you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Where the fuck is there suddenly such a big increase in (heterosexual) incest? Isn’t it still one of the rarest things in the world? (Not counting cousin marriages)

I don't know about a big increase, but no-- it isn't esp. rare, and never has been... unfortunately. At least if we're talking about fathers (and even more particularly stepfathers) preying on their minor daughters. Also other male adults in a girl's family: uncles; grandfathers. When you're talking about incest... that's the prototypical example of it. Which, being male/female, really does fly in the face of the idea that there's any great aversion to it based on reproductive considerations. (And of course, with a stepfather, genetics aren't even a factor.) The aversion in contemporary culture is mainly because it's child molestation, and in a context where the child is even more vulnerable than usual-- because the man molesting her is someone whom she's emotionally, and legally, dependent on; one of the very people she has a right to look to for protection. It's a terrible betrayal of a child.

[–]BioEssentialism[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

stepfather

While definitely an inappropriate and unethical grooming relationship, I don’t count this as incest so for me the point here is moot.

Fathers, Grandfathers and Uncles

Question, is Grandfather or Uncle heterosexual incest more common than father/daughter? As much as it creeps me out to admit it I would imagine the Westernmarck Effect doesn’t extend outside of first-degree relatives (so like parents and full siblings) I mean stuff like cousin and half-sibling marriage has been a historical norm for a reason, perhaps the genetic relatedness in the case of extended family members is just distant enough to offset any potential for inbreeding side-effects and so our species hasn’t yet developed an effective innate aversion to it like we have for 1st degree incest?

The father/daughter cases being as common as you tell me is what really astounds me, why isn’t the Westermarck Effect working on these men? Unless Paternity Uncertainty makes it so that a father can never truly know if his daughters are actually his daughters and that might be a factor here in the decreased aversion to first-degree incest?

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

While definitely an inappropriate and unethical grooming relationship, I don’t count this as incest so for me the point here is moot.

I consider it incest because it's driven by the same factors as with incestuous fathers (see below).

Question, is Grandfather or Uncle heterosexual incest more common than father/daughter?

Hard to say; it's my impression that father/daughter is the most common. Which, yes, contradicts the Westermarck Effect... but there are other factors at play here, specifically cultural ones. Never forget that being the one species to possess conceptual intelligence means that our behavior is shaped not only by evolution and biology, but also by ideas. Including ones that are wrong. In both sense of the word. As well as destructive and, sometimes, just fucking stupid. Like the "trans" train wreck! And, indeed, "gender" as a whole. That's the ideology underpinning the incestuous abuse of girls. Which leads me to:

The father/daughter cases being as common as you tell me is what really astounds me, why isn’t the Westermarck Effect working on these men?

Because something else is working on them, and it's stronger: gender roles. The ancient, pervasive system of sex-based stereotypes which classify "female" as inferior and "male" as superior. Female people are seen primarily in terms of the value given them by male people; since most male people are straight, this is fundamentally sexual. Most men don't extend this rule to their daughters, of course... but, unsurprisingly, quite a few do. Because that's what girls are for, in their minds (and it's one logical way of reading gender roles, tbf).

Which is the basic reason why I hate gender-woo. And everything that arises from it. Because this is the original evil ideology. Whether anyone tries to disguise it with colorful, New! Improved!TM packaging or not.

[–]BioEssentialism[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Because something else is working on them, and it's stronger: gender roles. The ancient, pervasive system of sex-based stereotypes which classify "female" as inferior and "male" as superior. Female people are seen primarily in terms of the value given them by male people; since most male people are straight, this is fundamentally sexual. Most men don't extend this rule to their daughters, of course... but, unsurprisingly, quite a few do. Because that's what girls are for, in their minds (and it's one logical way of reading gender roles, tbf).

I think you’re mis-reading your classic case of the “which came first, the chicken or the egg” question. Gender Roles only came about because of man’s need to propagate his genes and impregnate and rape as many women possible. Men see women through a solely sexual lens because that’s generally how the two sexes of any reproductive species see each other, it’s apart of the heterosexual reproductive imperative.

I don’t put that much stock in the concept that humans are so highly evolved as to be somehow an exception to this rule, we’re just another type of animal at the end of the day. Which still wouldn’t explain this supposed prevalence of fathers raping their biological daughters since gender roles just serve to enforce man’s need to fulfill their reproductive imperative, and a heterosexual’s 1st degree relatives should automatically be excluded from the list of “viable sexual partners” for obvious reasons.

I think something else might be going on here… And if it’s not paternity uncertainty (I find it interesting that there are apparently zero cases of brothers molesting their biological sisters in comparison) I have to wonder… Tell me, do the majority of these father/daughter molestation cases take place when the daughter herself is prepubescent or is she usually a menstruating teen?

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think you’re mis-reading your classic case of the “which came first, the chicken or the egg” question. Gender Roles only came about because of man’s need to propagate his genes and impregnate and rape as many women possible.

I don't think that I'm misreading this. If gender roles came about in order to promote man's need to propagate his genes, why are they so often geared towards doing the exact opposite? Two examples: the prevalence of fathers refusing to provide financial support for their minor children following a divorce, and of men to become the most violent towards their wives/girlfriends during pregnancy. Both of these phenomena are characterized by men behaving in a way that actually DECREASES the likelihood of their genes being passed on (because his children don't survive). What sense does this make in "selfish gene" terms? None.

And I hope you're not saying that men raping women is good! Beyond the ethical/moral objections to this, though, how the hell does it work as a reproductive strategy? In most animal species, the offspring reach maturity within a matter of weeks or months (sometimes even less); many have no need of any parenting whatsoever. So a "quantity, not quality" strategy makes perfect sense here. But children need an ENORMOUS amount of care for an EXTREMELY long time; a man would do much better to invest his resources in a few of them than just run around impregnating women. Particularly by means of rape, which maximizes the likelihood that the woman will kill these offspring (either by abortion, or, in past eras, simply abandoning them to die of exposure). Again, this is counter-productive if successfully passing on one's genes is the goal, but perfectly in keeping with the imperatives of gender.

