'In cases of rape or incest'

[poppy]

This is a common expression in the abortuon debate. But I'm a little puzzled by it . In this context , incest is rape- no? Treating them as separate crimes seems to make incest less abhorrant.

[Lolly]

To me, it depends on the age of the child/ren. Incest could be with consent of both parties. I would not consider it rape if it were brother/sister who were within a small age range of each other. If it is rape and incest, it makes it even more abhorrant to me, not less.

[poppy]

To me, it depends on the age of the child/ren. Incest could be with consent of both parties. I would not consider it rape if it were brother/sister who were within a small age range of each other. If it is rape and incest, it makes it even more abhorrant to me, not less.

Right , but in the abortion debate, I do not think people are referring to the very rare cases of adult consensual incest.

[Ottakee]

I don't agree with those conditions for abortion............but we have had foster children whose parents were brother and sister---consensual, adult, 3 children, living sorta as husband and wife.

[Lolly]

Right , but in the abortion debate, I do not think people are referring to the very rare cases of adult consensual incest.

 

It doesn't have to be two adults. It could be two young children. Still may not be what they are talking about..but that is my first thought. As I said, between adult/child, I would consider it both, not either or. 

[albeto.]

Right , but in the abortion debate, I do not think people are referring to the very rare cases of adult consensual incest.

 

I think you're right, and I agree, it's an awkward distinction to make considering the circumstances. I don't think the intent is to make one sound like a lesser crime. I always wondered if this was something someone said in a public talk and it became the go-to expression for exceptions.

[gardenmom5]

even if they are close in age - it can still be unwilling.  I know a woman whose case was thrown out because "there was less than five years age difference."   so what!  she was coerced by her cousin and didn't feel like she could say "no".

and I'm pretty sure the actress Alison angrm would dispute the age difference factor too.  she's been quite vocal on the subject.  she has stated her brother molested her for a three year period.

To me, it depends on the age of the child/ren. Incest could be with consent of both parties. I would not consider it rape if it were brother/sister who were within a small age range of each other. If it is rape and incest, it makes it even more abhorrant to me, not less.

 

incest doesn't start with both parties being willing.  there was grooming somewhere.  even in that incest family where the matriarch (amongst others) finally got sent to prison - those children were groomed from childhood.

 

rape can be a stranger or an acquaintance, incest is a family member.  but yeah - they are all rape.  the common denominator is the coercion/force.

[Lolly]

even if they are close in age - it can still be unwilling.  I know a woman whose case was thrown out because "there was less than five years age difference."   so what!  she was coerced by her cousin and didn't feel like she could say "no".

and I'm pretty sure the actress Alison angrm would dispute the age difference factor too.  she's been quite vocal on the subject.  she has stated her brother molested her for a three year period.

 

incest doesn't start with both parties being willing.  there was grooming somewhere.  even in that incest family where the matriarch (amongst others) finally got sent to prison - those children were groomed from childhood.

 

rape can be a stranger or an acquaintance, incest is a family member.  but yeah - they are all rape.  the common denominator is the coercion/force.

 

True that it can be unwilling, never said it wasn't. False that it has to be.  Grooming doesn't have to be involved when you are talking about two kids. There are many different scenarios and many different situations in the world. 

[SKL]

I think the intent is to make sure they are inclusive of incest regardless of how state law defines rape.

[SKL]

I know of a case of boy-girl twins conceiving a child at a very young age.  Can't call that rape, I don't think.

[JoJosMom]

"In cases of rape and incest" is language taken from legal statutes.  The legal definitions of rape and incest are different, as are the elements of the separate crimes.  Hence, the two are said separately (i.e., they are two legally distinct acts.)

[Tap]

Incest may be rape or it may not be.  I know two teenagers who were having sex as brother and sister. I know quite a bit about the case and from all that I know, it was 100% consensual.  The younger of the two, was actually more mature than his/her age and the older one was less mature than his/her age, which made it so that they were cognitively about the same. No one who knows the children, that I have talked to, thinks that the younger person was groomed.   They were just bored teens, who has little supervision, and neither of them have much impulse control in their lives  (they have both now spent significant time in jail as young adults.)

