[POLL] Incest game. What do you consider as Incest?

[Netori Popeye]

If there's a game or video that's labeled as incest and there's a "uhh actually it's okay cuz you're only my step-_____" disclaimer randomly thrown in, I actually get pissed off and immediately close it.

Lol, same here. Thankfully there is usually an incest patch for this sort of scenario.

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

If you really want to get rid of the legitimate never-useful "bad genes," encourage people to breed with people as far from themselves genetically as possible (mixed race relationsips at the very least), level the economic and social playing field as much as possible, encourage the successful in that system to have more kids, and severely decrease the amount of resources that kids can inherit from successful parents while pumping up funding and support for social programs with the taxes from what would otherwise be the force of inheritance destabilizing the game. That way, the most naturally successful are comparatively free from the forces propping up shitty inbred wealthy families and can shine on their own terms while also allowing a better life for the less successful/well-adapted people.

You don't know how wrong you are my little race mixing friend. Did you know that a person born of a relationship between a black person and a white person has a 98% mortality rate if they get Leukemia? Always nearly fatal... Do you know why? They can't receive a bone marrow transplant from their own parents let alone anyone else in the world who has to have the exact match in DNA that this person does. Mixed race children from other couples simply alters the percentage a bit, but you get the idea. The base mortality rate for a person with Leukemia is 61.4% currently. It only goes up when you involve mixed race children and adults.
I personally believe your hypothesis to be flawed in a few ways:

1. You assume that immuno-diversity is key to healthy societies, both in a socio-political sense and a medical one. Natural selection has engineered diverse communities of humanity across the globe, allowing the "fittest" the flourish, while culling the weak and useless. This must mean that you assume that everyone alive today must be the "fittest" to be alive simply by being alive. Not true.
2. Saying that a person can only receive a certain block in the genome if they insert it by mating with someone who has it is logical, but not the only way. Do you really think people mate based on who has the perfect gene? Women have been responsible for selecting mates in the recent past and the present, but before that it was based on a patriarchal system of arranging marriages.
3. And finally that nature gives only humans a free pass when it comes to deficiency. If people are irresponsible with the tools they have been given, there are no excuses, no favorites. There would be no meso-america if not for the spanish conquistadors who mated with the Aztecs and the surrounding tribes, while simultaneously destroying the unfit with genetic diseases. Is that diversity a good thing? Or how the first settlers in North America systematically destroyed the native people with interbreeding and disease? Is that good diversity? Most white americans today share DNA with at least one native tribe, but this didn't seem to benefit either party in the long run.

Unchecked outbreeding can be just as harmful to a parent stock as rampant inbreeding.

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

It's funny how the people who are really into eugenics are usually really against race-mixing.

Only because his eugenics are colored by a flawed utopian notion of a brotherhood of man where race doesn't exist. In a world where race doesn't exist, studying eugenics is the same as studying the difference between raindrops.

 

[Xalenda]

In a world where race doesn't exist, studying eugenics is the same as studying the difference between raindrops.

I believe KHAAANNNNN!!!! would beg to differ.

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

I believe KHAAANNNNN!!!! would beg to differ.

Gene Roddenberry was a utopian philanthropist at heart. His show was based on his own personal beliefs of a unified human society where race and genetic malformation has been abolished.

 

[Xalenda]

Yes, I agree with the race part, but there are still genetic flaws within the human genome - it's because of those flaws that one of the best characters (of DS9, at least), Julian Bashir, works hard to prevent others from knowing he's been "augmented".

Khan was, to my understanding, a type of Eugenicist who put the welfare and survival of his own advanced humans - or race of humans - above those of the other, "lesser" human race.

Stamping out racism will always be an impossibility, no matter the people or time or mixing of races - someone will always deem "their" race or type of human or birth defects to be more/less "pure" than others. It's just how we're wired.

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

Yes, I agree with the race part, but there are still genetic flaws within the human genome - it's because of those flaws that one of the best characters (of DS9, at least), Julian Bashir, works hard to prevent others from knowing he's been "augmented".

Khan was, to my understanding, a type of Eugenicist who put the welfare and survival of his own advanced humans - or race of humans - above those of the other, "lesser" human race.

Stamping out racism will always be an impossibility, no matter the people or time or mixing of races - someone will always deem "their" race or type of human or birth defects to be more/less "pure" than others. It's just how we're wired.

So it really comes down to a community of people who can be a fertile ground for advancement, not just throw dice with nature and hope that we get lucky. A lot of luck goes into why life exists at all let alone that humans came out of all of that chaos.
I can't really contribute much to the scheme, but I personally don't like being the guinea pig of nature any more than the next guy. I doubt that we can achieve the "Superman" using exclusive patterns like inbreeding or selective breeding, but maybe someday we can arrive at a conclusion that gives us a balanced view of what is healthy when it comes to offspring, so we can marry reason and hope and have a real reason to keep bringing more people into this world with a view to making humanity "better" and not just more of the same selfish excuses.

 

[a1fox3]

Blood related with brother and sister the most.
I like it when they have lived all there lives together but can get behind separated for a few years or so.

 

[Vanidal]

I'm a bit wiser by reading this thread. Kudos to those bring up the scientific side and consideration of incest.
I wonder, do you have a friend to talk about this?
How do you find a friend in life (not online) to discuss or casually talk about this kind of topic?
Most of my friends willing to continue the talk about incest were into the hot aspects of this topic. And the ones interested in the scientific side of it prefer to talk about it with their own selves.

 

[megaplayboy10k]

You can have biological parents, adoptive parents, foster parents and step-parents(ditto for siblings). In-laws is somewhat similar. In terms of blood relatives, I'd think of it as 1st, 2nd or 3rd degree incest--parent-child, sibling-sibling is 1st degree; cousin-cousin, aunt-nephew, grandparent-grandchild is 2nd degree; 2nd cousins, great-aunt/greatnephew, great-grandparent/great grandchild(ew!) would be 3rd degree. I think half-siblings would still be 1st degree(ish).

If you have non-biological parents who raised you from an early age, they're functionally your "real parents". I don't think anyone who felt attraction to such parents would characterize those feelings as non-incestuous.

 

[Virulenz]

From my point of view any good incest story develops from/in a common family. This whole come back after x years or adoption crap is a boring way to avoid this development...but it is the development that makes the story interesting.

 

[GottaLust]

A is legitimate incest, so A. However, I definitely prefer B because at least you'd already have a developed relationship with the other person.