the whole thing 🤷♀️
yuck someone else’s yum even if I feel weird about the whole thing 🤷♀️
I’m quite the same honestly, but like you said - there isn’t a need to be a dick about it, already a surplus of them around.
In terms of birth defects, that may be right. But it really depends on the generation of in-breading. A single generation wouldnt do much harm but has the potential to if it continues. Of course, about the trauma and power dynamic bits, that may be a hit or miss as it doesn’t really hold.
Supposing none of that is an issue
Obviously it’s against the law because folks that are prone to inbreeding are not necessarily equipped to make those assessments. The same as anything.
because folks that are prone to inbreeding are not necessarily equipped to make those assessments.
Yeah, but it seems a bit eugenical.
Eugenics isn’t inherently bad. If you prefer dating humans without genetic defects, congratulations; you’re a eugenicist.
Do you prefer blondes or brown hair? You’re preferring genes again! Don’t like people with potato bodies? There you go preferring genes…
Find out your fetus has a genetic defect and won’t live past five even if you birth them, so you abort? Cheer on genetic therapies that could solve such issues? Congratulations, you’ve practiced eugenics!!
Eugenics itself is not bad. It’s the racist fuck desire to want to “cleanse” the “race” of humanity that’s bad.
Why’d you have to bring my potato body into this?
If you prefer dating humans without genetic defects, congratulations; you’re a eugenicist.
Colloquially eugenics refers not to personal preferences, but to collective imperatives, as far as I know.
You know what? I think letting racists ruin eugenics gives them one extra “fuck you” to the human race.
If I use a revolver to play Russian roulette with a baby, they’d bury me under the prison. Why is it fine for parents with documented genetic conditions to do the same?
Why is it fine for parents with documented genetic conditions to do the same?
While I tend to agree, that’s a highly controversial view (see eugenics).
My brother in christ, the conversation is explicitly about eugenics, I don’t need to see shit!
documented genetic conditions
Who’s to say what conditions qualify? And what even is a condition? Homosexuality was in the DSM not long ago.
If the parents’ families have, say, a history of heart disease, we can all agree heart disease is bad, right? So they should be penalized for wanting children?
What about people with red hair? If we collectively decide to pathologize having red hair, are we going to sterilize all the gingers?
Do we try and prevent people with autism from being born? Down’s Syndrome?
I’d rather see better detection and genetic therapies, myself. Inform the parents and let them come to their own conclusion about whether or not to have children.
It’s definitely possible to establish reasonable thresholds - you could draw parallels to abuse/neglect laws. There are things that many people may find grotesque and objectionable that aren’t considered abuse/neglect. There are definitely historical and modern examples of those laws being applied unfairly, particularly to the disadvantaged. Boundaries may flex across regions or cultures, But it’s fair to say society as a whole supports abuse/neglect laws, and that they’re generally beneficial for children.
I’d rather see better detection and genetic therapies, myself. Inform the parents and let them come to their own conclusion about whether or not to have children.
A perfectly reasonable take, but even that falls in-scope of eugenics.
It sort of also assumed that just because relatives are fucking that they’ll even have a kid.
The increased chance of birth defects seems a bit immoral.
one could ask the question whether inbreeding is fine as long as it’s exclusively non-productive sex, i.e. they don’t make any children. some people have sex just for enjoyment.
…yet?
Yeah. To not be upset about it seems logical and fair.
But I still feel uneasy.They’re working on it apparently
Incest is almost never between two consenting adults. There is almost always an inappropriate power dynamic, coercion, and/or grooming.
But then the problem is the grooming not the incest so grooming should be the taboo
Both can be Taboo, and should be.
So in the cases where it is not, you’d allow incest?
I don’t think we have enough data to make that assumption.
No, it’s pretty well studied.
Only abstract is available by that link.
And the abstract doesn’t support your exact claims.Also:
group of adolescent sibling incest offenders (n=21) compared to a group of adolescent non-sibling offenders (n=24).
Do you call this well studied?
Do you call this well studied?
Yes.
Feel free to review any of the 54,000 scientific papers if you don’t like the one I shared. If you’d read and understood the abstract, you’d have seen that it is both an original study and review of the field of previous research. The page also includes links directly to dozens of related and cited papers. Psychological and behavioral studies are typically case studies, or group studies like this. This is considered a larger study in the field.
Feel free to present any paper that supports your counterclaim that there is simply not enough known about the issue to determine whether sibling incest is harmful or not. Please be sure that is is from this century and well-cited, since I did you the same courtesy. You can access full-text articles through an academic login, many public libraries, or archive sites.
I think we do.
That is correct, and that is why we shouldn’t make any wild assumptions which dont hold up to the facts. This is essentially shooting blindly within the smoke - there are better ways than relying on assumptions or the “feel”.
I agree, as long as consent is stated then no harm is done. Consent between people is important; but in these cases, they should know where they stand
If baby Hitler and your family dog were both drowning in the lake, and you could only rescue one…
deleted by creator
Shit I told my ex I’d let her drown in a frozen lake to save my life.
And that’s why you’re alive and she’s your ex, right?
Lol yeah 🤣