[poppy]

I am surprised to hear that in about an hour, several people talked about personally knowing of cases of consensual incest between young or "very young" girls with same-aged brothers. That is pretty bizarre , even for anecdotal evidence.

[SKL]

I am surprised to hear that in about an hour, several people talked about personally knowing of cases of consensual incest between young or "very young" girls with same-aged brothers. That is pretty bizarre , even for anecdotal evidence.

 

I was clerking for a small-town lawyer who was handling the juvenile court stuff.  That was the only reason I knew - it was not common knowledge.  I do not doubt that the girl had an abortion.  I can't remember if the twins were 11 or 13, but definitely not older than that.

[SKL]

I don't think it's very bizarre that sisters and brothers take experimentation too far at times.  Very sad, but not really that surprising.

[Tap]

I am surprised to hear that in about an hour, several people talked about personally knowing of cases of consensual incest between young or "very young" girls with same-aged brothers. That is pretty bizarre , even for anecdotal evidence.

What is bazaar?  That it happened, or that people know about these cases?

[Dory]

Well this discussion rocked my world a little. I didn't realize so many people viewed incest this way.

[Tap]

Well this discussion rocked my world a little. I didn't realize so many people viewed incest this way.

what way?

[Dory]

what way?

 

It's been insinuated or perhaps it's the wording, that for relatives that are close in age, that it's no real big deal so long as it seems consensual.

But no relatives go there unless there is some wildly unhealthy things going on in the family. Sometimes it's consensual simply because one or both just feels relieved to have someone seeming to love them and care for them. It's still damaging. It's still hurtful.

 

And sometimes the ages are close but there is still coercion, and often people from the outside looking in aren't going to see that. No one from the outside is going to notice the years of grooming that go into situations like that, or the background that readies them for the next jerk in the family. Incest is so damaging. It destroys healthy boundaries.

[poppy]

what way?

I am not the person you quoted but the view that sibling incest is not shocking, and can be consensual in young teen girls, shocks me.

[SKL]

It's been insinuated or perhaps it's the wording, that for relatives that are close in age, that it's no real big deal so long as it seems consensual.

But no relatives go there unless there is some wildly unhealthy things going on in the family. Sometimes it's consensual simply because one or both just feels relieved to have someone seeming to love them and care for them. It's still damaging. It's still hurtful.

 

And sometimes the ages are close but there is still coercion, and often people from the outside looking in aren't going to see that. No one from the outside is going to notice the years of grooming that go into situations like that, or the background that readies them for the next jerk in the family. Incest is so damaging. It destroys healthy boundaries.

 

If you believe that there must always (or almost always) be coercion in the case of young unsupervised siblings having sex, to me this doesn't make sense unless you believe that sex always involves coercion period.

 

Young kids do not understand the gravity of the situation.  They may know they aren't "supposed" to do xyz, but they also aren't "supposed" to jump on the bed or eat out of the frosting jar, but they do those things anyway when they think they can get away with it.

 

Meanwhile, parents may not realize the extent of their kids' sexual curiosity.

 

Even if there's an older/more dominant sibling, that person may not be mature enough to have the kind of intent you need to "groom" or "rape" somebody.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that incest between young sibs is not a problem.  Just that is it not very surprising that it occurs.  I also don't think it's as damaging as an adult-child situation would be.  I don't know that it automatically continues past the age of mature awareness, either.

[Tap]

It's been insinuated or perhaps it's the wording, that for relatives that are close in age, that it's no real big deal so long as it seems consensual.

But no relatives go there unless there is some wildly unhealthy things going on in the family. Sometimes it's consensual simply because one or both just feels relieved to have someone seeming to love them and care for them. It's still damaging. It's still hurtful.

 

And sometimes the ages are close but there is still coercion, and often people from the outside looking in aren't going to see that. No one from the outside is going to notice the years of grooming that go into situations like that, or the background that readies them for the next jerk in the family. Incest is so damaging. It destroys healthy boundaries.

I was one of the posters who related a story of teens I know who had relations, who were brother and sister.  I didn't comment in any way to say whether it was 'no big deal' or 'healthy'.  Just because posters haven't relayed a personal commentary of their personal feeling on the cases, doesn't mean the condone it.

