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

[RogueKnightUK]

Laws are generally written for a reason - especially given that getting a law passed is a time consuming process that has an enormous cost of some kind - even if only the opportunity cost of what other important things could have been done with those resources.

In the case of incest there are two main things that the laws are trying to be a common-sense solution to. The first is the very real, very serious risks of inbreeding. In some countries their laws regarding incest stop there, only forbidding blood relatives from any relationship or encounter that might lead to pregnancy. However, the second aspect is that of influence, of a person who has had access to a minor being able to 'groom' that child, effectively brainwashing them, and thus, effectively, statutory rape. UK incest laws cover this aspect too, and if you have ever been the step-parent, guardian, or otherwise had parental levels of influence/control over a person, then you are forbidden from ever having a relationship with that person in their lifetime.

So, to UK laws and all similar legal systems, both of the scenarios presented in the OP and the poll (A and B) are absolutely and unequivocally incest, and both are illegal.

I mention the illegal part for very good reason - when determining what makes for a good story, most of the time the characters being believable, not complete morons, is a part of that. These days, most Western countries have a sex offenders register, and having an incestuous relationship gets you on that, right alongside the kiddie-fiddlers, granny-rapists, and goat-felchers. When being on that for life is what you can look forward to if you survive being imprisoned in the sex offender wings, well, the sentence for incest is worse in real terms than for multiple murders.

A story would need to properly explain why someone would be willing to risk all of that for their forbidden love, or else be set in some quite different society, before the story will be able to be anything but a farcical comedy. Not that there is anything at all wrong with farce or satire - comedy can make for great games. But if you'd wanted a story based on drama, well, without belief in the reality of the characters there can be no drama at all.

 

[Exu]

For me, incest is a situation that can only happen between true relatives/family members. That being said, and considering family is not only, nor even primarly a matter of being blood-related, I think what defines incest is the dual nature of the relationship portrayed. If it involves, for example a pair of sibilings, each one of them needs to keep being a brother/sister in addition to lover in relation to the other one.

Scenario A and scenario B are equally potential incest scenarios, but not just by themselves. Instead, they are the opposite faces of the excuses commonly used to justify the taboos associated with incest.

One being: 'Hey, it's not my fault I fell in love with my [father/mother/sister/brother/auntie/nephew/cousin/whatever] or that I desire him/her cause it happened before I was aware they were my ""real family"". That's scenario A for you, gentlefolks which translates as: I know I'm breaking the 'genetics' taboo but I don't identify them as my family cause I wasn't raised among them and that's my excuse.

And the other: 'Hey, I've always lived with these people and felt bad about desiring them and thus I've been repressing those feelings but now I'm aware that they are not my ""real family"" I can start viewing them differently cause come on, we're not related, no genetics involved, and that's my excuse. That's scenario B for you, gentlefolks.

In scenario A, the sense of family may exist or may not, but the character thinks anyways that isn't important enough. In scenario B, the MC may trick him/herself into denying the kinship because of the lack of blood relation. But if the characters are denying their family bonds to pursue a romantic/sexual relationship can we really talk about incest? I don't think so.

Either proposed scenario can become incest, but keep in mind when a character is put in a lover dynamic with a relative, you must preserve the previous dynamic. It has to be an addition, not a replacement. Otherwise is no incest.

 

[Xalenda]

I’ll take option C - you’ve lived with and grown up with the family members, and start to realize that, despite what others think, you quite literally cannot find anyone better.

It’s not just about body type or looks or emotions and the in-jokes; it’s also in the way you feel so absolutely safe with them. You know that they will never abandon you, and always have your back. It’s the way that they know your idiosyncrasies and can poke fun, without being malicious.

It’s comforting, having someone around who can’t judge you, because you likewise cannot judge them. You know everything about them, and they you, and you still find happiness in even the worst times.

 

[megaplayboy10k]

Biological, half-siblings, step-relations, adoptive relations, and foster relations can all feel like close family, but in game terms, you have to spend a minute establishing that close kinship, not just sexual tension.

 

[Deleted member 229118]

I like my incest the way I like most of my genres, believable. The biggest hurdle for me is convincing me about the relationship. And by believable, I don't necessarily mean realistic. You can be exposed to some chemical that makes you uncontrollably horny and you simply screw the nearest person at the time, that's fine. I'm not saying I won't play a game with an unbelievable plot either, I'm just saying when it comes to preferences, that's how I prefer it. If the crux of the story is the MC finally saw his mother/sister naked in the shower for the first time and now they have to fuck, I'll roll my eyes. <Insert sigh, unzip> So somewhat regardless of the blood relationship, I want to know why these two people are fucking. That's just me.

I know what you mean.
I tent to prefer it if the mc starts "normal" and gets more and more corrupt over time.
Instead of wanting to have sex with his family because he saw them naked i find it far more enjoyable if the mc got so high on power over woman that he start target his own family because it being forbidden just makes it feel so much more fun.
Granted the game shoud probley end before the lust for power enters rule 7 territory.

