Wednesday, July 11, 2012

More Details About Canadian Prosecution of Consenting Adults

I covered this news of Canada criminally sentencing adults for consensual sex, but Megan Gillis' reporting of the story has since appeared in several news outlets. This took place in Ottawa. Here it is at

A judge handed a 53-year-old woman and her 35-year-old son probation for incest Thursday after the pair admitted to a sordid tryst, witnessed by her daughter and his sister at her father's deathbed.
Sordid? Clutch the pearls! What is sordid about people who love each other being affectionate with each other?

Of the rat, she writes...
On May 14, 2010, she was visiting her dying father's apartment along with her mother and brother. They'd been drinking.

She stepped onto a balcony to smoke and happened to look through a window into a bedroom.

She saw her brother having sex with her mother, whose skirt was hiked up around her waist.

Disgusted, she banged on the window. Her brother looked up with an expression of shock and embarrassment.
Why did the authorities need to be involved?

I looked through some of the comments left after the article at Not single response I saw explained why this should still be a criminal matter, just a lot of people expressing their personal disgust. I wonder what others would thing of their love lives?

Again, this should never have been a matter for the courts. They should be free to marry, if that is what they want.
— — —


  1. I can understand this woman's disgust at what her mother and brother were doing. Aversion to incest is a primal human instinct. Private chastising would be perfectly appropriate. What I cannot understand is why she would report them to the police for it. What kind of a person calls the police in when they discover that a loved one is committing a victimless crime? What would she have done if the mom had been making ends meet as an escort? I'm glad I'm not related to this woman.

    Reading the story itself, it seems that she now regrets her choice to be a tattle tale because all three of them are banned by the court from being in contact with one another. Congratulations sis, because you couldn't mind your own business you've lost your brother and mom in addition to your father.

    There are few things I detest more then busybodies. Unless someone is violating the rights of someone else, the fact that they are doing something you personally find disgusting does not give you the right to sic the law on them.

    1. Well put. There are hetero men who are disgusted by the thought of gay sex between men, but still support freedom and equality and don't discriminate against gays or try to interfere. I'm not saying being gay or lesbian is the same thing as being consanguinamorous, but the point is that someone else's sexuality disgusts a person should not give that person the power to interfere.


To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE. If your comment includes graphic descriptions of activity involving minors, it's not going to get published.