 

All I said is that it wasn't rape, and that it was 100% consensual.  In the case I know of, the teens separate therapists are the ones who made 'consensual' determination independently, due to the circumstances.  They were trying to figure out if they should press charges on one or the other, and if they needed counseling from the victims point of view or perpetrator.  I am friends with the mother and was her confidant for the process, as she dealt with the issue.  That is why I know so much about what was happening in the case.

[Dory]

If you believe that there must always (or almost always) be coercion in the case of young unsupervised siblings having sex, to me this doesn't make sense unless you believe that sex always involves coercion period.

 

Young kids do not understand the gravity of the situation.  They may know they aren't "supposed" to do xyz, but they also aren't "supposed" to jump on the bed or eat out of the frosting jar, but they do those things anyway when they think they can get away with it.

 

Meanwhile, parents may not realize the extent of their kids' sexual curiosity.

 

Even if there's an older/more dominant sibling, that person may not be mature enough to have the kind of intent you need to "groom" or "rape" somebody.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that incest between young sibs is not a problem.  Just that is it not very surprising that it occurs.  I also don't think it's as damaging as an adult-child situation would be.  I don't know that it automatically continues past the age of mature awareness, either.

 

Here's and interesting link. Some research suggests that there is a link between family dysfunction, neglect, and sibling incest. 

 

If we were talking first cousins, or step siblings I would find it much more believable that sexual exploration would occur, but in a healthy setting, brothers and sisters aren't normally going to explore with each other. It's not about impulse control or lack thereof, but about the type of relationships that normally are happening in a healthy home.

 

Also, grooming is not always that amazingly sophisticated. Often  it's just a slow movement of the boundaries by someone who is seeing how far he/she can go over time. That doesn't take maturity.

 

And yes, it's damaging. You're right, perhaps it's not as horrific as a dad or grandpa, but it's damaging.

[Tanaqui]

Incest generally implies rape, yes. However, it doesn't have to.

 

For example, we've all heard horror stories of siblings or half siblings who meet as adults, don't know they're related (maybe Dad really got around, maybe one or both of them was conceived via donor, maybe one or both was adopted into a different family) and don't find out until after they've already gotten engaged. There is no way of knowing how common this is, as it is very possible that some people in that situation never find out, or they find out but decide to keep their mouths shut. My guess is that it isn't *that* common, but it does happen once in a while.

 

On a more innocuous note, some pairings considered incestuous by one culture might not be considered incestuous by another. For example, first cousin marriages - preferred among some groups, shunned among others.

 

At any rate, we have some valid reasons for discouraging incest, regardless of whether or not it is consensual. One generation of it probably won't do much genetic harm to the offspring (because incest doesn't cause bad genes, it just increases the likelihood that existing bad genes will be inherited), but several generations will begin to have an effect. And, on the whole, we think it's really, really icky, such that a child who is the product of incest would have some serious stigma attached to him or her.

[poppy]

 

 

Even if there's an older/more dominant sibling, that person may not be mature enough to have the kind of intent you need to "groom" or "rape" somebody.

It's not about whether the male is or is not a rapist. 

A  child can be too young to consent, and thus be a victim of rape, even if the other person in the act has doesn't have mental or emotional capacity to have the intent to rape.

[poppy]

Incest generally implies rape, yes. However, it doesn't have to.

 

For example, we've all heard horror stories of siblings or half siblings who meet as adults, don't know they're related (maybe Dad really got around, maybe one or both of them was conceived via donor, maybe one or both was adopted into a different family) and don't find out until after they've already gotten engaged. There is no way of knowing how common this is, as it is very possible that some people in that situation never find out, or they find out but decide to keep their mouths shut. My guess is that it isn't *that* common, but it does happen once in a while.

 

On a more innocuous note, some pairings considered incestuous by one culture might not be considered incestuous by another. For example, first cousin marriages - preferred among some groups, shunned among others.

 

At any rate, we have some valid reasons for discouraging incest, regardless of whether or not it is consensual. One generation of it probably won't do much genetic harm to the offspring (because incest doesn't cause bad genes, it just increases the likelihood that existing bad genes will be inherited), but several generations will begin to have an effect. And, on the whole, we think it's really, really icky, such that a child who is the product of incest would have some serious stigma attached to him or her.

