User:Loveislove89/sandbox

Consanguinamory (from Latin consanguinitas, "blood relation", and amor, "love") is the practice of or desire for intimate relationships with an adult relative or family member. It has been described as "Consensual sex or marriage between close family members or relatives.".

People who identify as consanguinamorous hold the view and that family members can form loving and intimate relationships and reject the view that consensual sexual and romantic relations between family members is immoral.

Consanguinamorous arrangements are varied, reflecting the choices and philosophies of the individuals involved, but with recurring themes or values, such as love, intimacy, honesty, integrity, equality, communication, and commitment.

Terminology
The first known usage of the word consanguinamory was on May 22nd, 2011 in a blog post on Full Marriage Equality which has defined the term as "Consensual sex or marriage between close family members or relatives" or as "sexual or romantic love between close genetic or blood relatives", and has defined consanguinamorous as "In or oriented to a romantic, dating, courting, or marital relationship or engaging in sex with a close relative. Consanguineous sex can be expected between those who practice consanguinamory." The word is defined by the blog Consanguinamory as a romantic "love of family members". Yet another definition from a well-known blog in the consanguinamory community defines the term as "Incest between consenting adults, or between consenting minors close in age" or "consensual incest." .

No single definition of "consanguinamory" has universal acceptance. Many individuals would define consanguinamory as a relationship practice or form, while some believe that it should be classified an orientation or identity (like sexual orientation or gender identity). Most definitions agree that consanguinamory includes a practice of or desire for loving relationships between consenting adult family members, including consensual adult incest. Areas of difference arise regarding whether relations between non-blood relatives (such as step-siblings or adopted siblings) count as consanguinamorous, whether consanguinamory includes the concept of marriage, and also whether the term applies exclusively to relations between consenting adults, or if it also applies to between consenting minors who are close in age.

A common question that comes up is whether consanguinamory is just another word for incest. There are some very important differences between the two terms. Consanguinamory includes romantic non-sexual expressions of love, while the legal definition of incest is usually stated in terms of sexual activity. So for example a brother and a sister writing love letters to each other is an example of consanguinamory but not incest. And incest includes acts of rape and child sexual abuse, while consanguinamory is only consensual sexual and romantic activities. So for example a father sexually abusing his daughter is an example of incest and rape but not consanguinamory.

Forms
There are many variants of intimate relationships between family members, and they vary along four main dimensions: consanguinity, blood relatives vs non-blood relative, monogamous vs polyamorous, and, in the case of siblings, whether or not the people were raised in the same family or in different families and then met later in life as adults.

In particular, there are many forms of consanguinamory, for example:
 * cousins relationships - relationships between cousins is the most accepted form of consanguinamory, and cousin marriage is legal in most of the world.
 * aunts, uncles, nieces, or nephews - these are avunculate relationships, and avunculate marriage is legal in many countries
 * GSA siblings - love between genetically related siblings who were separated at birth and met later in life as adults and discover a genetic sexual attraction.
 * non-GSA siblings - love between genetically related siblings who grew up in the same family unit
 * half-siblings - love between half-siblings that share either a father or a mother, but not both
 * adopted and step siblings - love between siblings who are not genetically related but grew up in the same household
 * parent and adult-offspring relationships - love between a mother or father, and his or her adult son or daughter.
 * relationship between three family members - a relationship such as a triad or vee between three siblings, or between two siblings and a parent.
 * relationship between two family members and a third - for example a poly-consanguinamorous relationship between two siblings and a third person who is not related

Cultural diversity
Consanguinamory is closely associated with values, subcultures and ideologies that favor individual freedoms and equality in sexual matters – most notably, those reflected by sexual freedom advocacy groups such as Woodhull Freedom Foundation & Federation, National Coalition for Sexual Freedom and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Consanguinamory, polyamory, and BDSM often face similar challenges (e.g. negotiating the ground rules for unconventional relationships, or the question of coming out to family and friends).

