Columbia Professor Charged With Incest

[FBM]

I knew a guy who had sex with his sister lots of times.

POINH

[Ayaan]

consensual

That should be the start, beginning and end of the matter.

Both are well over the arbitrary age of consent in the US, so however repulsive this relationship may be personally, what does it have to do with anyone else, or the state? If it's not consensual, that's another matter.

Like FF, I think as long as it's consensual on the part of both parties, I don't see the problem. If there are offspring, that could be problematic, but otherwise, I don't get why this is an issue (as long as it's consensual).

[Rob]

I love the smell of incest.

What does incest smell like?

[Hermit]

All this stuff about consent and a victimless crime is bollocks.
If this isn't illegal, it's open to abuse. Say the age of consent is sixteen. A father has sixteen years to condition his daughter into doing whatever he says. Then, the day after her sixteenth birthday, he fucks her, with her "consent" and they can't touch him for it.

You appear to have made up your mind that the daughter was groomed. The police don't, but you seem to know better. On what grounds should we share your opinion? Do you have evidence they have missed, or are you asking us to accept it simply because you happen to think she was?

I wish people would keep their noses out of what consenting adults do in private. It's none of our business.

[Warren Dew]

You appear to have made up your mind that the daughter was groomed.

I don't see the logic of the "grooming" argument, anyway. A daughter could be groomed to like an unrelated friend of her father for her whole life, and if they didn't have a relationship until her age of consent, that would be perfectly legal. If one doesn't think incest is bad, then there's really no difference between that case and the case where the daughter is groomed to like her father.

[mistermack]

All this stuff about consent and a victimless crime is bollocks.
If this isn't illegal, it's open to abuse. Say the age of consent is sixteen. A father has sixteen years to condition his daughter into doing whatever he says. Then, the day after her sixteenth birthday, he fucks her, with her "consent" and they can't touch him for it.

You appear to have made up your mind that the daughter was groomed. The police don't, but you seem to know better. On what grounds should we share your opinion? Do you have evidence they have missed, or are you asking us to accept it simply because you happen to think she was?

I wish people would keep their noses out of what consenting adults do in private. It's none of our business.

Can you not read the piece you've quoted? Where in that did I refer to this case?
I made the case for incest being illegal. I didn't pronounce on this case at all.
I said nothing about this woman being groomed. Take a course in comprehension, it could improve your debating skills no-end.
.

[mistermack]

You appear to have made up your mind that the daughter was groomed.

I don't see the logic of the "grooming" argument, anyway. A daughter could be groomed to like an unrelated friend of her father for her whole life, and if they didn't have a relationship until her age of consent, that would be perfectly legal. If one doesn't think incest is bad, then there's really no difference between that case and the case where the daughter is groomed to like her father.

Not the same thing at all.
A family friend doesn't bear the same responsibility as a father, or step-father.
If you really think there is no difference, you seem to be saying that parenthood bestows no duty on a parent.

[hadespussercats]

She should follow Katherine Harris's example and write a creepy bestseller about the affair-- that should offset legal fees, anyway.

As for legality/morality, there are laws in most American states prohibiting marriage of first cousins, and if I'm not mistaken, laws in all states preventing brothers and sisters from marrying-- most likely because of the connection between marriage and sex, and the connection between incest and freakish inbred offspring. As the daughter's in her early 20's, she should be considered fertile and thus at risk of the aforementioned flipper babies, etc., whether or not she's actually trying to marry her dad.

These laws, which, as I've said, vary from state to state, exist at least in theory to protect the public health-- though the Ewww! factor probably plays in not a little. I can't say I'm a big supporter of the government making its way into private bedrooms, but I'm not a big fan of incest, either-- so I'm not going to put up much of a hue and cry if someone gets in trouble for it.

[Hermit]

Can you not read the piece you've quoted? Where in that did I refer to this case?

You didn't need to. Your statement beginning with "All this stuff about consent and a victimless crime is bollocks" is sweeping enough to include the particular case we're talking about. I suggest you learn to comprehend what you are saying.

[Hermit]

She should follow Katherine Harris's example and write a creepy bestseller about the affair-- that should offset legal fees, anyway.

In Australia this wouldn't work. We have laws here prohibiting you from profiting from your crime. That includes money made from publications, interviews and so on. The government will simply confiscate the proceeds.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

She should follow Katherine Harris's example and write a creepy bestseller about the affair-- that should offset legal fees, anyway.

In Australia this wouldn't work. We have laws here prohibiting you from profiting from your crime. That includes money made from publications, interviews and so on. The government will simply confiscate the proceeds.

I think this is in most states in the US as well.

[mistermack]

Can you not read the piece you've quoted? Where in that did I refer to this case?

You didn't need to. Your statement beginning with "All this stuff about consent and a victimless crime is bollocks" is sweeping enough to include the particular case we're talking about. I suggest you learn to comprehend what you are saying.

When you've just shot yourself in the foot, is it wise to reload, close your eyes, and keep blasting away? I suppose if it makes you feel better.........
.

[Warren Dew]

I don't see the logic of the "grooming" argument, anyway. A daughter could be groomed to like an unrelated friend of her father for her whole life, and if they didn't have a relationship until her age of consent, that would be perfectly legal. If one doesn't think incest is bad, then there's really no difference between that case and the case where the daughter is groomed to like her father.

Not the same thing at all.
A family friend doesn't bear the same responsibility as a father, or step-father.
If you really think there is no difference, you seem to be saying that parenthood bestows no duty on a parent.

In my hypothetical, it's the father doing the grooming in both cases, so it's the same duty we're talking about.

[Hermit]

Can you not read the piece you've quoted? Where in that did I refer to this case?

You didn't need to. Your statement beginning with "All this stuff about consent and a victimless crime is bollocks" is sweeping enough to include the particular case we're talking about. I suggest you learn to comprehend what you are saying.

When you've just shot yourself in the foot, is it wise to reload, close your eyes, and keep blasting away? I suppose if it makes you feel better.........

Is that so? Repeating unfounded assertions won't get you anywhere. You'll do better if you can convince us that "All this stuff about consent and a victimless crime is bollocks" is not connected to the professor's relationship with his daughter that we are discussing here.

[mistermack]

In my hypothetical, it's the father doing the grooming in both cases, so it's the same duty we're talking about.

Oh, right. I didn't get that bit.
I do think incest is bad. So do most people, that's why it's illegal.
I thought that example was a bit contrived, but maybe not. It might happen quite a lot in mormon families, or other cults.
Although it's distasteful, it would be hard to make a case for making it illegal. Hard to prove what's grooming, and what's not, because it's not an unnatural liason that's being encouraged.
In most countries where this might happen regularly, they would certainly frown on incest, so it's not just me that makes a distinction.
Grooming for incest isn't the same as grooming for an arranged marriage, even though I find both repugnant.
I wouldn't say it's the same duty though.
I think you have a duty to refrain from incest with your children, even if they want it. You don't necessarily have a duty to prevent your daughter from relationships with older men. Maybe to give your best advice, and guidance, but people arranging marriages usually think they are doing that.
.