Where it's never evil to kill orks and goblins

Midnight_v · Post by **Midnight_v** » Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:46 pm

I'm not trying to save face at all Dsm, this is the land of dicks per barrel after all, hard to give two shits about what people here think about you personally. More importantly, I actually don't care what your thoughts on incest are. I do care that this thread that might have once been interesting is now in a completely unrelated place because of that.
<---Orcs --- Real World incest --->
I'd like the conversation to steer towards anything but this irrelevant shitdrivel.
So, now that you've set forth both your astoundingly adequate summation of the problems of incest, as well as the meta-analysis of my behavior (which you know, dicks on a plane etc. ) maybe some gaming talk. Maybe?

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:50 am

Midnight_v wrote:I'm not trying to save face at all Dsm, this is the land of dicks per barrel after all, hard to give two shits about what people here think about you personally. More importantly, I actually don't care what your thoughts on incest are. I do care that this thread that might have once been interesting is now in a completely unrelated place because of that.
<---Orcs --- Real World incest --->
I'd like the conversation to steer towards anything but this irrelevant shitdrivel.

And to emphasize that point you made your first post 100% about insutling (strawman) people for their views on incest and 0% about orcs.

momothefiddler · Post by **momothefiddler** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:25 am

DSMatticus wrote:I suppose that has a "downside" that some number of "genuine" sibling romances get the axe, but that's pretty negligible.

It ends up being a lot like the downside to statutory rape laws where they also prevent the occasional 16-year-old who is actually somehow emotionally able to consent to have sex with a 30-year-old who somehow isn't in a potentially coercive position of relative power. It's pretty widely seen as a worthwhile trade, even though there's theoretically an ok situation here and there.

And with siblings, even a year or two of separation can be a pretty big power gap when young, and that dynamic doesn't necessarily just evaporate when they reach adulthood.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 2:32 am

Midnight, it took you three posts to bitch that the thread was off-topic. Your first two posts are, instead, angry conviction of "the den" for their "pro-incest amorality." At that point, I suggested maybe you should read the fucking thread, because people were saying things like this

momothefiddler wrote:Obviously a lot of real life incest ends up being rape, and I don't think that's remotely ok, and that's arguably a point against incest even though the two are not inextricable...

deanruel87 wrote:I imagine that incest is reasonable to keep illegal and not just frowned upon specifically because such an enormous portion of it is molestation and rape. It's probably just better for society if we make it super clear that if anyone touches their sister we will come down on them.

Kaelik wrote:Saying that incest should double down as an additional area of statutory liability because it is so likely to not be consensual that you don't want to argue about it is not a bad thing.

before you showed up to make an ass of yourself on the topic. (Also, I offered a hypothetical that I thought made the flaws in relying on blind, indiscriminate moral panic at taboos fairly obvious, though in retrospect that probably sent mixed messages. I should have remembered you hadn't fucking read the thread to begin with and kept to tackling one issue at a time.) But it wasn't until after you were called out for your massive fucking reading fail that you started bitching that the thread was off-topic. So alternative theory: you don't give a fuck about the thread, you just want to change the topic because you ran in swinging without having any idea what the fuck was happening. "Oops. So, how about that weather, guys?"

Though, the part that amuses me the most is that you then went on to agree with cyberzombie, who actually has the most incest-friendly stance here. Seriously. How the hell does that even happen? Are you fucking stoned out of your mind?

Midnight_v · Post by **Midnight_v** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:04 am

DSMatticus, and his bullshit

Also there was this

I'm gonna call bullshit on the incest thing, what with Game of Thrones being so massively popular. It might trip Frank's personal skeeze alarm, but I don't think there's much evidence for it being a universal turn off.

Funny thing, a person's emotional reaction to incest depends on if they were raised with siblings or not.

The inbreeding aspect only becomes a problem if they actually want to procreate with each other.
If it's just for the sex with birth control, it's a non issue.