The consanguinamory community is a diverse group of people including people who are LGBT (for example two adult gay brothers who pose no risk to genetic defects from inbreeding), people who are polyamorous (for example a triad between a man, a woman, and her mother), as well as people who are into kink and BDSM activities.

Religion
The Christian Bible has a mixed view as to whether or not it permits consanguinamory, or consensual incest. In Genesis, Abraham married his half sister (Genesis 20:12) and was not condemned for this. And both Issac and Jacob married relatives (Genesis 22:20; 24:4; 24:43). Abraham’s nephew had two sons by his own daughters while drunk (Genesis 19:30-35) and was later condemned (Genesis 49:4). There are other cases of incest in the Bible that are condemned as well, such as when Amnon, one of David's sons, raped his half-sister (2 Samuel 13:7-14), however this is not a condemnation of consanguinamory, since the sexual act was not consensual.

Laws and Marriage
Laws regarding relationships, marriage, and consensual sexual activity between adult relatives vary considerably between jurisdictions, and depends on the type of activity and the nature of the family relationship of the parties involved, as well as the sex of the parties. Most jurisdictions permit cousins to marry, and many also permit uncle-niece and aunt-nephew marriages. Sibling marriage and marriage between parents and adult children are not allowed in most jurisdictions. In most places, sexual activity between consenting adult family members is illegal. In other countries, consanguinamorous relationships are permitted, including in the Netherlands, France, Slovenia and Spain. Sweden is the only country that allows marriage between half-siblings and they must seek government counseling before marriage.

Values

 * Fidelity and loyalty: Many consanguinamorists are monogamous and define loyalty as committing to only one partner (at a time), and having no other sexual or relational partners during such commitment. Some consanguinamorists are polyamorous and have the values of fidelity and loyalty within polyamory, such as being honest and forthcoming with their partners with respect to their relational lives, and keeping to the commitments they have made in those relationships.


 * Communication and negotiation: Because there is no "standard model" for consanguinamorous relationships, and reliance upon common expectations may not be realistic, consanguinamorists often advocate explicitly negotiating with their partner to establish the terms of their relationships, and often emphasize that this should be an ongoing process of honest communication and respect. Consanguinamorists will usually take a pragmatic approach to their relationships; many accept that sometimes they and their partner will make mistakes and fail to live up to these ideals, and that communication is important for repairing any breaches.


 * Trust, honesty, dignity, and respect: Most consanguinamorists emphasize respect, trust, and honesty. While consanguinamorists usually cannot come out and tell others about their relationship, due to the criminalization of consensual adult incest, most believe in being open and honest with their partners.

Specific issues affecting relationships
One of the most common issues affecting consanguinamorous relationships is discrimination from society and fear of being found out. Consensual adult incest relationships between siblings and also between parents and their adult offspring is prohibited in most countries, and so people in these relationships usually need to keep their relationship a secret. The need for secrecy, the effects of discrimination, and fear of being found out sometimes cause mental health issues for people practicing consanguinamory.

If found out, people in consanguinamorous relationships, especially those in relationships with immediate family members, are sometimes sent to jail and sometimes lose custody of their children.

Research
Research on consanguinamory is currently very limited due to the stigma associated with incest, including consensual adult incest. This makes it hard to get academic funding to conduct research on consensual adult incest. In June 2017, an informal online survey of 159 individuals in the consanguinamory community was completed. Most of the respondents to the survey were college-educated, about half of the respondents had been in a sibling relationship, almost half were in a parent/adult offspring relationship, and about a fifth of the respondents had been in a relationship with a cousin. Regarding these relationships, about a third of the respondents had been in their consanguinamorous relationship for 1-5 years, about a third had been in their relationship for under a year, and about a third had been in their relationship for over 5 years, with some maintaining a consanguinamorous relationship for 20 or more years. The majority of people in these consanguinamorous relationships did not have children, and those that did tended to have children with someone who wasn't related. The majority of respondents described their consanguinamorous relationship as "loving and healthy", while some described their relationship as "loving but sometimes dysfunctional". When asked how they felt about being consanguinamorous, the overwhelming majority responded that they were comfortable with being consanguinamorous and wouldn’t change it even if they could, and felt there was nothing wrong with being consanguinamorous.

