Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

A South Australian woman has given birth to her father's daughter after the couple had sex.

John and Jenny Deaves reunited 30 years after Mr Deaves separated from Jenny's mother.


Jenny was 31 and just two weeks after meeting, father and daughter had sex.

"John and I are in this relationship as consenting adults," Mrs Deaves told the Nine Network.

"We are just asking for a little bit of respect and understanding."

Their nine month old daughter Celeste, shown on TV, appears fit and healthy.

Mrs Deaves said soon after reuniting with her father she began to see him as a man first and her father second.

"I was looking at him, sort of going, oh, he's not too bad.

"Like you might look at a man across the bar at a nightclub."

Mrs Deaves brought two children, Samantha and Alex, into the relationship after splitting from her former partner.

Mr Deaves admitted that he "initially" thought having sex with his daughter was wrong.

"Emotions take over, as people no doubt realise, there are times during your life where emotions do rule the heart, it rules the head," he said.

"I knew it was illegal, of course I knew it was illegal but you know, so what."

Mrs Deaves said the physical relationship with her father was like "a sexual relationship with any other man".

For Mr Deaves the sexual relationship was "absolutely fantastic".



FFS, now we officially have inbreds. Funny story though.

Poor children that is ****in awful, they deserve each other the twisted freeks

Originally posted by Outbound
A South Australian woman has given birth to her father's daughter after the couple had sex.

John and Jenny Deaves reunited 30 years after Mr Deaves separated from Jenny's mother.


Jenny was 31 and just two weeks after meeting, father and daughter had sex.

"John and I are in this relationship as consenting adults," Mrs Deaves told the Nine Network.

"We are just asking for a little bit of respect and understanding."

Their nine month old daughter Celeste, shown on TV, appears fit and healthy.

Mrs Deaves said soon after reuniting with her father she began to see him as a man first and her father second.

"I was looking at him, sort of going, oh, he's not too bad.

"Like you might look at a man across the bar at a nightclub."

Mrs Deaves brought two children, Samantha and Alex, into the relationship after splitting from her former partner.

Mr Deaves admitted that he "initially" thought having sex with his daughter was wrong.

"Emotions take over, as people no doubt realise, there are times during your life where emotions do rule the heart, it rules the head," he said.

"I knew it was illegal, of course I knew it was illegal but you know, so what."

Mrs Deaves said the physical relationship with her father was like "a sexual relationship with any other man".

For Mr Deaves the sexual relationship was "absolutely fantastic".



FFS, now we officially have inbreds. Funny story though.

LOL, wut?

Surely this proves all the crap that they'd have 9 legs or something.

On a further not, what's life gonna be like for that kid?

"Okay, I'm your mother and sister, this is father and grandfather."

It actually gives me gooebumps thinking about it, I mean seriously how ****ed up must you head be to even go ahead with something like that


I wonder if she calls him Dad

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
It actually gives me gooebumps thinking about it, I mean seriously how ****ed up must you head be to even go ahead with something like that


I wonder if she calls him Dad I on the other hand don't see things as ****ed up. Mostly because I see things very differently than most people. I see past this moral stuff, and chnage mine every two seconds.

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
It actually gives me gooebumps thinking about it, I mean seriously how ****ed up must you head be to even go ahead with something like that


I wonder if she calls him Dad

Some people enjoy that. Besides, they're in love. Why do you care?

I care cause its unnatural and obviously as a human being I cant help but feel unsettled at the thought of such madness

"Besides they're in love" are you seriously suggesting that even if they were in love it would be OK. Its Illegal for a reason.

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
I care cause its unnatural and obviously as a human being I cant help but feel unsettled at the thought of such madness

"Besides they're in love" are you seriously suggesting that even if they were in love it would be OK. Its Illegal for a reason. So the reason that other people think it's wrong is why you think it's wrong? You have a very bleak view.

Do whatever makes you happy, provided you aren't harming anyone else.

Are they harming anyone else?

My God disagrees with you, XYZ.

Prepare to die.

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
I care cause its unnatural and obviously as a human being I cant help but feel unsettled at the thought of such madness

"Besides they're in love" are you seriously suggesting that even if they were in love it would be OK. Its Illegal for a reason.

I'm human. I see nothing unsettling or crazy about what they're doing.

People should do what makes them happy. This is what makes them happy. No one's being hurt. There's nothing wrong about their relationship, especially if they're in love.

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
My God disagrees with you, XYZ.

Prepare to die. I disagree with your god. He smells and looks old.

Originally posted by lord xyz
So the reason that other people think it's wrong is why you think it's wrong? You have a very bleak view.

Do whatever makes you happy, provided you aren't harming anyone else.

