Incestuous Lot

[Orleander]

..Women today mature physically much more quickly an reach their periods years quicker. Girls today are thousands of times more educated then some desert dwelling nomadic children 2000 years ago.
Michael

I guess I should have said more responsible. I didn't mean mature physically. They could cook, clean, take care of babies, move herds, etc. Why would they need to read even most of the men didn't. All girls think about these days are clothes, lip gloss and Paris Hilton, from what I've seen.

 

[Orleander]

How old were his daughters? And aside from religious considerations, incest has been pretty common in all cultures.

Who cares. It breaks one of the 10 Commandments. He wasn't married to them.

 

[S.A.M.]

Who cares. It breaks one of the 10 Commandments. He wasn't married to them.

So he felt guilty because he was religious? If he was atheist, it would have been fine?

 

[Orleander]

So he felt guilty because he was religious? If he was atheist, it would have been fine?

Hey! I have morals.
And why would he feel guilty when he was raped.

 

[S.A.M.]

Hey! I have morals.
And why would he feel guilty when he was raped.

Morals are a religious construct.

Raped by the daughters? So they were the gerontophiles then?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Who cares. It breaks one of the 10 Commandments. He wasn't married to them.

*************
M*W: Unless Lot lived during the time of Hammurabi, he wouldn't have had to go by the Ten Commandments. They were copied from the Code of Hammurabi much later probably during the 18th Dynasty of Egypt, so Lot wouldn't have known about the Jewish law.

Also, I don't think those old laws protected girls and women who were nothing more than indentured slaves to the men who owned them. Unless, of course, you're born into a royal pharaonic family, and if you were a young girl (aka a virgin), you might get it on with your brother, father, uncle or whomever took a fancy to you. Most likely, they would only be from within your royal lineage, though. Abraham and Sarah were children of the same pharaohnic father. They were married siblings. No big deal.

 

[Michael]

How old were his daughters? And aside from religious considerations, incest has been pretty common in all cultures.

OMG are you trying to justify familiar incest? Paternal incest? The chances of having a severely messed ip kid are like 1 in 2. Which is why incest is a universal taboo.

Even close nit Pacific Islanders welcomed foreigners to impregnate their women - before killing and eating them of course.

 

[Michael]

Morals are a religious construct.

That better be a wink - societal construct.

I guess I should have said more responsible. I didn't mean mature physically. They could cook, clean, take care of babies, move herds, etc. Why would they need to read even most of the men didn't. All girls think about these days are clothes, lip gloss and Paris Hilton, from what I've seen.

True, but this really isn't maturity. It's doing chores. Today kids have different obligations - like math and dance. Doing chores like herding may appear mature because we associate it with an adult's job but on a farm this is kids work. Mentally they ARE still children - as any farmer will tell you.

 

[Orleander]

That better be a wink - societal construct.

True, but this really isn't maturity. It's doing chores. Today kids have different obligations - like math and dance. Doing chores like herding may appear mature because we associate it with an adult's job but on a farm this is kids work. Mentally they ARE still children - as any farmer will tell you.

I grew up on a farm, driving a tractor when I was 8. Helping stretch fence, herd cows, brand and dehorn cows, helping deliver calves, castrating, etc. They were chores??? Taking out the garbage is a chore. Washing dishes is a chore. I was WAY ahead on the maturity/responsibility scale. You have to be because your family depends on it. Getting homework done isn't even on the same scale.

 

[S.A.M.]

OMG are you trying to justify familiar incest? Paternal incest? The chances of having a severely messed ip kid are like 1 in 2. Which is why incest is a universal taboo.

Even close nit Pacific Islanders welcomed foreigners to impregnate their women - before killing and eating them of course.

You should read up on the royal Egyptians. They only had incestuous relations. All others were taboo.

And it has been pretty common in many cultures.

It is relatively accepted that incestuous marriages were widespread at least during the Graeco-Roman period of Egyptian history. Numerous papyri and the Roman census declarations attest to many husbands and wives as being brother and sister (Lewis 1983, Bagnall and Frier 1994, Shaw 1993). In (Hopkins 1980) this is conclusively demonstrated, and more recent scholars in the field have not questioned it. Some of these incestuous relationships were in the royal family, especially the Ptolemies.

Incestuous unions were frowned upon and considered as nefas (against the laws of gods and man) in Roman times, and were explicitly forbidden by an imperial edict in AD 295, which divided the concept of incestus into two categories of unequal gravity: the incestus iuris gentium, who was applied to both Romans and non-Romans in the Empire, and the incestus iuris civilis which concerned only the Roman citizens. Therefore, for example, an Egyptian could marry an aunt, but a Roman could not. Despite the act of incest being unacceptable within the Roman Empire, Roman Emperor Caligula is rumored to have had open sexual relationships with all three of his sisters, (Julia Livilla, Drusilla, and Agrippina the Younger), killing his favorite (Drusilla) when she became pregnant with his child.

