[lbo-talk] Sexual self-expression

ravi gadfly at exitleft.org
Tue Sep 21 10:32:54 PDT 2004


Michael Pugliese wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:54:16 -0400, ravi <gadfly at exitleft.org> wrote:
>
>>and similarly for incest... what's the non-biological problem with it?
>>it can meet the 'consenting adults' requirement.
>>
> The parent-child relationship is primarily erotic because all human
> ...
> The above statements do not explicitly talk about sex with children...
> ...
>

i am going with this definition of incest (dictionary.com):

in·cest

1. Sexual relations between persons who are so closely related that

their marriage is illegal or forbidden by custom.

2. The statutory crime of sexual relations with such a near relative.

(american heritage dictionary)

and the common use of the term to include sexual activity between close relatives, such as siblings.

to repeat my question: in such a case, say two adult male siblings, what is the non-biological problem with it?

"adult" removes the "pedophilia" orthogonality. "male" removes the "feminism" orthogonality.

maybe i should add "twin" to deny reference to natural power relationships, caused by difference in age.

--ravi



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list