He woody.. Don't get me wrong! I am writing about adults here, not minors! You are writing about child abuse and off course that is and should be forbidden everywhere.
I think this thread skewered way off topic, and I’m not going to try to fix it. I think when someone show’s an interest in an incest movie or story, it’s only fantasy. If there is a niche for a genre and the demand is high enough it will be perused. The legality is the only deterrent. And speaking of foreign legality : 1. “France dropped incest from the penal code under Napoleon - 200 years ago. But siblings may not marry” 2. “Sweden is the only country in Europe which allows marriage between siblings who share a parent.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6424337.stm 3. If you believe in Adam and Eve, where did there grandkids come from????
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Jan 13 2010 : 10:42PM
Is there not enough porn and categories on the shelves these days or have we become so desensetized as a porn viewing community that we need to justify incest and incest porn. What's next "I Cumfarted Daddy into Mommy?" or "I DP'd Daddy and Granddaddy" or how about "Mommy Fucks Her Sons while Daddy Anals the Girls" or how about "Family Reunion Bukakke?" I'm pretty open minded, but jeez, can't we be happy with keeping it at a Step Mommies and Step Daddies level?
One of the posters, above, in response to something that I wrote, claims that incest (and, by extension, incest porn) is "morally and legally wrong". As it happens, I don't care at all what someone else supposes might be "morally wrong" about some sex acts (or porn) being done by consenting adults. "Moral wrong", as applied to the sex acts of consenting adults, is merely an abstract concept in the eye of the beholder, and I completely reject the relevance of anyone's opinion of the "morality" of sex (or porn) being done by consenting adults. So some guy thinks that some consentual sex is "morally wrong"--so what? So billions of people agree with that guy--so what? There should be no infringement whatever of sex, or porn, between consenting adults, period. I do not accept the notion that there should be any infringement of the right of consenting adults to do whatever sex--or make whatever porn--that they want, providing that the performers are exclusively consenting adult human beings. That politicians--those vicious parasites--have enacted statutes that make ANY sex between consenting adults illegal is an outrage, to me. As a result of legislation, incest and incest porn involving consenting adults are "legally wrong", as a poster in this thread has noted repeatedly. Well, so what? To me, such statutes are repulsive. I think that such laws should be resisted, ridiculed, and repealed. I totally reject the notion that politicians should have the right to determine what porn depicting consenting adults should be available to me. It is highly likely that I am the only poster in this thread who has been prosecuted for the performance of consensual (as it happens, non-incest heterosexual) sex, so please excuse my intense animosity toward politicians and their employees. On the other hand, I am not asking you to excuse my disgust that some guy supposes that his personal notion of morality--concerning sex done by consenting adults--matters in any context whatever.
Roscoe, I am certainly trying to "justify incest porn" on the grounds that politicians, those creepy parasites, ought not to have any right to determine what porn depicting consenting adults is available to me. I don't want politicians to have any rights, whatever, to limit my access to porn depicting consenting adults. I completely reject the notion that anyone--on the public payroll or not--ought to have the right to determine what porn I can consume, providing that the porn depicts only consenting adult human beings. That incest porn is not to your taste--I totally understand that. On the other hand, I am not at all accepting of the notion that someone else's (or everyone else's) opinions about porn depicting consenting adults should have any legal standing whatever.
On the subject, may I say I'm a fan of the two Taylor Twins lesbian scenes I've seen so far. Of course I know they are really not twins, just acting, but thought they looked hot. On another note, did you hear of the incest story in the UK which threw the whole, parents wanting to remain anonymous when they adopt out their kids debate? Apparently a guy and a girl met, liked each other alot and found out they were both orphans as kids. Anyway they got married, had two kids and finally after years both found out... that they had the same parents and are brother and sister! Anyhow, both went to divorce court and are devastated and trying to find a way out of the mess. The same article mentioned something similar happening in Europe. It raised the whole debate of orphans being allowed to know their birth parents. BrekkyDJ (that guys in Australia)
Gotta agree with this. First: Holly and Cumfiesta and whomever else are NOT the "moral barometer" of porn or ADT for that matter. Personal opinions are fine... but I take offense to the objective nature of such statements. Following the "consenting adult" rule above,... I could really care less what people do or watch or think, I find really nothing wrong with it. Avoid harming others, that's simple enough isn't it? As far as incest goes... I question the "morality" statement. This is more of a physiology issue in my understanding. Hemophelia and other issues began to result due to incest practices of European royalty and I believe that is why it has been outlawed. So with that in mind... I'd say if you wanna screw your sister and she wants to screw you, have at it.... but use birth control or you could violate that rule above and bring a (possibly disabled) child into the world who may very well be vilified by a society comprised of people who like to shove THEIR morality upon others. I'd also argue that historically (in the West) a female daughter was a liability in many cultures. You had to pay the groom to take her (at least 3 chickens lol) as a "weak" mouth to feed was transferring hands. SO in that regard, as a father of such an age and culture, you would NOT want your son to marry your daughter as the payment would balance to zero... Just a random thought.
