More Anti-Equality Cowardice and Ignorance

The bigots like to pile on, and someone going by streiff wrote at redstate.com, apparently to demonstrate a basic lack of 1) critical thinking, 2) ability to do the most basic research, and 3) originality. Later, he added a demonstration of a lack of spine. This person was no doubt prompted to add to the hate recently demonstrated by other sites against equality. These haters all copy off each others' papers yet they call everyone else incestuous. And they seem to be coward in that they will not actually debate.

The headline of streiff's piece was "It Isn't Science of Love, You Are Just a Pervert." You know, because this person is a scientist, right? And knows whether or not other people really love each other, right? This hater starts off whining about Justice Anthony Kennedy writing a majority opinion striking down laws against private sex. So right there, you know this person has problems. Then, of course, there is the whining about the decision this past June in favor of the limited monogamous same-gender freedom to marry. That's not enough, so the whining moves on to transphobia. Finally, we get to the quoting from Cosmo (always Cosmo, never the sister publications that carried the same article, some prior to Cosmo). There's a lot of huffing and puffing (and I think a lot of huffing) that mostly boiled down to "I think this is perverted." Wow, what a contribution!

Despite decades of documented evidence, this hater thinks a simple "Nuh-uh!" wipes away the reality of Genetic Sexual Attraction. Then, lamenting that discrimination against consanguinamory is "over" (if only that were true!) this paragon of journalistic excellence writes...

Germany has declared incest to be a basic constitutional right and it is impossible to conceive any state laws against incest standing in the face of even a minor legal challenge.

Germany has done no such thing. A ethics panel has called for it. That's not the same thing. Really, is it that hard to look at Wikipedia?

In trying to correct someone else, this bigot reveals more ineptitude...

In fact, the writer gets a detail wrong. She says that incest is illegal in all states. It isn’t in Chris Christie’s New Jersey, incest is legal.

No mention of Rhode Island nor Ohio. Again, this is easily researched.

This person never even tries to give any reason why the lovers in the article shouldn't be free, but rather counts on readers to simply nod along.

So I took to Twitter to respond to the tweet from streiff RS ‏@streiffredstate about this monstrosity with this...

Please, @streiffredstate - do some research next time instead of copying from someone else's paper http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/2015/11/busted-site-clutches-pearls.html

Surely this person could defend their piece, right?

Well... not really. The homophobic, ableist (and erroneous) response was...

sorry I don't have time for shrill, neurotic gays

And then I was blocked by @streiffredstate

But YOU may not be blocked, yet. So... maybe you can send some tweets to that account?

An Update From Liz

One of my first interviews for this blog was Liz. Her first appearance on the blog can be found here. She checks in from time to time, and this is her latest update...

We're doing ok here. We spent Thanksgiving with our parents. They do enjoy spoiling their granddaughter. She's getting so big too, definitely going to be a tall girl.

You know, I look at her sometimes and think that if we just blindly followed what people said was the right thing for us to do, we wouldn't have her. If I only thought of my brother as my brother and nothing else, I wouldn't have her. I can't imagine life without her or him. People need to understand. I can only hope that someday they do.

Sorry, just needed to get that out. I'm doing fine, I am happy as is my brother. He spends time with her every day, and she loves her daddy.

Wouldn't it be cruel to rip such a family apart? It's also cruel to try to stop it from happening in the first place. There are many people who wish they could find such love or form a family like that. There's no good reason to try to stop them. It is ridiculous that they can't openly discuss the totality of their relationship with neighbors, coworkers, and the like. As always, we with them a long and happy life together!

We Get Letters Wistful About Past Consanguinamory

Unknown left a comment on our most popular entry. His letter is about a situation that is not all that rare...

My parents had four kids. I am the oldest son, and I have two sisters and a much-younger brother. My parents divorced when I was sixteen and my oldest sister was fourteen. My mother struggled with alcoholism after the divorce.

That's unfortunate.