 

Having to delve into this level of whether or not its incest or unintentional incest really makes the "in case of rape of incest" debate seem a little ridiculous.  I mean, a woman wants an abortion, and an anti-abortion politician would say that it should be illegal.  But if she finds out her spouse is also her half-sibling, the abortion is OK?   You're right about the genetic element, but, thank goodness, no one is arguing about restricting or allowing abortion on other genetic risk factors.

 

NOT looking for an abortion argument here, at all. Just talking about why incest is framed the way it is in the political debate on the topic.

[SKL]

It's not about whether the male is or is not a rapist. 

A  child can be too young to consent, and thus be a victim of rape, even if the other person in the act has doesn't have mental or emotional capacity to have the intent to rape.

 

So in the case of the 11yo or 13yo twins, who was the rapist?  Both of them?  I'm thinking both were too young to legally consent, and yet a pregnancy occurred.

 

Can rape occur without a perpetrator?  Rape is a criminal term, no?  The question isn't whether it's intercourse - obviously it is.

 

Why did you assume "male," by the way?

[Tanaqui]

So in the case of the 11yo or 13yo twins, who was the rapist?  Both of them?  I'm thinking both were too young to legally consent, and yet a pregnancy occurred.

 

In NYS, at least, it is considered that they raped each other. Honestly, in that situation, I think child services would be looking pretty closely at the family situation.

[SKL]

Having to delve into this level of whether or not its incest or unintentional incest really makes the "in case of rape of incest" debate seem a little ridiculous.  I mean, a woman wants an abortion, and an anti-abortion politician would say that it should be illegal.  But if she finds out her spouse is also her half-sibling, the abortion is OK?   You're right about the genetic element, but, thank goodness, no one is arguing about restricting or allowing abortion on other genetic risk factors.

 

NOT looking for an abortion argument here, at all. Just talking about why incest is framed the way it is in the political debate on the topic.

 

I think the point is to not have to force a pregnant young woman (past the age of legal consent) to prove that intercourse with a family member was non-consensual.  But I could be wrong.  I don't draft those laws.

[SKL]

In NYS, at least, it is considered that they raped each other. Honestly, in that situation, I think child services would be looking pretty closely at the family situation.

 

It was in juvenile court.  In my state, juvenile crime is not the same as adult crime.  It is basically all "delinquency."  It would include "consensual" sleeping around at an early age with anyone.  A juvie can be tried as an adult for rape, but I can't imagine anyone trying that in this case.

 

I think it's ridiculous to call it mutual rape btw.

[SKL]

Here's and interesting link. Some research suggests that there is a link between family dysfunction, neglect, and sibling incest. 

 

If we were talking first cousins, or step siblings I would find it much more believable that sexual exploration would occur, but in a healthy setting, brothers and sisters aren't normally going to explore with each other. It's not about impulse control or lack thereof, but about the type of relationships that normally are happening in a healthy home.

 

Also, grooming is not always that amazingly sophisticated. Often  it's just a slow movement of the boundaries by someone who is seeing how far he/she can go over time. That doesn't take maturity.

 

And yes, it's damaging. You're right, perhaps it's not as horrific as a dad or grandpa, but it's damaging.

 

Your link suggests it's more common than many realize, and also that many come out of it with higher sexual self-esteem, especially if does not involve a big age difference.

 

As for family dysfunction and neglect, that would not surprise me, but your linked article also notes that most people never report incest.  The cases that are discovered may be the ones where other bad stuff is going on.

 

From my personal observation, I also think there may be another link in some cases.  If one of the siblings has been targeted sexually by a non-sibling (such as a next-door neighbor in a case I'm thinking of), that may pique his/her curiosity and he/she may decide to try some things when alone with siblings.  A child who has never been targeted may just never think of doing such a thing.  Or he/she may.

 

I don't think kids are automatically programmed to be disgusted by the thought of touching a sibling.  I think parents who assume their kids would never think of that may be a bit naive.

[Tanaqui]

I think it's ridiculous to call it mutual rape btw.