Criticisms
In Vice is Nice But Incest is Best: The Problem of a Moral Taboo, Vera Bergelson describes five reasons traditionally used as justification for the criminalization of incest, and variations of them are used as criticism of consanguinamorous relationships as well:


 * 1) Respecting Religion and the Universal Tradition
 * 2) Avoiding Genetic Abnormalities
 * 3) Protecting the Family Unit
 * 4) Preventing Sexual Abuse and Sexual Imposition
 * 5) Precluding Immorality

Respecting Religion and the Universal Tradition
Consanguinamorous relationship are often criticized as being against the teachings of the Bible, or are said to violate other religions' teachings, and therefore should not be permitted. To the degree that this rationale is used to try to justify laws today, it is not acceptable since it goes against the Establishment Clause, which prohibits making any laws "respecting an establishment of religion". The argument from religion is rarely used by itself today, but rather its often used to underscore the "universality of incest taboo." However, the ban on incest is not universally taboo, as Robin Fox points out that there has been at least 96 societies which have permitted sexual relations between family members, including marriage.

Avoiding Genetic Abnormalities
One of the most common reasons used for the ban of consanguinamorous relationships is that the ban prevents inbreeding, which can have a higher rate of genetic defects in offspring. Supporters of consanguinamory argue that this line of reasoning has several flaws:

First, if this were the reason to ban consensual incest, then the ban would be overly broad since it doesn't just apply to reproduction, and many consanguinamorous couples choose not to have children, and use contraception to avoid having them.

Second, incest laws apply not only to blood relatives, but also to step-siblings and adopted relatives, in which case inbreeding does not have any higher risk of genetic defects than in the general population.

Third, its not at all clear that inbreeding presents a threat to society. Because of the Westermarck effect, the number of people who are open to consanguinamory is quite low, and many consanguinamorous couples choose not to have children from sexual reproduction with each other. In addition, the number of serious genetic disorders associated with inbreeding is quite limited.

Fourth, there is the question of who exactly is harmed by inbreeding. Intuitively, one may say the child is harmed, however this is debatable given the "non-identity problem". Suppose a child named Frank has been born of inbreeding and happens to have a genetic defect that degrades his quality of life. This raises the question: Could the parents have done anything better for Frank? If Frank's mother had had sex with a different person, she would have had a different child, and Frank wouldn't have existed. For Frank, no alternative was possible - he could not have failed to have these genetic defects.

Finally, under no other circumstances does the law penalize people for producing genetically defective offspring. As Bergelson writes:

"We do not require people to be tested for genetic abnormalities as a condition of granting them a marriage license. We do not prohibit procreation by people known to possess a defective gene. A law criminalizing child bearingby the deaf-mute or by dwarf partners would most certainly cause public outrage. More-over, the early prenatal diagnostics today often give prospective parents the option of aborting an abnormal fetus. If they choose not to exercise that option, they act with a much higher degree of subjective responsibility than an incestuous couple having unprotected sex.""

And Johann Hari writes: "We should, however, be wary of damning incest on these grounds alone. To prohibit two people from having sex because their offspring may be "defective" or "inferior" is to adopt the standpoint of a eugenicist."

Protecting the Family Unit
Another common criticism of consanguinamory is that it threatens the nuclear family:

"The essentials of a nuclear family are a man and a woman in a relation of sexual intimacy and bearing a responsibility for the upbringing of the woman’s children. This institution is the principal context for socialization of the individual. A critical component of that process is the channeling of the individual’s erotic impulses into socially acceptable patterns."

According to this line of reasoning, prohibiting consensual incest is justified because it preserves the nuclear family by preventing sex rivalries and jealousies within the family unit, and by ensuring suitable role models it prepares children for future familial responsibilities.