Are they harming anyone else?

By having sex they could potentially give birth to a mutated baby, and that is harming the baby and also why it is illegal. Although they lucked out this time and the baby is fine but that's still no excuse. It's against the law.Its like you saying its ok for a terrorist to go onto a subway and set off a bomb because they believe they are doing the right thing.I don't have a bleak view if that's the case then any normal person out there that thinks incest is wrong has a bleak view. The majority of people thinks its wrong for a reason and I am in that majority... I apologise for being normal

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
By having sex they could potentially give birth to a mutated baby, and that is harming the baby and also why it is illegal. Although they lucked out this time and the baby is fine but that's still no excuse. It's against the law.Its like you saying its ok for a terrorist to go onto a subway and set off a bomb because they believe they are doing the right thing.I don't have a bleak view if that's the case then any normal person out there that thinks incest is wrong has a bleak view. The majority of people thinks its wrong for a reason and I am in that majority... I apologise for being normal

Did you just compare terrorism and incest? hysterical

personally my opinion as follows:

I'm south Australian, and my first reaction was, 'what if people think this is common for us?... UGH' load of crap... I think if they really want to do it, move to France, apparently there's no law about it after Napoleon removed it...

That and the love for one another yes maybe, but they ruined their offspring's life, how will she feel when she's a mature woman, knowing that her mother and father were father and daughter!

So no, I don't agree with them bearing a child...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Did you just compare terrorism and incest? hysterical

I'm using it as an example they are both against the law so why should you think terrorism is wrong, but practically knowingly giving birth to a deformed child is right?

Originally posted by Aliies
personally my opinion as follows:

I'm south Australian, and my first reaction was, 'what if people think this is common for us?... UGH' load of crap... I think if they really want to do it, move to France, apparently there's no law about it after Napoleon removed it...

That and the love for one another yes maybe, but they ruined their offspring's life, how will she feel when she's a mature woman, knowing that her mother and father were father and daughter!

So no, I don't agree with them bearing a child...

Exactly... the emotional damage of the child would be worse than the physical damage.

Originally posted by Aliies
That and the love for one another yes maybe, but they ruined their offspring's life, how will she feel when she's a mature woman, knowing that her mother and father were father and daughter!

Seriously? That's your concern? At least call it immoral or note the genetic dangers of incest.

Maybe if she grows up in a house where her father and mother are father and daughter she won't care at all.

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
I'm using it as an example they are both against the law so why should you think terrorism is wrong, but practically knowingly giving birth to a deformed child is right?

It's called strawman. You'll need an argument that doesn't violate logic in order to debate.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Seriously? That's your concern? At least call it immoral or note the genetic dangers of incest.

Maybe if she grows up in a house where her father and mother are father and daughter she won't care at all.

So you are aware of the genetic dangers? then how could you agree with it ?

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
So you are aware of the genetic dangers? then how could you agree with it ?

There's nothing wrong, at all, about incestuous relationships but I do agree they should be careful about having children.

Also the genetic risks aren't nearly as high as people think. It's something like 15% rather than the normal 5%. Most children born from closely related people will be quite healthy.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Seriously? That's your concern? At least call it immoral or note the genetic dangers of incest.

Maybe if she grows up in a house where her father and mother are father and daughter she won't care at all.

true, but I didn't feel it a need to repeat that which was already said, yes I think it is immoral and I know the physiological damage the child can suffer...

but they don't have the right to 'hope' that their child will be accepting, that and what happens when medical professionals check on her after birth, that and since it seems general knowledge, the child doesn't only have to be accepting but what about her peers as she grows up? even if she's home-schooled people are gonna know, she'd never have a positive reputation because of her 'parent's' actions...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
There's nothing wrong about incestuous relationships but I do agree they should be careful about having children.

Also the genetic risks aren't nearly as high as people think. It's something like 15% rather than the normal 5%. Most children born from closely related people will be quite healthy.

Yeah I suppose but... Its just even that little chance of it happening is still a worry plus the psychological damage to the child and not to mention the bullying in school

They were reunited? How long where they apart? It would be very disturbing if they were in the normal family relationship from her birth up until there attraction and this happened. It's only natural she is attracted to him but if the dad was with her during her childhood and teen years that is very strange indeed. It does not bother me at all as it effects me in no way just the thought of it is quite disgusting.

Originally posted by Aliies
but they don't have the right to 'hope' that their child will be accepting, that and what happens when medical professionals check on her after birth, that and since it seems general knowledge, the child doesn't only have to be accepting but what about her peers as she grows up?

All parents have hopes about their children.

What parent wouldn't raise a kid to understand why mommy and daddy love each other?