 

I never said the law made sense. But my understanding is that in the absence of force, drugging, coercion, or anything else that would make it rape even if it didn't involve minors, it's considered that they raped each other.

[Mrs Mungo]

It's been insinuated or perhaps it's the wording, that for relatives that are close in age, that it's no real big deal so long as it seems consensual.

I didn't get the idea that they considered it no big deal. Whether or not it is problematic wasn't part of the original post or question. Can incest be consensual? Yes. Is it always rape? No. Those were the questions the posters were answering.

 

ETA: I think it is worth pointing out that is often two crimes under the law because that means that someone who rapes a close relative can be charged with multiple crimes.

[LucyStoner]

Incest can be part of an ongoing negative, toxic and abusive familial pattern. Both parties can be the victims of whatever messed up or neglectful family dynamic they were raised in even if they both may have "consented".

[Catwoman]

I am surprised to hear that in about an hour, several people talked about personally knowing of cases of consensual incest between young or "very young" girls with same-aged brothers. That is pretty bizarre , even for anecdotal evidence.

:iagree:

 

I have never heard of it happening among anyone I have ever known. I'm not saying it couldn't have happened, but if people found out about it, they would have been absolutely shocked and appalled.

 

  

I don't think it's very bizarre that sisters and brothers take experimentation too far at times.  Very sad, but not really that surprising.

I find it to be incredibly surprising.

 

I mean, seriously, YUCK. :ack2:

[Laura Corin]

 

If we were talking first cousins...

 

FWIW, the boundaries for incest are culturally determined.  It's legal for first cousins to marry in the UK; it is common in some communities.

 

I used to know a woman who had an affair with her step-brother.  They didn't grow up together - they met when both were over 18.  I'm not sure when their parents married.  I knew them both at that time and there was no strange vibe about the relationship.

 

L

[poppy]

So in the case of the 11yo or 13yo twins, who was the rapist? Both of them? I'm thinking both were too young to legally consent, and yet a pregnancy occurred.

 

Can rape occur without a perpetrator? Rape is a criminal term, no? The question isn't whether it's intercourse - obviously it is.

 

Why did you assume "male," by the way?

Why are you do focused on finding a rapist? The point is there is no way for an 11 year old girl to consent to sex. None.

 

And I mentioned male because we are very obviously discussing situations that result in pregnancy.

[clarkacademy]

Why are you do focused on finding a rapist? The point is there is no way for an 11 year old girl to consent to sex. None.

 

And I mentioned male because we are very obviously discussing situations that result in pregnancy.

 

I went from a catholic school to a public school in 5th grade and I was shocked to know some 10-11 year old girls who bragged about who they had done and how many bj's they had given.

[Dory]

FWIW, the boundaries for incest are culturally determined.  It's legal for first cousins to marry in the UK; it is common in some communities.

 

L

 

which is why I said that first cousins wouldn't surprise me as much. That's a little different then siblings.

[solascriptura]

FWIW, the boundaries for incest are culturally determined. It's legal for first cousins to marry in the UK; it is common in some communities.

 

I used to know a woman who had an affair with her step-brother. They didn't grow up together - they met when both were over 18. I'm not sure when their parents married. I knew them both at that time and there was no strange vibe about the relationship.

 

L

Isn't a step brother not a blood relation? Don't the involved parties need to be related by blood in order for it to be incest?

[Laura Corin]

Isn't a step brother not a blood relation? Don't the involved parties need to be related by blood in order for it to be incest?

 

Step-siblings were mentioned above, so that's why I commented.

 

L

[Lolly]

It's been insinuated or perhaps it's the wording, that for relatives that are close in age, that it's no real big deal so long as it seems consensual.

But no relatives go there unless there is some wildly unhealthy things going on in the family. Sometimes it's consensual simply because one or both just feels relieved to have someone seeming to love them and care for them. It's still damaging. It's still hurtful.

 

And sometimes the ages are close but there is still coercion, and often people from the outside looking in aren't going to see that. No one from the outside is going to notice the years of grooming that go into situations like that, or the background that readies them for the next jerk in the family. Incest is so damaging. It destroys healthy boundaries.