It is interesting to note how customs have changed in the UK, with incest at one time apparently being normal practice, at least in the south of the country. When Julius Caesar invaded Britain for the second time in 54 BC, he noted the customs of the Britons, remarking, 'Wives are shared between groups of ten or twelve men, especially between brothers and between fathers and sons; but the offspring of these unions are counted as the children of the man with whom a particular woman cohabited first.' [10]

And despite the taboos its not absent in present day society:

# Research indicates that 46 percent (46%) of children who are raped are victims of family members. (Langan and Harlow, 1994.)
# The majority of American rape victims (61%) are raped before the age of 18; furthermore, an astounding 29 percent (29%) of all forcible rapes occurred when the victim was less than 11 years old. Eleven percent (11%) of rape victims are raped by their fathers or step-fathers, and another 16 percent (16%) are raped by other relatives. (National Center for Victims of Crime and Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center, 1992.)
# The study of a nationally representative sample of state prisoners serving time for violent crime in 1991 showed that, of those prisoners convicted of rape or sexual assault, two-thirds victimized children and almost one-third of the victims were the children or step-children of the assailant. (Greenfeld, 1996.)

http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32360

One of the nation's leading researchers on child sexual abuse, David Finkelhor, estimates that 1,000,000 Americans are victims of father-daughter incest, and 16,000 new cases occur annually (Finkelhor, 1983). However, Finkelhor's statistics may be significantly low because they are based primarily on accounts of white, middle-class women and may not adequately represent low-income and minority women (Matsakis, 1991).

 

[Orleander]

I think the Hawaiian royal families did too. I'm gonna have to re-read on that though.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think the Hawaiian royal families did too. I'm gonna have to re-read on that though.

Quite possible, I believe it was also common in African royal families.

 

[Michael]

I grew up on a farm, driving a tractor when I was 8. Helping stretch fence, herd cows, brand and dehorn cows, helping deliver calves, castrating, etc. They were chores??? Taking out the garbage is a chore. Washing dishes is a chore. I was WAY ahead on the maturity/responsibility scale. You have to be because your family depends on it. Getting homework done isn't even on the same scale.

I worked a lot too when I was young and I agree that this does raise the level of self-reliance and independence and if that is a maturity marker then yes people who work hard are much more mature then those that come home and watch TV.

 

[Michael]

You should read up on the royal Egyptians. They only had incestuous relations. All others were taboo.

And it has been pretty common in many cultures.


And despite the taboos its not absent in present day society:



http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32360

I agree it was prevalent in many Royal families but I didn't think it was at all common for the average person in a society. Even primitive tribes still look for mates in neighboring tribes.

Hell I think even Apes and other primates don't do it.

 

[S.A.M.]

I agree it was prevalent in many Royal families but I didn't think it was at all common for the average person in a society. Even primitive tribes still look for mates in neighboring tribes.

Hell I think even Apes and other primates don't do it.

I think in primates there is a tendency to avoid incest with maternal relations, but I wonder how much of that is related to familiarity based on the Westermarck hypothesis:

"There is a remarkable absence of erotic feelings between people who live together and play together before age ten. The absence is particularly marked among couples brought together before age three, and, for any given couple, largely depends on the age of the younger partner when they first meet."

In a number of pre-modern societies, relations of this
kind were the exclusive prerogative of kings and remained forbidden to
commoners. 'Royal incest' (Bixler 1982), which serves to emphasize
the supernatural qualities of the rulers (strongly associated with
mythological traditions of divine incest) and insulates ruling families
against intrusions, can be found around the globe, from the Pharaohs
and Ptolemies of ancient Egypt (e.g., Cerny 1954; Carney 1987) and
ancient Near Eastern rulers (e.g., Elam, Persia, Phoenicia, etc.)
(Kornemann 1923) to kings in Central Africa (de Heusch 1958), the Inca
of Peru and the Mixtec aristocracy of Mexico (Christensen 1998), and
the chiefs of pre-contact Hawaii (Davenport 1994). In other cases,
mostly in tribal societies, incestuous behaviour could be imagined to
confer magical powers. By contrast, habitual nuclear-family incest
outside ruling families was exceedingly rare. The census returns of
Roman Egypt, preserved on papyrus, provide quantifiable documentary
evidence of brother-sister marriage, mostly for the 2nd and early 3rd
centuries AD (Thierfelder 1960; Sidler 1971; Hopkins 1980; Shaw 1992;
Scheidel 1996a). At that time, one in five attested couples in Middle
Egypt consisted of brothers and sisters (Bagnall and Frier 1994). The
incidence of incest in the city of Arsinoe in the Fayum was higher
still, indicating that virtually every man with a living younger sister
married her instead of someone from outside the family. At that level,
this custom must have assumed the function of a cultural norm (Scheidel
1995). Mazdaean ('Zoroastrian') religious doctrine, originating
from Iran, not only legitimized but encouraged and extolled sexual
relations between parents and children and between siblings. The very
substantial corpus of pertinent evidence combines prescriptive
Zoroastrian texts (mostly from the early Middle Ages) and descriptive
accounts by outsiders, ranging from the 5th century BC to the Middle
Ages and from western Europe to Tibet and China (West 1882; Spooner
1966; Sidler 1971; Bucci 1978; Frye 1985; Herrenschmidt 1994;
Mitterauer 1994). Half-sibling unions are also attested for a number of
other societies but have so far eluded systematic investigation
(Modrzejewski 1964; Goggin & Sturtevant 1964).