Gender roles, I'm convinced, are based on something else entirely: faulty reasoning. Just like the idea that the Sun revolves around the Earth, witchcraft is real... and people can be "born in the wrong body".

I don’t put that much stock in the concept that humans are so highly evolved as to be somehow an exception to this rule, we’re just another type of animal at the end of the day.

Oh, I don't put ANY stock in this concept, myself! That's not at all what I'm saying. It's not a matter of humans being "so highly evolved", or somehow not an animal species. It's a matter of how the element characterizing us-- for both good and ill-- is unique: conceptual intelligence. When comparing our species to any other, you have to factor this in. Only we can be shaped by ideas. And those ideas can be erroneous. Conceptual intelligence is a two-edged sword, really: on the one hand, it's the most versatile tool for survival that evolution has ever come up with... but, on the other hand, it allows us to make factual errors, and create artificial devices/conditions, which may well bring about our extinction in record time. So as to whether human intelligence makes us "superior": I'd say that the jury is still very much out on that one.

Which still wouldn’t explain this supposed prevalence of fathers raping their biological daughters since gender roles just serve to enforce man’s need to fulfill their reproductive imperative, and a heterosexual’s 1st degree relatives should automatically be excluded from the list of “viable sexual partners” for obvious reasons.

That's because gender roles are first and foremost devoted to reinforcing male superiority; this is often inconsistent with the welfare of his own biological children, and may in fact promote his neglect and abuse of them (quite possibly to the point that they do not even survive). Not that gender roles only threaten men's children; this ideology is destructive to people in general (though women most of all).

I think something else might be going on here… And if it’s not paternity uncertainty (I find it interesting that there are apparently zero cases of brothers molesting their biological sisters in comparison) I have to wonder… Tell me, do the majority of these father/daughter molestation cases take place when the daughter herself is prepubescent or is she usually a menstruating teen?

Oh, brothers certainly do molest their biological sisters; I didn't mention it because, during the period when their sisters are still children, so are most of these boys, and many aren't physically-mature enough to be sexually-predatory yet. This isn't true of fathers/grandfathers/uncles, obviously.

Most father/daughter molestation begins when the daughter is prepubescent, usually well before her teens. However, it will typically continue until he's forced to stop, usually because his daughter has gotten old enough to successfully resist and/or escape him.

[–]BioEssentialism[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Two examples: the prevalence of fathers refusing to provide financial support for their minor children following a divorce

This is easily explained by the fact that sperm is cheap and eggs are expensive, therefore males of all species typically place less investment in their children on the average than the females. Despite human children needing a significant amount of more care and having a longer childhood period, human males still typically value a quantity over quality breeding approach because that’s just the nature of sperm vs eggs in general.

and of men to become the most violent towards their wives/girlfriends during pregnancy.

Is this also actually a thing? I haven’t seen statistics but it’s hard to believe that men becoming more violent towards their partners during pregnancy is a common occurrence, unless of course there’s that Paternity Uncertainty I talked about. (Or maybe it’s the result of men drinking more during their partner’s pregnancy due to nervousness over being a father and it’s the drunkenness causing them to be more violent rather than them doing it deliberately?)

And I hope you're not saying that men raping women is good!

Of course I’m not, but it is what it is. Nature can be a cruel beast.

Particularly by means of rape, which maximizes the likelihood that the woman will kill these offspring (either by abortion, or, in past eras, simply abandoning them to die of exposure).

Keep in mind that our caveman genes haven’t yet caught up to recognize the technological existence of abortion. Abortion is a relatively recent medical phenomena, for most of human history (and mammalian history in general, remember animals don’t even have the concept of abortion) if you got pregnant that was it, you had no choice but to carry the pregnancy to term. (unless you intentionally miscarried or something)

Then when the baby was born logic would dictate that a mother’s maternal instincts would kick in which more often than not would negate the fact of how that baby got put into her and she would more than likely nurture it all the same. (or at worst just outright abandon it rather than actually kill it, which while still not great, still at least gets a man’s genes out there and is better than the alternative of him never getting them out there at all, remember that sperm is cheap.) remember, the baby would be half hers too and most mothers typically recognize that fact, so it is in all honesty a valid reproductive strategy for men as unfortunate as it is to admit.

Oh, brothers certainly do molest their biological sisters; I didn't mention it because, during the period when their sisters are still children, so are most of these boys, and many aren't physically-mature enough to be sexually-predatory yet. This isn't true of fathers/grandfathers/uncles, obviously.

Since it typically happens when these boys are still kids rather than much older brothers, I imagine it’s due to them either being groomed themselves or emulating the behavior of their older male molester relatives.

Most father/daughter molestation begins when the daughter is prepubescent,

Yep, just as I thought. Sounds like what’s going on here is neither Paternity Uncertainty nor the influence of gender roles but rather that these men just happen to be sick in the head pedophiles. Of course the Westernmarck Effect wouldn’t be working on them, if they’re pedophiles that means their sexual orientation is already abnormal and misdirected to begin with. They have a mental illness that already orients them to non-reproductive viable strategies (being attracted to those who are literally physically incapable of reproducing yet, and unlike homosexuality it’s not a natural genetic alternative meant to prevent overpopulation and help the species, it’s just a plain ass Paraphilia) so obviously other normal, inborn evolutionary traits such as the Westernmarck Effect that helps aid our reproduction wouldn’t be working in these pedos sick minds.