Therefore, don't act like there weren't pro-sis boning talk from more than just cyber, or that I'm not spot on for stating this whole digression worthless.
You are laughably fucking stupid though, thinking that people tremble to save face because your try to call them out on the internet. I'm sure you'll comeback and declare victory or whatever though You're just that type of guy.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:30 am

What the fuck, midnight? The first two are "incest doesn't cross everyone's squick threshold," and the third is "inbreeding is only a problem if you're breeding." Exactly zero of those is a pro-incest stance, unless your definition of pro-incest is "saying anything at all about incest that isn't completely negative, truth be damned."

Now I strongly suspect a number of people in this thread would take the stance that they do not give a fuck about incest on moral grounds, but literally the only person who has explicitly said as much is Cyberzombie, and the response to cyberzombie has been to raise practical (i.e. not rooted in blind moral outrage) justifications for enforcing the taboo.

Midnight wrote:I'm sure you'll comeback and declare victory or whatever though You're just that type of guy.

Well, I won't declare victory. I'll just sort of win and it'll be obvious.

rasmuswagner · Post by **rasmuswagner** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:43 am

Cyberzombie wrote: But those are already crimes without bringing incest into it. It's not as if child molestation/rape is any less or more horrific depending on if the person doing it is related to them.

Those are two monumentally stupid points for such a short paragraph. I know that concepts like "power disparity", "betrayal of trust", "isolation" and more can't possibly be completely unknown to you. Disregarding all that just to defend the black swan case of actual, consentual adult incest makes you Ayn fucking Rand.

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 10:08 am

rasmuswagner wrote: Those are two monumentally stupid points for such a short paragraph. I know that concepts like "power disparity", "betrayal of trust", "isolation" and more can't possibly be completely unknown to you. Disregarding all that just to defend the black swan case of actual, consentual adult incest makes you Ayn fucking Rand.

If that's true, then maybe, but where are the stats that most incest between non-minors is rape or abuse of power?

If what you're claiming is actually a fact, you've got a point, but it sounds a lot like the claim that a lot of anti-prostitution advocates make where they claim most prostitutes are sex slaves therefore we should outlaw prostitution, when in fact that's not true, at least outside 3rd world countries maybe. I suspect the claims against incest may be exaggerated as well. Can you cite any statistics?

rasmuswagner · Post by **rasmuswagner** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:20 pm

Cyberzombie wrote:
rasmuswagner wrote: Those are two monumentally stupid points for such a short paragraph. I know that concepts like "power disparity", "betrayal of trust", "isolation" and more can't possibly be completely unknown to you. Disregarding all that just to defend the black swan case of actual, consentual adult incest makes you Ayn fucking Rand.
If that's true, then maybe, but where are the stats that most incest between non-minors is rape or abuse of power?

If what you're claiming is actually a fact, you've got a point, but it sounds a lot like the claim that a lot of anti-prostitution advocates make where they claim most prostitutes are sex slaves therefore we should outlaw prostitution, when in fact that's not true, at least outside 3rd world countries maybe. I suspect the claims against incest may be exaggerated as well. Can you cite any statistics?

I think you missed a point earlier. The point of having incest as an absolute taboo is to reduce rape incest and abuse-of-power incest. I think we can agree that those cases are A) fucking horrible, and B) The vast majority of all incest (adult incest being a tiny majority of all incest).

Given A) and B), we need to weigh the freedom of potential adult sister-fuckers against protecting potential molestation victims. And while that is hypothetically a matter of preference, making any position valid, I think favoring the freedom to fuck your sister in this cases makes you either pathologically naive or an Internet Libertarian.

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:06 pm

rasmuswagner wrote: I think you missed a point earlier. The point of having incest as an absolute taboo is to reduce rape incest and abuse-of-power incest. I think we can agree that those cases are A) fucking horrible, and B) The vast majority of all incest (adult incest being a tiny majority of all incest).

Given A) and B), we need to weigh the freedom of potential adult sister-fuckers against protecting potential molestation victims. And while that is hypothetically a matter of preference, making any position valid, I think favoring the freedom to fuck your sister in this cases makes you either pathologically naive or an Internet Libertarian.