While it's true that sex rivalries and jealousies can be destructive to the family, so can other non-sexual rivalries and jealousies. And the question of who gets the family inheritance can be equally destructive. And divorce is almost by definition destructive to the family unit, yet divorce is not illegal. There has been a long history of rivalries within families throughout history, including those documented in the Bible, and yet all of these have not destroyed the family as a social institution.

Next, if two siblings chose to have sex and form a relationship, sending them off to prison for years is also very destructive to the family.

Preventing Sexual Abuse and Sexual Imposition
Another criticism of consanguinamorous relationships is that they are a form of sexual abuse, or often have a power imbalance that makes them not truly consensual. Consanguinamorous relationships are by definition loving and intimate relationships between consenting adults, in which no sexual abuse exists, so the first part of this criticism clearly isn't valid.

The second part of the argument is usually explained by saying that an adult parent can still have some power over his or her adult son or daughter, such as when the adult child is still financially dependent on the parent, and thus an intimate relationship between them is not truly consensual, and therefore incest should be illegal. However this fails to account for the many consanguinamorous relationships between siblings close in age, or twins, in which no power imbalance exists.

Additionally, the law doesn't forbid relationships between other adults with a large age gap, or between a very wealthy person or very poor person, or between one person who works full time and another person who is financially dependent on him or her, or between a very strong person and very weak person. If legislators tried to introduce a law that would prevent all new marriages except for marraiges between people who were within a few years of age, who were from the same social class, who both proved they were financially independent, and who had close to the same physical strength and intelligence, there would be a public outcry.

Precluding Immorality
A final criticism of consanguinamory is that its simply immoral. While the majority of people currently view consensual incest as immoral, many people view it as permissible and have strong arguments to justify their views. There is a wide variety of cultures and moral views in the world, and people who view consanguinamory as immoral can simply choose not to pursue consanguinamorous relationships. The question of whether the morals of the majority is a legitimate basis for the criminalization of consanguinamorous relationships is a legal question.

The enforcement of morals through laws as for a long time been viewed as a valid function of the state, however it has also been criticized as going against the liberal tradition in both principle and in practice, since it requires infringing on a citizen's liberty and privacy. By the early 21st century, views on criminalizing private conduct on the grounds of immorality reached a turning point, as Bergelson writes:

"In Lawrence v. Texas, the United States Supreme Court held that a Texas statute prohibiting homosexual sodomy was unconstitutional insofar as it applied to the private conduct of two consenting adults. The court admitted that for centuries homo-sexual conduct was condemned as immoral, and for a number of people it is still completely unacceptable. Yet, these considerations were held to be insufﬁcient for criminal prosecution: even if anti-sodomy laws are grounded in ‘‘profound and deep convictions accepted as ethical and moral principles’’ by many people, the majority may not ‘‘use the power of the State to enforce these views on the whole society through operation of the criminal law.’’"

This says that even if the majority of people view something as immoral, this is not sufficient justification to use the power of the State to enforce these moral views on others through the criminal law. And in Lawrence v. Texas, Justice Kennedy wrote the following regarding the case about the homosexual couple:

"The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. … The case does involve two adults who, with full and mutual consent from each other, engaged in sexual practices common to a homosexual lifestyle. The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime."

And Justice Scalia wrote the following on the decision to end the prohibition of homosexual acts:

"The Texas statute undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are ‘‘immoral and unacceptable,’’—the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality, and obscenity. Bowers held that this was a legitimate state interest. The Court today reaches the opposite conclusion … This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation."

Zhou writes that "careful examination of Lawrence’s reasoning reveals that sexual intimacy must also encompass sexual relationships between first-degree relatives."

Thus supporters of consanguinamory argue that there is legal precedent for not enforcing the morals of the majority on everyone, especially in cases regarding what two consenting adults chose to do in private lives, and so even if many people view consanguinamorous relationships as immoral, that is not a justified basis for the criminalization of loving relationships between consenting adults who are related.