Originally posted by Aliies
even if she's home-schooled people are gonna know, she'd never have a positive reputation because of her 'parent's' actions...

That's the sign of a sick, outdated social system not a problem with two people in love.

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
Yeah I suppose but... Its just even that little chance of it happening is still a worry plus the psychological damage to the child and not to mention the bullying in school

Fix the system or start aborting every baby with the possibility of a birth defect.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

That's the sign of a sick, outdated social system not a problem with two people in love.


of course as all opinion goes, but you're now going into how you believe that the moral construct of modern-day society is immoral? I am not here to argue or make you justify your opinion, I would just like a little more clarification.

Should we revert to a society based purely on instinct and be rid of morality, then how does that change any facts about say; murder, rape and all the things that morality stand for?

Originally posted by Aliies
of course as all opinion goes, but you're now going into how you believe that the moral construct of modern-day society is immoral? I am not here to argue or make you justify your opinion, I would just like a little more clarification.

I have never seen anything to make certain things that are supposedly immoral be immoral. There is no earthy reason to follow a rule that is clearly bases and irrational.

To use your type of arguments: If modern society said it was immoral to let girls live beyond the age of twenty would you be out there with a chainsaw gutting the sinners?

Originally posted by Aliies
Should we revert to a society based purely on instinct and be rid of morality, then how does that change any facts about say; murder, rape and all the things that morality stand for?

I'd like an arguments that doesn't rely on reducto ad absurdum or strawman. But to answer your question there are very clear victims in those cases. Incest makes two people happy.

How f*cking sick, ewwww.

Oh c'mon.. you weren't complaining when you, your sister and I were gettin' it on.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I have never seen anything to make certain things that are supposedly immoral be immoral. There is no earthy reason to follow a rule that is clearly bases and irrational.

To use your type of arguments: If modern society said it was immoral to let girls live beyond the age of twenty would you be out there with a chainsaw gutting the sinners?

I'd like an arguments that doesn't rely on reducto ad absurdum or strawman. But to answer your question there are very clear victims in those cases. Incest makes two people happy.

well you put up a valid argument there, the two consenting adults despite relations is only immoral in the views of others. But the case here is that modern society isn't going to accept it on a whim, things like this remain and while, yes a lot of it IS absurd, but for the child's sake if she did not develop any deformities mentally or physically; society would not be accepting and as you did say this may just be old-fashioned bias, but It's not going to change anytime soon, so the child will still suffer in the eyes of those around who are not accepting, which in reality is the majority.

My debate is that whilst societal norms will most-likely endure long after we're dead and buried, what becomes of the daughter even if she accepts her parent's relation? I just feel sorry for her in an unbiased way as she will not have the privilege of a normal life due to nonacceptance

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Oh c'mon.. you weren't complaining when you, your sister and I were gettin' it on.
I can't deny you and I but my sister ever being involved when the both of us were together? Pa-lease. In your dreams, sonny!

*sigh*

Back to the incest section at literotica...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
start aborting every baby with the possibility of a birth defect.

yes

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos


Also the genetic risks aren't nearly as high as people think. It's something like 15% rather than the normal 5%. Most children born from closely related people will be quite healthy.

There was a German professor in human genetics who said that out of a hundred children born from closely related adults almost half have some sort of disabilities.

He was commenting on a couple who were brother and sister but had four children together. Unsurprisingly two of the children were born disabled.

So if people are going to engage in incestuous relationships they should not have children.

well at least they're not gay.

Originally posted by Aliies
well you put up a valid argument there, the two consenting adults despite relations is only immoral in the views of others. But the case here is that modern society isn't going to accept it on a whim, things like this remain and while, yes a lot of it IS absurd, but for the child's sake if she did not develop any deformities mentally or physically; society would not be accepting and as you did say this may just be old-fashioned bias, but It's not going to change anytime soon, so the child will still suffer in the eyes of those around who are not accepting, which in reality is the majority.

My debate is that whilst societal norms will most-likely endure long after we're dead and buried, what becomes of the daughter even if she accepts her parent's relation? I just feel sorry for her in an unbiased way as she will not have the privilege of a normal life due to nonacceptance

Fair enough.

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
*sigh*

Back to the incest section at literotica...

*high five*

Originally posted by The Pict
There was a German professor in human genetics who said that out of a hundred children born from closely related adults almost half have some sort of disabilities.

He was commenting on a couple who were brother and sister but had four children together. Unsurprisingly two of the children were born disabled.

So if people are going to engage in incestuous relationships they should not have children.

Okay, I got my numbers from a few minutes on google. It probably is best for family members to avoid having children due to the increased chance of birth defects.

Originally posted by lord xyz
So the reason that other people think it's wrong is why you think it's wrong? You have a very bleak view.

