my sexy sister

I am now convinced that PinkOrchid, Jenny_S, and my wife are all the same person.

I knew you were checking out literotica behind my back:p
 
y=mx+b said:
I am now convinced that PinkOrchid, Jenny_S, and my wife are all the same person.

I knew you were checking out literotica behind my back:p


Damn, I feel exposed. Who told him?
 
ooowwwww my eyes!!!

JennyS and PO I was going to respond earlier but it took me forever and a day to get through all the science and then overcome my own overwhelming feeling of utter stupidity for not being able to follow it wortha damn!

Ok...that said I'm normally a " Whatever tickles your pickle" kinda gal but I do think there are far to many valid reasons incest has been considered taboo to warrant considering any action towards a sexual relationship with a close sibling. Yes I know, wild thoughts from a girl in Kentucky the land of " ifn' she ain't good enuf fer family she ain't gonna be good enuf fer anyone else" stereotypes. I don't think it's worth everything that could potentially go wrong within your family dynamic. If you jack off to it fine, if it's a recurring sexual fantasy fine, hell I'd even say look for women that resemble the girl. All science and genetics aside, the damage you could do to your family as a whole isn't worth any imagined sexual gratification.
 
Wait... this discussion did not start out as a "love and marriage" idea... more the idea that Mike wanted to get into his sister's pants.

Mike, most of us guys have had the experience of trying to get a friend/classmate/work collegue into bed... if it succeeds and then the relationship sours, it makes things rather uncomfortable. If the guy (who here hasn't) gets shot down, the rejection can change the relationship with this person forever.

A person that you work/school/hang out with may or may not remain in your life forever - your sister on the other hand hopefully will. It could ruin your relationship with her and cause BIG family problems.

Regarding the other comments here:

ASSUMING that he succeeds and ASSUMING that he uses a condom or other protection, the comments given in this tread (although interesting) would be irrelevant.
 
Re: Re: actually...recent studies published in discover magazine have shown that it is ac

Etoile said:
He's full of shit on this one.

Interesting quote Etoile, considering your quote says that you are "Daddy's little girl."

Meant as a comment, not a criticism.
 
FastFastr said:
ASSUMING that he succeeds and ASSUMING that he uses a condom or other protection, the comments given in this tread (although interesting) would be irrelevant.

Only the reproduction parts, not the "boy, would this risk disastrous mental & familial consequences" parts :D
 
Beyond thus...

PinkOrchid said:
I won't get into the fact that Discover magazine is the Reader's Digest of science writing (I can't in good conscience call it science literature).

I will say I did a search on their site and found no such article.

Additionally, I read a great deal of the published research findings in biology, particularly genetics, and I haven't seen such a study. The only thing I've seen that is close is one that showed that close matings aren't as genetically risky as once thought, but they still are risky.

I'll keep my moral judgements to myself.

Beyond these facts are the psychological ones no one seems to mention. the incest tabood is consonant with developmental individuation. If we mate or marry our siblings, what's the emotional incentive to maximaze individual growth potentials?

Now, I must admit, the case of lost of unknown siblings, where the young gow up apart and later meet and still want to marry, are arguably a case to the contrary. But clearly this is not what's going on above.

--Orson
 
See if you guys can guess at which point in the thread my brain started hurting
 
FastFastr said:
ASSUMING that he succeeds and ASSUMING that he uses a condom or other protection, the comments given in this tread (although interesting) would be irrelevant.
Unless the condom breaks.

Rumple Foreskin
 
Gee, I feel like I am getting dumber by reading a lot of these posts. Ignorance abounds in the land of yesteryear. Let's get the easy parts out of the way first. Yes, I am only 21 years old. Yes, I am a conspiracy theorist and UFO believer, hell I live outside of an Air Force Base that runs tests at 2 AM, my co-worker lives under thier flight path. That said, I'll give the facts.

Incest is NOT genetically less inferior to having realtionships with strangers. 1) Bible has many instances where incest occurs. Hell, incest caused our existence to flourish according to them. Read Genesis 1-10. Incest has been around since times before the Bible. Incest is what the British Royalty is based on, as a means to keep the bloodline "pure". It is said that incest through enough generations has the effect of changing the blood a bluish color or giving it's redness a bluish tint, hence the title Blue Bloods. If incest had such a huge probablity of being bad, the Royal Family would have been wiped out long ago.

I see nothing wrong, except the ignorant societal acceptance problems, with incest. If you truly love someone, why should anyone be allowed to tell you no? Isn't that telling someone that they have a limited freedom in the land of the free, home of the brave? Hell, create your own religion and use religious exemption if you fear the law.

If I am wrong, and I challenge you all to prove me wrong with sound science, none of that crap put in Scientific America, then there is one other thing to say. To remove the "problems" people mention of the weakened immune system, etc, it just requires one generation to refuse incest and go with a stranger. Their child will have none of the characteristics of the previous generations choices.

But, these are my opinions and views. Take them as you like. I don't expect to please or make friends with many people. Just like to be able to inform.
 
PinkOrchid said:
I won't get into the fact that Discover magazine is the Reader's Digest of science writing (I can't in good conscience call it science literature).

I will say I did a search on their site and found no such article.

Additionally, I read a great deal of the published research findings in biology, particularly genetics, and I haven't seen such a study. The only thing I've seen that is close is one that showed that close matings aren't as genetically risky as once thought, but they still are risky.

I'll keep my moral judgements to myself.
I had done a search too, which was why I said he was full of shit. :) I didn't realize Discover wasn't really a legitimate science mag, though - thanks for the warning.
 