The feelings of loss and abandonment nearly wrecked our family. I hated my father. Our mother was trying to work full-time, go to school at night and still keep the house running. In order to do this, my oldest sister and I took on much of the cooking, cleaning, shopping, getting the younger kids ready for school, etc. In effect, we sort of took on a parental role in the house, including disciplining the younger kids.

Is this the ideal family situation? No. But it is what many people have dealt with due to a parent dying or leaving or being taken away (war, incarceration.)

Busted Site Clutches the Pearls

The anti-equality frigid set over at newsbusters.org and breitbart.com has decided to increase their hits by allowing their followers to "protest too much" in reaction to a story that ran recently at GoodHousekeeping.com and, subsequently, many sister publications. The Newsbusters intern Erin Aitcheson picked on Cosmo, which was probably deliberate, even though a simple search would have revealed the many other publications running the article. Then breitbart.com's Kipp Jones subsequently did the same, ironically practicing journalistic incest. It's crap, hence the dung beetle pic.  Let's look at busters first...

First, the headline was "Cosmo Praises Incest, Infidelity, and Possible Child Rape."

Did the Devil Go Down to Georgia?

Another day, another incomplete report of an "incest" criminal charge. (See another one here.) This one comes from the state of Mississippi. Therese Apel and Sarah Fowler report at clarionledger.com about a Georgia man. Despite two reporters being involved, they still apparently didn't get enough information from law enforcement. Again, his name and picture are prominently featured even though it isn't clear whether he was involved in a very serious crime (assault) or being charged in a victimless "crime."

A Fayetteville, Georgia man has been charged by Mississippi authorities with "adultery and fornication between certain persons forbidden to intermarry."

According to a release from Starkville Police Department, Dan Dewayne Newcomb, 69, was arrested on Tuesday on that charge, which state statute 97-29-5 classifies as "persons being within the degrees within which marriages are prohibited by law to be incestuous and void, or persons who are prohibited from marrying by reason of blood and between whom marriage is declared to be unlawful and void."

Dear Mississippi: People don't need to be married to each other to have sex.

Starkville detective Stephanie Perkins said the incident, which allegedly occurred in 2013 and was just reported, is still under investigation. She said there could be more charges in the future.

If this was an assault, charge him with that. If this was a consensual romp, leave him alone. If this was cheating, that's not a good thing but shouldn't be criminal.

Newcomb is in the Oktibbeha County Jail where he is awaiting an initial court appearance in municipal court.

The charge can carry up to 10 years in prison.

Ten years is not enough if it was assault. He shouldn't even be in jail of this was sex.

Carl Smith had a report at cdispatch.com that shed no more light on what actually happened, other than location and who reported it...

A complaint filed by a person listed as a family member alleges the incident occurred on Aug. 10, 2013, at 982 Highway 12.

That's a hotel.

Lest you think it has to be assault because it must of been the other person who went to police, that isn't necessarily true. There have been many cases of others, including family members, ratting out consenting adults for being lovers.

So, we still have no idea if this was allegedly sex between adults or an assault. I would think the initial charge would be assault if that was the allegation, but we can't be sure.

Is It Really That Hard to Clarify?

We got an update from a case in Iowa we wrote about here, and the defendant's picture and name is prominently featured, but there's still a stunning lack of information. The latest report is from Mike Bunge at kimt.com...

A Clear Lake man has pled not guilty to a charge of incest.

So, there's still no other charge, such as assault or molestation. So right there, this sounds like this was something consensual. If this was an assault, he should be charged under those laws.

45-year-old Todd William Russ entered that plea Tuesday in Cerro Gordo County District Court.  His jury trial has been scheduled for January 12.

If this was consensual I hope there is someone on that jury with some sense.

Russ allegedly performed a sex act with someone he knew to be a blood relative in December, 2014.