Excellent question lol. This question ultimately does indeed prove that certain interpretations of Genesis (the bible) are impossible... If we all came from Adam and Eve... well, we'd all be pretty damn ugly laiden with so many diseases and we couldn't have made it 6,000 years (as literal interpretations of the bible require humanity to be that age). However, if you really KNOW your history of Christianity and the Bible, you'd know that the genetic mutation issue is not really an issue... but incest would have to certainly remain a huge part of the beginning of humanity. This is why: There are actually TWO creations in Genesis. The remnants of this are still visible today but most Christians are ignorant or deluded about the truth of it. There is a creation by the "Elohim" which is the group of gods (originally this was a polytheistic religion) and there is a creation by the chief of Gods, Yahweh (later became "Jehovah"). Yahweh has his little science experiment in the Garden of Eden and does a whole different creation there. The elohim creation is first, yahweh's second. This is confirmed by the fact (remaining evidence of it in King James and most other versions) that the creation story is told two times in Genesis yet offers differences. In one, animals are created before man, in the other the reverse... and so forth. Back to the point. (and this is another piece of evidence of the two creations): Cain is banished from the Garden for killing Abel, what happens to him? He goes to "Nod" and marries someone from "the other people". Who are these "other people"? They are those people created by the Elohim (other gods). So clearly the bible (whether it meant to or not) suggests that human life begins with two separate gene pools. This is just interesting to me, I think the entire book is rubbish myself and have confirmed that I could get all the "good things" out of the bible (like turn the other cheek, love your enemy as much as you do your "lord", etc.) from children's books. Aesop's fables has all the morality you need yet does not have all the murder, mayhem, and pornography that the bible does lol. Anyway, just my thoughts and I figured someone might find my addition to this thread interesting.. Plus, the whole "I'm moral and you're not!!" discussion is boring me.... :)
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
I find it fascinating that some of the same posters who DEFEND racism in porn want to ban incest in porn. None of you holds any moral high ground. Incest is immoral, and illegal. However, faking incest is not illegal. If the act depicted is legal, there is no reason to ban it.
None of that matters, the flood knocked out all of humanity except for Noah's family.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 15 2010 : 1:10AM
As shocking as this may be to you, incest between adults is not necessarily beillegal, based on a recent Supreme Court decision. Check my previous post.
Edited by - Clam Digger on 1/15/2010 1:15:31 AM
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 15 2010 : 1:19AM
I don't think that this is a scientific certainty. As an after thought, sex between a brother and a sister, for example, may not lead to pregnancy, if birth control is used. Edited by - Clam Digger on 1/15/2010 1:21:52 AM
Actually, Lawrence vs. Texas may be a ground for challenging the illegality of incest but that's far from being done. It would take some attorney with HUGE cojones to take such a matter to the SCOTUS... and then even more huge ones to the SCOTUS Justices to rule for that.
Awesome 'incest' scene in this movie...scene 2 featuring Aurora Snow and Lexi Belle...parody of "The Simple Life" https://www.adultdvdtalk.com/price_search/search_item.dlt/sku=102431/spunkd-the-movie.htm
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 15 2010 : 9:48AM
I agree it would be dicey, but first a prosecutor would need to bring up charges. To do that witnesses would be needed. I'm not sure that would be easy. Considering Lawrence, they might just pass on it. However, if charges were brought, I'm sure a guilty verdict would be a slam dunk, locally. I would not be surprised that an appellate court would over turn the verdict and eventually SCOTUS might be asked to rule on it and I think they would decline, considering their decision on Lawrence. Anyway that's what my crystal ball says..
Good point, I guess the "other people" are gone anyway. But again, no question that by Genesis account, we're all the product of mass incest--three cheers for christianity!
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 19 2010 : 12:31PM
^We can't forget Lot and his mischievous daughters.
While borderline OT, this is interesting to me. Thanks for pointing it out. Do you have any reference books you could point me to that might discuss it further? (I don't buy into the whole religion thing, either -- but I am fascinated by its evolution -- pardon the play on words.)