 

I assume I am one of the people you are referring to. You are mistaken. There was no insinuation that it is okay. Just that it happens. The question was why the difference? The question poses that incest is always rape. I pointed out that this is not always the case. It seems, from another post, that legally they are two separate things.

 

Why are you do focused on finding a rapist? The point is there is no way for an 11 year old girl to consent to sex. None.

 

And I mentioned male because we are very obviously discussing situations that result in pregnancy.

 

Actually, an 11 yo girls can legally have sex/consent.  The laws have age differences built in in order to keep two kids from getting into legal trouble. Does it make it okay? No. But, it does make it not illegal.

[Dory]

I assume I am one of the people you are referring to. You are mistaken. There was no insinuation that it is okay. Just that it happens. The question was why the difference? The question poses that incest is always rape. I pointed out that this is not always the case. It seems, from another post, that legally they are two separate things.

 

 

 

You're right. My past had me jumping off the original question. My apologies.

[poppy]

 

 

Actually, an 11 yo girls can legally have sex/consent.  The laws have age differences built in in order to keep two kids from getting into legal trouble. Does it make it okay? No. But, it does make it not illegal.

 

It varies based on state law. In many states, sex with an 11 year old is flat-out illegal, no matter who the other party is.

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2003/olrdata/jud/rpt/2003-r-0376.htm

 

I can't wrap my head around this................... how we got from "isn't incest always rape" to "can a tween consent to sex".  From the perspective of whether or not to put a sexual predatory in jail- it matters a lot.  From the persepctive of the abortion debate, I find it rather repugnant that this is a conversation at all.  That whether an abortion would be illegal or legal depends on putting a magnifying glass on her sexual history. Did she say yes? Is the boy also a child? Does her state law give exceptions if the boy is fewer than 4 years older?  Is he related by blood to her, closer than first cousin? These are the questions that determine her ability to get the procedure.  And that's NUTS to me. It seems to make access to the procedure arbitrary at best, and punitive at worst.

[MomatHWTK]

I believe the distinction is made to clarify that beyond r, there are further crimes that would be even worse- i.   

[Guest]

If you believe that there must always (or almost always) be coercion in the case of young unsupervised siblings having sex, to me this doesn't make sense unless you believe that sex always involves coercion period.

 

Young kids do not understand the gravity of the situation. They may know they aren't "supposed" to do xyz, but they also aren't "supposed" to jump on the bed or eat out of the frosting jar, but they do those things anyway when they think they can get away with it.

 

Meanwhile, parents may not realize the extent of their kids' sexual curiosity.

 

Even if there's an older/more dominant sibling, that person may not be mature enough to have the kind of intent you need to "groom" or "rape" somebody.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that incest between young sibs is not a problem. Just that is it not very surprising that it occurs. I also don't think it's as damaging as an adult-child situation would be. I don't know that it automatically continues past the age of mature awareness, either.

I agree with you in all but your last paragraph. I do think it is pretty shocking that sibling sex happens at all.

[Mrs Mungo]

It seems to make access to the procedure arbitrary at best, and punitive at worst.

Which is how a lot of people find themselves on the pro choice side, even when they would never have an abortion themselves. There are too many possibilities to cover every tragic situation without putting women through additional hardships in the midst of trauma.

[LucyStoner]

I went from a catholic school to a public school in 5th grade and I was shocked to know some 10-11 year old girls who bragged about who they had done and how many bj's they had given.

That is a rarity. And kids may not always be truthful when seeking to shock or impress other kids.

 

Less than 2% of American teens have had sex at age 12 or under.

 

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html

[Mrs Mungo]

That is a rarity. And kids may not always be truthful when seeking to shock or impress other kids.

 

Less than 2% of American teens have had sex at age 12 or under.

 

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html

I agree. I attended public school for my entire school career. There was a point where *many* kids lied about their experiences. I only realized how much of it was lies much later.

[SKL]

Why are you do focused on finding a rapist? The point is there is no way for an 11 year old girl to consent to sex. None.

 

And I mentioned male because we are very obviously discussing situations that result in pregnancy.

 

That lady school teacher who raped a 12yo boy got pregnant.

 

How can it be rape if there is no rapist?

 

You usually make more sense than this.