Well, child molestation is already covered by laws against child molestation and statutory rape. You don't need further laws to make that illegal, because it already is illegal (as it should be). All you're really restricting with anti-incest laws is incest between adults, and I don't know the stats on how much of that is some form of rape versus how much is legitimate consensual romance/lust.

And without actual stats to prove that it's definitely more harmful, it feels like it's a "some prostitutes are sex slaves, therefore we should outlaw prostitution" or "gay sex spreads AIDS, so lets make gay sex illegal" argument. Just because some people abuse something, or there can be negative side effects in some cases, doesn't necessarily mean something should be illegal. Without some strong evidence, I'd be reluctant to restrict what two consenting adults decide to do in their spare time based simply on the gut feeling that it's probably rape in most cases. People can be turned on by some pretty weird ass shit, so it's really not far fetched that you'd find incest couples that are both enjoying it.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sat Apr 19, 2014 10:34 pm

Cyberzombie wrote:Well, child molestation is already covered by laws against child molestation and statutory rape.

No it isn't you piece of shit, learn to read. If a 15 year old has sex with his 10 year old or 13 year old sister that is not fucking covered by child molestation laws. It is not.

Further, issues of power amongst siblings persist. If someone is a domineering asshole of an older brother who treats his sister like shit and forces her to do his laundry and cook for him at 12, but he waits till she is 16 to start having sex with her, that is not particularly compelling case for your "not a big deal." Siblings cannot just leave asshole siblings, instead they have to live years in that shitty relationship until they get used to it and are substantially less likely to reject advances regardless of what they want.

momothefiddler · Post by **momothefiddler** » Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:38 am

Kaelik wrote:No it isn't you piece of shit, learn to read. If a 15 year old has sex with his 10 year old or 13 year old sister that is not fucking covered by child molestation laws. It is not.

Your other point is valid but you need to stop claiming this because it's not true.

In Virginia, for instance, a 15 year old having sex with a 13 year old is a Class 4 felony if the latter did not consent, or a Class 4 misdemeanor if the latter did consent [x], and with a 10-year-old gives you a mandatory minimum of five years in prison [x].
In California they're both guilty of a misdemeanor in the 15/13 situation, and the 15 year old is guilty of a misdemeanor or a felony in the 15/10 situation [x].

I am in favor of incest laws still applying because the power imbalance between a 15 year old and a 13 year old is hugely different depending on whether they're siblings, it's very possibly a bigger deal in that situation, and honestly the "if the latter consented" sort of thing needs to not exist there. I agree with your point but your claim is and continues to be factually wrong so stop it.

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:01 am

momothefiddler wrote: I am in favor of incest laws still applying because the power imbalance between a 15 year old and a 13 year old is hugely different depending on whether they're siblings, it's very possibly a bigger deal in that situation, and honestly the "if the latter consented" sort of thing needs to not exist there. I agree with your point but your claim is and continues to be factually wrong so stop it.

I'd be okay with an incest exception on the statutory rape laws to modify how certain cases of underage sex are handled. Child abuse is a serious issue and needs to be handled seriously.

I just don't think it should apply to adults at all. Once you're an adult, you're an adult. And if some adult dude wants to screw other adult dudes, wants to screw his adult sister or wants to dress up in a furry costume and screw other people of like mind, then that's their decision.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:26 am

This is getting wildly off topic. And since I'm not Midnight_v I'll make an actual attempt to get it back on track.

If you're playing a simple hack and slash you don't need justifications for your genocides. That they were between you and treasure is justification enough. That's just the way that hack and slash is played.

If you're playing something more complex, then dumbing things down does a disservice to your game.

If you want a morally complex game then have a morally complex game. Don't chicken out. If you want a hack and slash then have a hack and slash.

It's a mistake to try to make murderhoboing morally acceptable according to any real life standard. Your game world isn't reality and trying to fit murderhoboing into any realistic ethical framework is far more trouble than it's worth. You can just take certain things for granted.