People like Sigmund Freud, Leslie White, Claude Levi-Strauss, and Rodney Needham claimed there was a natural instinct for sexual relations with family, rather than an aversion; some denied that an incest taboo existed at all; others claimed that it was impossible for that taboo to be derived from a biological aversion.

http://dannyreviews.com/h/Incest.html

 

[Michael]

I just do not see how so many coupled brother and sisters could even be sustainable due to all of the genetic problems that would arise.

 

[Orleander]

Well anyways, I wasn't so much trying to question whether or not the incest happened or if Christians are hypocrits because its in the Bible, I was just wondering if Lot is a BIG FAT HAIRY LIAR!!
How drunk does a man have to get to be raped by his daughters and would the 'equipment' still work at that level of drunkenness?

 

[S.A.M.]

Well anyways, I wasn't so much trying to question whether or not the incest happened or if Christians are hypocrits because its in the Bible, I was just wondering if Lot is a BIG FAT HAIRY LIAR!!
How drunk does a man have to get to be raped by his daughters and would the 'equipment' still work at that level of drunkenness?

Arousal is involuntary and purely physiological in general (there can be psychosomatic effects but those are another topic), it will work regardless of willingness. A lot of men get raped but are ashamed to admit it, probably because they get aroused, just as women do.

 

[Light Travelling]

Actually the exact opposite is true in regards to women maturing. Women today mature physically much more quickly an reach their periods years quicker. Girls today are thousands of times more educated then some desert dwelling nomadic children 2000 years ago.

As to your assumption of old enough to bleed old enough to breed, yeah, civilized and uncivilized men alike used to think like this. Sadly some still do (not saying you do - just that some societies still accept it).

Michael

It seems to have escaped everyone’s notice, that although it is obviously illegal to have sex under sixteen, a huge number of 14 and 15 year old girls have sex with their boyfriends (of similar age) all the time in our current times, and if you were to ask them they would tell you it is perfectly natural and enjoyable.

The reason girls start their period at a certain age is that it is natures way saying they are ready to start mating. Of course western ‘morals’ say this is all wrong. But I would remind all you atheists here condemning teenage sex that it is only false RELIGIOUS morals that have ever tried to push the age of consent of sex up. The natural, biological, scientific age for girls to begin sexual activity is after the period starts.

It is funny how atheists are the first to start banging on about religiously based morals in cases like this ……….:shrug: Double standards or what.

 

[Michael]

……….:shrug: Double standards or what.

Perhaps you are right.

But we as a collective society do not consider it acceptable for very old men to have sex with very young girls (or boys). Even if teenagers are having sex at 13, 14 or 15 we only think it is socially acceptible if it is with other 13, 14 or 15 years old because they are of a similar mind, maturity and we accept that both experimenting and trying to figure things out. They are entering and progressing through similar stages in life. Turning from child to young adult.

When a 55 year old man "grooms" a 13 year old girl (or boy) he is considered a dirty old retch. We look at it from this perspective: He is using his life's experience to manipulate a young child into having sex with him. In our society this is considered immoral and heinous and thus we have outlawed it. Of course in ancient Greece it was not considered immoral for 55 year old Socrates to have a relationship with a young boy. Different society and different perspective. But, it was still illegal on the books - hence the hemlock. That sort of says something doesn't it?

Anyway, incest is taboo in most countries for a damn good reason. Sure Pharaohs and the like may have practiced it but they were considered Prophets and Gods and the political implications meant they had to keep it in the family. And like I said, from my perspective Lot lied to his daughters, told them to wait here while he went back and murdered his wife. He then drugged and raped them and topped it off by blaming them for seducing him! Which is the typical excuse pedophiles still use to this day.

Who is this Lot anyway? Another YWHA Prophet? Sounds about right