 

[Sphere42]

To me both are incest in their own way but not under one definition. Option A is emotionally meaningless but carries the risk of severe inbreeding especially between siblings from the same parents (e.g. Luke and Leia) and thus having children together needs to be avoided. Option B meanwhile is genetically harmless but emotionally charged, especially if there are unequal power dynamics involved (i.e. the "btw ur adopted" parents as opposed to similar-age "siblings" or "cousins" who have already established an equitable relationship assuming each other to be related by blood).

I'm not really "into" incest in itself but would prefer scenario B. Both because it does not leave any unfortunate implications to potential happy endings (read: inbred babies) and because I see far more options to have an interesting relationship evolution and dynamic compared to basically tossing "buut we're faaaaaamiwee!" into what would otherwise amount to a regular old meeting between strangers.

 

[Booki]

If it is blood related, it is incest.

If it is not blood related, it is inseki.

 

[215303j]

it’s also in the way you feel so absolutely safe with them. You know that they will never abandon you, and always have your back.

It's a good point, but it's also a double edged sword. If someone confessing their feelings but it turns out not to be mutual, it's really awkward and there is no way to avoid each other like you could with any random girl/guy. And if the relationship doesn't work out in the end, there is hardly a way out. I think those are bigger IRL drawbacks of incest than any genetical concerns, which with modern day testing and contraceptives could be manageable. But unfortunately neither of these points are ever addressed in porn games...

 

[khumak]

Kind of a strange poll. If they're blood related, it's incest. If they aren't, it's not. Doesn't matter if they were separated at birth or not. Doesn't matter if they know they're related or not, although finding out after they fuck could make for an interesting plot twist.

I do think there is a similar taboo aspect to step brother/sister/mother/father/etc but I would say not as strong as a true blood relation and for a step relationship to really have any taboo I think it pretty much requires that you spent all or most of the "childhood years" together. For a blood relation I think it strengthens the taboo bit isn't required.

I like both, but incest isn't really my thing so I don't really care either way. I do prefer incest to the sanitized "landlady/roommate/childhood friend/exchange student/configurable nickname" thing though. I realize people probably only do that to get around the censorship police, but even if I got nothing out of the incest taboo I would still apply the incest patch just because it sounds so stupid for people to be hung up on on why they can't bang their landlady or whatever. The story is obviously written as an incest story and it just doesn't really make sense when you get the sanitized version.

 

[Fliptoynk]

Real incest porn is about the taboos in kinship and it neither give a rat's ass about law nor babies with shrunk heads, and oversized lips and jaw imho.

Good luck with the moral fuzz

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

It's a good point, but it's also a double edged sword.

I believe it was Plato that said that the unseen element to incest- assuming it to be blood related- is that it can create "too much love", his words. Have you ever heard of too much love? Kinda makes you think.

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

For all you Incest fans out there, I highly recommend the book Choice of a Mate by Anthony M. Ludovici. Very long book, with a very in depth analysis of the old colloquial term for incest- Cosanguinity. For clarity's sake, no I don't mean the meaning behind the word, but the act. He makes a stunning case for the use of incest as a way to clean out the genetic closet of several generations of built up (harmful) mutation. And yes, he shuts down the argument for human immuno-diversity early on claiming that in essence all genetic mutations accounted for by diverse strains of DNA had already been reached by the 1850's.
He was also the first to claim that since we have perfected the art of inbreeding cattle and domestic pets, why can we not turn that knowledge back on to us?

 

[Fliptoynk]

Meh, dun worry we're all just playin a vn with a vanilla sex labeled incest in'ere. We're not going to stretch our nagging spoiled sisters when we feel platonic about them, right?


uhm, right.... ?

 

[HarveyD]

Both scenarios are incest for the Character.

But only A is for the Player.

Step (or adopted) relations are incest due to the fact the character has spent their entire lives viewing these people as their family. They might aswell be blood related for all they care. The player obviously doesn't have the same attachment to those characters at the start of the story.

Blood relatives you're only just meeting also end up feeling like strangers to the player unless written well. If the characters aren't acting like family then what's the point of the incest.

 

[215303j]

I believe it was Plato that said that the unseen element to incest- assuming it to be blood related- is that it can create "too much love", his words. Have you ever heard of too much love? Kinda makes you think.

It does make one think indeed...

For all you Incest fans out there, I highly recommend the book Choice of a Mate by Anthony M. Ludovici.

I have just found it:

You must be registered to see the links

and read a few snippets.

Interesting reading for sure, and I'm planning to read all of it.

In the 1930's, I believe it was such not an outlandish concept. After WW2 however, eugenics has been in a bad position.
Maybe this will change again, but maybe eugenics will simply be replaced by direct genetic engineering and/or cybernetics.

However, concerning the present discussion in this specific forum, I think the question should be "is it hot?" rather than "is it wise?".

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

However, concerning the present discussion in this specific forum, I think the question should be "is it hot?" rather than "is it wise?".