"Performed a sex act" implies this was consensual. Molestation or assault is not performing a sex act. It is violating someone. Sex acts are consensual things. "Someone he knew to be a blood relative" is ridiculously vague. Are we talking about a minor or an adult? The lack of clarification, along with the previous language, leads me to believe this was another adult. "Blood relative." In some states, that could mean his first cousin. A "blood relative" can be a parent, an adult child, a niece or nephew, and aunt or uncle, and this person could be a consenting adult, and someone he just met a couple of years ago.

So what's really going on in this case? We don't know. If this was assault, charge him for that and send him away. If this was consenting adults having fun or making love, the charges should be dropped.

Update here.

We Get Letters From People Who Might Want Beards

We get letters from people at all stages of their lives and relationships. Some are freshly into adulthood, some are middle-aged some are older. Sometimes they are thinking back fondly on good times of the distant past, sometimes they are talking about something going on at the present time, and others are considering the future, like these siblings.


A comment was left here by Anonymous...

Keith I really appreciate what you are doing. I wish there were more open minded people like you in the world. Here I just want to share my story. I am from India and I am in relationship with my sister. I am 29 and she is 27. We grew up together. We developed the attraction in last few years and started experimenting. This resulted in a full fledged romantic relationship. I never felt so close to my sister as I feel now now. Sex surely adds new dimension to the relation. Our relationship is a secret and is going to remain so forever. We can't share it with any one else. Here in India we don't have any laws against incest but the society does not accept such relationships. We haven't yet thought of our future but clearly marrying with each other is not the possibility. I wonder if it would be ethical to continue our (sexual) relationship after we both get married (to different people, of course).

I've heard before about consanguinamorous siblings continuing after getting into relationships with others or even getting married to other. If their partners are under the impression that the relationship is monogamous, or even if they accept some interactions with others, the discovery of a consanguineous affair by a scorned lover could result in that lover exposing the affair and bringing serious trouble, even if criminal law is not a factor. The law does not protect consanguineous lovers, who can be discriminated against in employment and many other ways, and targeted by neighborhood bigots.

The question was specifically about ethics.

We Get Letters From Happy LTR Consanguinamorists

We are always happy to comments on this blog, but especially so when we hear from anyone who isn't free to speak up elsewhere. Anonymous left a comment here on our blog's all-time most popular entry and I wanted to highlight it so it won't go overlooked.

My sister (now age 59) and I (61) actually ended up together after she had an unexpected divorce and moved in with me.

Sometimes, people get together temporarily or permanently after a divorce or a death.

We had "experimented" together at a young age and stopped in the late teens.

Some kids do play doctor. Most who do end up never having any involvement with each other as adults. But some never stop "playing" and others do resume later.

When she moved in, I had just planned a vacation driving up the California coast and she came along. 

As we drove, we stopped at beaches along the highway and many were clothing optional and we "did as the Romans". It was at a nude beach just past Santa Cruz where we were watching a sunset when, on the spur of the moment, we kissed. That shock led to a very romantic interlude - that hasn't stopped even after 12 years.

Twelve years. How many marriages don't last long? And yet they can't get legally married. There's no good reason their love should be criminalized or denied equality. Doing the math, they were about 47 and 49 when that special vacation took place. Certainly, they were old enough to decide for themselves.

Something that amazes us both is that the passion between us has not faded as did in our marriages.

Other people in consanguinamorous relationships tend to report similar experiences. Why should they "settle" for someone else? Nobody should try to make them. Friends and family need to be supportive and we need to eliminate discriminatory laws.

I'm hoping Anonymous contacts us so we can find out more.

If you're in a "forbidden" relationship, have been in one, or know someone who has been, please share your experiences in the comments, or better yet, contact us to tell us about it.

Reasons to Legalize Polygamy

The reason to legalize polygamy is that an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to marry any and all consenting adults. That's about as simple as it gets. There's no good reason to deny adults these rights. But listland.com claims to give the top ten reasons the US should legalize polygamy (in a way that appears to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, but contains much truth.)