I find the "it's illegal" positions in this thread to be a bit selective. Up until a few years ago, sodomy was illegal in a good number of places in the U.S.--as mentioned. Sex outside of marriage was (may well still be--not sure if Lawrence v. Texas knocked these statutes down, too) illegal in some places in the U.S. Both of these items are routinely included in adult films and have been since their inception. So...as a caution...I would be careful in saying that anything that is illegal shouldn't be filmed, sold, etc. I have no real interest in incest, but I don't think that the act of filming it itself, buying films with it included, or possessing it should be illegal -- provided that we are talking about consenting adults. Porn films have featured participants doing illegal acts--at least in many of the places where said films were sold--since the beginning. In terms of whether the act itself should be illegal or not--this is more dicey on public health issues due to potential birth defects that may result in wanted (or unwanted) pregnancies. Even birth control isn't 100%. But, how does this legitimately translate to homosexual relationships (i.e., gays and lesbians)? Other than the "ewwwww" factor -- the factor -- which is clearly there for a large number of people (myself included), it is a trickier issue than many people give it credit for. How credible is the "ewwww" factor -- which, in essence, is "morality" -- if it were left to stand all on its own? (i.e., the cases of gays and lesbians) It's also interesting how the "ewwwww" factor has a tendency to fade (for many) when it involves two hot twins involved in a lesbian act...or perhaps even the scenes involving half-sisters. I don't pretend to have all of the answers, but it is (can be) an intriguing conversation.
thats what I thought, twin sisters =hot i thought that was a pretty common fantasy and if its adults its cool with me. Its "morally' wrong means nothing
With respect to the exalted concern about legality expressed by several posters in this thread, an outfit called BelAmi is advertising a dvd in which brothers Milo Peters and Elijah Peters have sex with each other. The tag line on the advertising is "The ultimate taboo is finally broken!" So much for the notion that no "studio" would knowingly produce a dvd depicting incest. And, what about that dvd in which Lanny Barbie has sex with her step-sister Kimberly? That was produced by a major U. S. porn studio. Did they get prosecuted for it? Of course not.
Some years ago, in a Kristen Bjorn video shot in the Dominican Republic called "Caribbean Beat", the Mendez twins had sex with each other. Was anybody prosecuted for that? Of course not. The dvd is still on offer from the producer, and, to my knowledge, it has never been under attack from politicians and/or their employees. In view of its non-traditional aspirations on so many policy fronts, it is highly unlikely that the Obama regime will probe into porn fetish niches to look for something and someone to prosecute, providing that the performers are consenting adults.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 25 2010 : 12:36AM
You bring up an interesting point that also serves as a reason that "consensual" adult incest is not be against the law, especially after Lawrence v. Texas. Homosexual relations between 2 siblings does not pass the public health nonsense as procreation can never be the result. There is no basis to believe that the offspring of a brother and sister are anymore genetically inferior then the parents already are. It can be said that all humans have genetic deficiencies, that are passed down to offspring, even when parents are not related. Parental sex with a minor child would be statutory rape and of course criminal, in and of itself. Parental sex with an adult child, though icky, does not create genetically inferior offspring, beyond deficiencies that already exists in the parents. It is highly doubtful that real incest movies would ever be made or marketed by legitimate porn companies. Hey, it's just porn.
Hell, even Private shot several scenes with some Eastern-European twins doing each other. Jacco
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 25 2010 : 8:15PM
I think links or sources would be in order for such claims, and I don't mean just studio press releases either. An example from Rogreviews kind of blows Jade's and Nyomi's so-called sister hood out of the water.DVD Review Whoriental Sex Academy 3
^^^ Clam, I'm asking, because the stills that I saw from it had a Vivid stamp, but I was never able to find the actual DVD title. In the stills, Lanny and Kimberly were doing various things with each other.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 25 2010 : 10:24PM
There have got to be several threads around here about false labeling on box covers. Why on Earth would anybody believe nonsense like this? How many mother/son/daughter/father/sister/brother box covers do people need to see before they understand that their chains are being pulled? Here's a big surprise: HEY IT'S JUST PORN!
^^^ Clam, the stills that I have in mind were ones on a free website, if you get my drift. Of course, they could have been faked, and the Vivid reference that I recall could also have been counterfeit. All of that said, does anyone recall seeing a dvd with Kimberly Franklin and Lanny Barbie doing things with each other?
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jan 26 2010 : 12:37AM
[ invalid url ] IAFD is a great resource. Notice none of the reviewers of any of the scenes in which they both appear, mentions that they are sisters. In one review by Don Houston, Kimberly Franklin is referred to as Lanny's "stripper buddy."
^^^ Thank you, Clam, for this reference. The dvd that I had in mind in my previous posts in this thread is "59 Seconds", by Vivid. The reviewer's "stripper pal" comment has to do, I think, with the characters portrayed by Lanny and Kimberly. That reviewers have not mentioned that these two are step-sisters isn't very significant to me; I got that information from some other source. Was that information incorrect? Does anyone know if Lanny Barbie and Kimberly Franklin are or aren't step-sisters?
And on that fateful day, the hatred consumed me... 1423 Posts 3/09
Posted - Jan 26 2010 : 12:20PM
They're [ invalid url ]. Look around the net for more sources. There's more saying 'half' than 'step'. Looks like Hollywood Woody will have to leave Vivid due to its immoral output. All it takes is 59 Seconds...
Introducing Kalani Luana
Posted - Jan 13 2010 : 2:50PM
factor -- which is clearly there for a large number of people (myself included), it is a trickier issue than many people give it credit for.
there would have been a war on here.lol