Yes, maybe not the best thread to discuss the rational side of incest. Instead of creating a new thread I just thought about name dropping. I'm a big fan of Ludovici myself and sometimes I just insert him into any conversation about the subject since he has had the biggest influence on me concerning that particular taboo to date.
He's not just "that guy" who made incest seem less crazy, but he's written about a lot of other subjects that I research consistently.
Didn't seem to bother anyone either so no apology is forthcoming

 

[gunderson]

My dudes? People not having IRL incest babies is eugenics, just the boring kind where you try to minimize how fucked up the babies turn out rather than making the world 100% white or whatever. Also, purebred pets are all kinds of messed up both health-wise and in terms of intelligence. If you want a healthy, smart pet, your best odds come with a mixed breed.

Anyway, back on topic! Legally, scenarios A and B are both considered incest in real life, and that's not relevant in the slightest because this is fictional porn. Scenario A is hotter because it's both harder to find porn of this these days (because of the scaaaaaary ones and zeros saying that fictional sex partners are related by their fictional blood rather than just by fictional marriage) and because it's fiction about a more taboo subject than step relatives fucking.

Which is as it should be. After all, this is fantasy! The whole point is to go big. A good power fantasy isn't just to dream that you get a promotion to assistant manager from fry cook, but that you're the king of the world and can do all kinds of shit. Similarly, a good sexual fantasy is doing something you really aren't supposed to do IRL, not just something that is kinda frowned upon, like creampieing your mom after winning the lottery and retiring to an island someplace to screw her perpetually hot older ass off while having a billion perfect and not-fucked-up kids.

And it's fine to have these fantasies, because as long as you know the difference between fiction and reality, they have no IRL consequences in and of themselves!

 

[Freudian Iconoclast]

My dudes? People not having IRL incest babies is eugenics, just the boring kind where you try to minimize how fucked up the babies turn out rather than making the world 100% white or whatever. Also, purebred pets are all kinds of messed up both health-wise and in terms of intelligence. If you want a healthy, smart pet, your best odds come with a mixed breed.

And it's fine to have these fantasies, because as long as you know the difference between fiction and reality, they have no IRL consequences in and of themselves!

This is kind of why I mentioned the book earlier. The circumstance of botched incest offspring is mainly due to people who have diseases somewhere in their DNA and incest simply accelerates the appearance of those mutations which could take a century or more to surface. Down Syndrome is a great example of this. An incurable genetic disease that occurs when two apparently healthy adults conceive and nature comes knocking. I'm not arguing that incest is appropriate 100% of the time, in fact it's a last resort when it comes to restoring disintegrating DNA. I believe professor Ludovici even argues that cancer itself is the result of mass propagation of aberrant DNA which means to cull genetic dead-ends with cold efficiency.
So which is worse- a horde of mutants with incurable diseases lurking in their genes and hospitals filled to the brim with terminal children, or genetically balanced people who are allowed to continue reproducing while at the same time quarantining those who are unfit. Sometimes you have to be ruthless, because nature won't change for us.

 

[gunderson]

This is kind of why I mentioned the book earlier. The circumstance of botched incest offspring is mainly due to people who have diseases somewhere in their DNA and incest simply accelerates the appearance of those mutations which could take a century or more to surface. Down Syndrome is a great example of this. An incurable genetic disease that occurs when two apparently healthy adults conceive and nature comes knocking. I'm not arguing that incest is appropriate 100% of the time, in fact it's a last resort when it comes to restoring disintegrating DNA. I believe professor Ludovici even argues that cancer itself is the result of mass propagation of aberrant DNA which means to cull genetic dead-ends with cold efficiency.
So which is worse- a horde of mutants with incurable diseases lurking in their genes and hospitals filled to the brim with terminal children, or genetically balanced people who are allowed to continue reproducing while at the same time quarantining those who are unfit. Sometimes you have to be ruthless, because nature won't change for us.

Sickle cell anemia. Too much and you suffer from the condition, too little and you have no meaningful natural malaria resistance. Not a big deal in an area without a big mosquito and malaria problem; a serious benefit in an area with said issues. But the point is that a supposedly harmful gene has a specific use in a specific situation, and can provide an advantage to those who have exactly one copy in that circumstance over and above those who have either zero or two copies of that gene.

Properly functioning eugenics, as something productive for society that isn't just blatant racism and prejudice, isn't simply manichaean 'good genes' and 'bad genes.' It's survival of the fittest for a particular situation. Part of the reason why it's not a good idea to reduce a species' genome to 'optimal' genes is the sheer lack of adaptability of said reduced genome. That's just how you get cheetahs, which are very vulnerable to changes in conditions due to them being nearly genetically identical, as well as Monsanto's "suicide seeds" that are both extremely genetically specific (and thus only suitable for very specific circumstances, especially in terms of disease and parasite resistance) as well as sterile to keep those laboratory-induced properties intact. In many, though certainly not all, cases, a 'bad gene' can do something useful for a very specific circumstance that isn't always applicable.

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.

For some fun rumination on this kind of idea, see Piers Anthony's Macroscope and the related Peckham Experiment.

 

[thecardinal]

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.

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

But to respond to the OP, both are considered incest under Patreon's rules.