Bible has many instances where incest occurs. Hell, incest caused our existence to fl

the bible was written how long ago? And how much of it is probably exaggerated?

Im sure water miraculously flows from rocks where you live...and water turns to wine everyday!

The human race has gone through millions of mutations to get where we are. The thing is...if we are in fact descendants of only two people...think of it this way...ITS THE ONLY WAY WE CAME TO BE! It came down to survival of the human race. I am sure if it ever came to those circumstances ever again...screw your relatives to procreate or everyone dies...Im sure it would be ok to make an exception. There is no reason though, in this day and age to be incestual. With the billion or so people who roam the earth, one does not have to commit the incest taboo. The royal family has held true to an ignorant belief built up in times when people thought the world was flat. Hell...there are ANIMALS that wont have sex with their kin.

And as for love...not all love is sexual....you dont need sex to love.
 
Last edited:
lovechild27 said "there are ANIMALS that wont have sex with their kin". Well, there are studies of primates that do in fact have A) homosexual sex and B) incestual sex. Read lots of books about the sexuality of the animal kingdom. Very interesting information, except in the insect world. Ecch.

You also said that there is no reason to partake of the incest taboo. Well, there is also no reason to partake of the watersport, bloodsport(?), or any other taboo out there. But what makes those ones ok and the incest one not ok? What gives anyone the right to tell another person "That's just wrong and you shouldn't do it."? I profess only one thing: true freedom. If it don't hurt anyone else, then go for it. It's the same with A) Women who want to be able to go around topless (read the news about the California and Florida stories regarding this subject) B) Men who want to be able to wear women's clothing without having to feel ashamed or harassed for it. I fit in the second category personally. I've admitted it in the post delegated to that subject. It's taboo, but I do it because it is comfortable for me and to me it is wrong that women have been able to adopt men's clothing but when men try to do it, it means we are gay or have "problems".

Society needs to worry about bigger problems than what we wear and who we have relationships with. Try getting rid of the hate, discrimination, and prejudice before you start criticizing people about what they wear and what they do.
 
Little do you realize Uncle Tom that Apes having sex with their own is an anomalie...very few species do it. (I know this because I have been researching their behavior for school.) And Apes are not the only animals that are close to humans.

I never once said Oh dont do it because its gross. Its ignorant as hell to think that nothing would happen to a child, not to mention what it would do to your family ties if they were to find out. Incest is unnecessary. Come on...im sure youve seen Jerry Springer. Those incestual couples are to much even for THAT SHOW.

AS for other taboos...watersports...sexual practice. Bloodsports...an odd fetish. Look up the word taboo. Its forbidden. Neither one of those sexual practices are labeled to be forbidden by anyone...maybe icky to some people but not forbidden. As for men wearinc womens clothes...i wouldnt call that taboo either. It may make some people uncomfy...but in no way is it really labled abnormal. Same thing with women not wearing tops in public..breasts are far from taboo. But is it right to expose what many consider a sexual organ to small kids? No...it isnt. It has nothing to do with breasts being forbidden but how comfy people are with the matter.

I dont think anyone said society was worried about incest...I think we were here answering someones question....no one was criticizing. He asked and people replied.

Im glad you embrace total and complete freedom and lack of morals as well. The vast majority of us see things a little differently though...
 
Don't do it!

Please go find someone else to satisfy your pleasures. Your sister (if she is like any other sister) thinks of you as her brother, that is it! If you even try to make a move on her it will ruin your relationship forever. The consequences are many. Your life and her life will NEVER be the same again. Good luck.
 
I don't have a sister, but to me, this sounds like something at the top of the list of really BAD ideas. Just my two cents worth.
 
Sister Fuckin...

I fully agree with ole Plastic Ball...Go to the Playground Forum and look up the thread, " Incest is Best " Hosted by Khan-E.......

They all love " sister fuckin " and damn proud of it...........


~~~HOT HORNY JABO~~~:p :p :p


A little girl once told her brother--- " Johnny your cock is almost as good as Paw's. "

" Yeah! That's what Maw says " Johnny replied proudly.....
 
Am I the only one (besides Etoile) who thinks this guy is full of shit and pulling everyone's chain? Yes, I know some people really do want to sleep with their sister but it seems to me that Mike just wanted to get a rise out of someone by posting this question.
:confused:
 
Re: Sister Fuckin...

Jabo 69 said:
I fully agree with ole Plastic Ball...Go to the Playground Forum and look up the thread, " Incest is Best " Hosted by Khan-E.......
Speaking of the Playground Forum-it's no longer on the list of forums. Does anyone know what happened? RF

edit: I just went back and the Playground was there. Either I've got to lay off the old "Rock & Rye" or the sucker's playing peek-a-boo. RF.
 
Last edited:
No matter the boy's motives, if sister wants to then things can happen. I know several brother-sister pairs who have fucked and they didn't self distruct or anything.
 
I agree with most of the posters. Trying to fuck your sister is a bad idea even if you knew she was interested and inspite of examples where brother and sister did fuck and nothing bad happen to their relationship. As far as birth defects and biblical procreational necessity there are scienctific studies abounding to prove any point you want and in the early days of creation it was esential for procreation. But, if you read further into the bible, when Moses was getting the laws from God it was made clear that touching your sister, brother, mother, father sexually was wrong.
Now, if you are bent on this fantasy then get stranded on a tropical island like in the story "Blue Lagoon" most likely nature would take its course and you'll get her. Not likely to happen so read lots of incest stories, write a few fantasy stories and jack off. Give the pursuit of these fantasy up or it will most likely fuck your life up.
LDLarry52
 
Back
Top