It starts off well, with an explanation of polygyny and polyandry both being forms of polygamy. It gets into such reasons as parenting, endorsement by religions, and that it is legal in some countries...

Of the approximately 200 countries in the world about 50 (25%) allow polygamy to be practiced. 

Interesting.

Most Muslim countries (Tunisia and Turkey are notable exceptions with Turkey going so far as to forbid polygamists from immigrating) permit polygamy and countries such as India, Sri Lanka and Malaysia permit polygamous marriages only for their Muslim citizens.  Some countries, such as New Zealand, which otherwise outlaw polygamy, will recognize polygamous marriages if they were legal in the country in which they were contracted.  In other countries, polygamy is positively celebrated such as, for example, in Swaziland where the king has 13 wives.  Several Central Asian republics, notably Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan have debated legalizing polygamy for civil unions.  The debates failed in all national parliaments but it is still seen as an important issue for securing the status of many unofficial second, third and fourth wives.

They go on to cite in-family support networks...

In a monogamous union, when one party is sick, the day to day responsibilities fall on the shoulders of a single person.  This is simply not the case in polygamous marriages where more people are earning and there are more to share the household tasks.

You can read it all here. Every relationship structure can be said to have advantages and challenges. This is why this blog advocates that people be allowed to have the relationships they mutually negotiate, which are more likely to be the ones that enable people to meet each others needs.

It is ridiculous that in just about every state in the US, three or more adults can live together and raise children together, but they can't be legally married to each other even though that it what they all want. It's a major reason to support full marriage equality.

Are You Willing to Help Media?

If so, contact me on Facebook or write me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com.

More and more requests are coming in from media (newspaper and magazine journalists, radio and television producers, documentary filmmakers) seeking those involved or experienced in polyamorous relationships and/or consanguineous romantic or sexual relationships, whether initiated through Genetic Sexual Attraction or not. As usual, I’m talking about consensual relationships, not abuse.

The right media projects can greatly advance the rights of people in these relationships by raising awareness and showing people that these relationships are nothing to fear, and are often quite beautiful and healthy relationships.

So, what I'd like is to know who is willing to participate, so I know ahead of time who would help with something like this. Before you say "not me!" please continue reading.

Woefully Incomplete Reporting From Iowa

Is Iowa prosecuting an abuser, or a lover? We can't be sure, because as with so many other cases from other places, we're not being given enough information. A report by Mike Bunge at kimt.com is headlined with "Alleged Incest in North Iowa."

A north Iowa man has been accused of incest.

45-year-old Todd William Russ of Clear Lake is charged with one count of incest, a class “D” felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of no more than $7,500.

Reading 736.5 in Iowa law, this "crime" appears to be about consensual (to be redundant) sex. However, no other defendant is mentioned, leaving us to wonder how someone can commit this "crime" without anyone else? If he molested or assaulted someone, he should be charged with those crimes.

Authorities say sometime in December, 2014, Russ performed a sex act with someone he knew to be a blood relative.

That shouldn't be a crime. If the person didn't consent, well, that's not a "sex act," that's an assault.


There was also a report by Molly Montag at globegazette that contained the same minimal information.


So the guy's name and picture are posted online, and we have no reason (other than the lack of mention of another defendant) that this was anything but consensual (again, to be redundant) sex. Why should anyone be arrested, tried, fined, and jailed for having sex with other adults?

If this was really a matter of assault, then say so! Is that really so hard?

We have no way of knowing if this is a genetic sibling he'd just met months before, or a child he raised. It's ridiculous. Many other law enforcement agencies and news source give more information without identifying victims. It is possible. Try it!

Stupid Laws Continue to Hinder Some LGBT Monogamist Marriages

We've written before about how some LGBT people used adult adoption law to somewhat offset the discrimination preventing them from legally marrying, and the problems now faced by those who now want to marry. It should not matter if one person adopted the other. It should not matter if people are considered family or close relatives by birth, consanguinity, affinity, or adoption. All that should matter in getting married: 1) Are they adults? 2) Do they consent to being married to each other? That's all that should matter.

