Wagging a Finger at Consanguinamory in Media, Again

Gregory Wakeman over at screenjunkies.com had another one of those "incest in TV and film" lists. This one was titled "The 6 Creepiest Incestuous Couples From TV and Film". As opposed to the sweetest? Or does Wakeman mean to say consensual sex is always creepy if it involves close relatives? Apparently, he's not an ally, as it turns out...

Incest is a horrific act to commit, yet for some reason it seems to populate many of cinemas most celebrated and respected films.

Consensual sex is horrific? And the reason it populates the films it does is that it is a part of life and always has been. He goes on to cite many of the usual examples, such as Luke Skywalker and his twin sister, of course...

...MartyMcFly and his mother from "Back to the Future," Simba and Nala from "The Lion King," "Eurotrip," "The Dreamers," and "Cruel Intentions 2."

I think perhaps Wakeman protests too much in his negative descriptions.

As I wrote above, consanguinamory is a part of life and always has been. Not for everyone, but for some. Everyone knows someone who has been, or is, consanguinamorous, whether they know it or not. There are creepy people, boring people, smart people, attractive people... all kinds of people who have been with a close relative that way. There are people in the television and movie industries, behind the cameras and in front of the cameras, who have been consanguinamorous or are currently in such a relationship, whether with family member who is in the business or isn't. Why shouldn't fiction have some realistic and some positive portrayals of consanguinamory? And why shouldn't real-life stories be told? Referring to consanguinamory in hateful terms doesn't help anyone; it can only hurt. There are people hiding their love who shouldn't have to, and the last thing they need is more jeering from people they are in no way hurting.