Here's a current report from Evan Perez and Ariane de Vogue at cnn.com...

Nino Esposito, a retired teacher, adopted his partner Roland "Drew" Bosee, a former freelance and technical writer, in 2012, after more than 40 years of being a couple.

Now, they're trying to undo the adoption to get married and a state trial court judge has rejected their request, saying his ability to annul adoptions is generally limited to instances of fraud.

Well let's solve the problem by making it so they can marry without undoing the adoption, OK?

But Judge Lawrence J. O'Toole, of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, ruled against the couple. He noted that the primary purpose of the adoption was to reduce the Pennsylvania inheritance tax payable upon the death of one of the men from 15% to 4%, "as the two men would now be in a parent-child relationship instead of a third party relationship."

O'Toole said he was "sensitive to the situation" but noted that despite the fact Esposito and Bosee desire to marry, "they cannot do so because they are legally father and son."

Then overturn the law saying that fathers and sons can't marry. There's no good reason to have such a law.

Andrew Potts at gaystarnews.com deals with this topic, too.

It has been revealed that at least 25 US states, including Pennsylvania, have laws on their books that would see gay people who legally adopted their partners to insure inheritance rights before same-sex marriage was legal treated the same as incestuous relatives if they marry.

Such couples could technically find themselves facing ten years in prison in convicted.

Some state court judges have allowed same-sex couples in this situation to have the adoptions annulled before they then marry.

However other state court judges have refused to revoke adoptions for people in this situation because of legal precedent around adoption where only those entered into for the sake of fraud are eligible for annulment to prevent child abandonment.

It's very, very simple: let adults share love, sex, residence, and marriage (or any of those without the others) with ANY and ALL consenting adults. This problem and many others would disappear. Let an adult, regardless of that adult's gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, marry any consenting adults.

We Get Letters From Polyamorous Consanguinamorous Women

"Dee Dee" left a comment on this blog's all-time most popular entry, and rather than publish it there, I wanted to highlight it here. It contains polyamory, consanguinamory, exhibitionism/voyeurism, and something else some might call a fetish.

She explained that she was the third child in her family, having three brothers; one older and two younger. She explained that even while growing up, she liked to go au naturel at home, which meant in front of her brothers. Her parents didn't approve, but they worked evenings and so that often gave her the opportunity to go bare.

PLEASE NOTE: The rest of this entry gets slightly explicit.

How to Get Away With Playing the I Card

Shaunna Murphy's write-up at mtv.com on "How to Get Away With Murder" is headlined with the "i" word, because that always gets attention.

When you watch “How to Get Away With Murder” every week, do you spend half of the episode’s runtime leaning over to tell your friend, spouse, sibling, etc. that Wes (Alfie Enoch) it totally guilty, or Asher (Matt McGorry) knows more than he’s saying? Well, as it turns out, you’re in very good company — because even one-half of this season’s possibly incestuous (psh, like we trust that virginity test) sibling duo, Kendrick Sampson, doesn’t know who killed his billionaire parents at this point.

So often in pop media, if siblings (or any other close relatives) have a sexual relationship, they are portrayed as evil or deranged, or we find out that they aren't really related after all. We need more representation for people like this, meaning more literature like this and movies and shows adapting that literature.

ABC/Mitch Haaseth

This includes Sampson’s friends, who have apparently all been saying to him “I know you’re sleeping with your sister” since the premiere of Season 2. (“As long as people don’t think I’m sleeping with my [real] sister, I’m good.”) But all incest jokes and ridiculous plot theories — theories that could very likely become a reality — aside, Sampson is just grateful to be part of a diverse and dynamic cast on a well-written show, during a time when increasing the number of voices we hear onscreen is a major cultural talking point.

There are many great stories that could be developed that treat consanguinamorous people with respect and are compelling stories. The prejudice faced by such lovers is enough material for drama. But that's just one thing.

Do you watch this series? What do you think?