Do whatever makes you happy, provided you aren't harming anyone else.

Are they harming anyone else?

It cracks me up that people come up with these type of arguments, yet they're the first to jump on news stories about people in the South by calling them inbred pieces of sh*t.

The sex must have been funny...'Who's your daddy?' *smacks ass*

also, in b4 kram3r lolpost.

Too late for the edit, but theres more info:

A father and daughter who have a baby girl together, had another child who died a few days after birth from a congenital heart disease, court documents show.
"The first child was born in 2001 but died a few days after birth due to a congenital heart disease," Judge Millsteed said.

More crap here for anyone who cares:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/080406/2/16ds9.html?f=mv

I can't believe this happened in Mt. Barker @_@I mean I've heard of it in other countries and other states, but Mt. Barker... man...

this makes us S-Aussies look bad =O

that and its all over the news here...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
There's nothing wrong, at all, about incestuous relationships but I do agree they should be careful about having children.

Also the genetic risks aren't nearly as high as people think. It's something like 15% rather than the normal 5%. Most children born from closely related people will be quite healthy.

Sicko.

well the fact that there fisrt child died is clearly enough for anyone to see that it is wrong

Deformed or inviable children aside. Think of the emotional toll this could play of both of them, especially the daughter/wife and their child. What happens if the relationship goes sour? They not only lose a husband to wife (or partner/partner) relationship; they also lose a father to daughter relationship. which in imo, is much more important.

As a parent, I can't comprehend how someone could find their child sexually attractive. I love my daughter more than I do my wife, but it's on an entirely different level.

Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really been more responsible and not had children.


Hey, has anyone seen the Korean movie "Old Boy"?

Originally posted by Robtard
Deformed or inviable children aside. Think of the emotional toll this could play of both of them, especially the daughter/wife and their child. What happens if the relationship goes sour? They not only lose a husband to wife (or partner/partner) relationship; they also lose a father to daughter relationship. which in imo, is much more important.

As a parent, I can't comprehend how someone could find their child sexually attractive. I love my daughter more than I do my wife, but it's on an entirely different level.

Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really been more responsible and not had children.


Hey, has anyone seen the Korean movie "Old Boy"?

Yes, I didn't like the ending.

Originally posted by Robtard
Deformed or inviable children aside. Think of the emotional toll this could play of both of them, especially the daughter/wife and their child. What happens if the relationship goes sour? They not only lose a husband to wife (or partner/partner) relationship; they also lose a father to daughter relationship. which in imo, is much more important.

As a parent, I can't comprehend how someone could find their child sexually attractive. I love my daughter more than I do my wife, but it's on an entirely different level.

Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really been more responsible and not had children.


Hey, has anyone seen the Korean movie "Old Boy"?

Children of the divorced parents are 50% more likely to divorce themselves in the future. Should they as a result not get married because their parents screwed up?

There are several genetic traits possible in two people which would increase the chances of their children having diseases or being deformed. Should they as a result not be allowed to have children?

How about homosexuals, the psychological damage done to children because of gay parents hasn't even been confirmed yet but lot's of people think it will damage the children, should gays by that right not be allowed to raise children? (btw: downsides are not yet universally accepted, which is strange with the huge amount of study material).

Incest is illegal not because of child defect chances or because of the trauma it would cause the children but because it's usually done under force by one of the two party's. Now in this case seeing as the two haven't seen each other since the girl was 1 years old until she was 31 years old she couldn't be forced into this relationship anymore then another woman could be forced into a relationship. We aren't making those illegal because of chances like this are we?

There is no force, they are both adults who know what they are doing, and although I won't say it's turns me on or something they should be allowed to do it.

However they should be careful with children and try not to have them anymore as there is a greater risk, although hugely overestimated.

Actually if you can trust Freud and the Westermarck effect (from my limited understanding on the subject) then it would only be logical that two people whether brother or sister father or daughter mother and son or whatever other kind of relation would be sexually attracted to each other if they spend their lives apart from each other

Freud arguing that all family members are eventually sexually attracted to each other.

Westermarck arguing that people who grow up together especially during the first six years of their life have no attraction to each other at all.

Combine those two and you would know why most people don't want to have sex with their family members but why these people would look at it completely differently.

Originally posted by Fishy
Children of the divorced parents are 50% more likely to divorce themselves in the future. Should they as a result not get married because their parents screwed up?

There are several genetic traits possible in two people which would increase the chances of their children having diseases or being deformed. Should they as a result not be allowed to have children?

How about homosexuals, the psychological damage done to children because of gay parents hasn't even been confirmed yet but lot's of people think it will damage the children, should gays by that right not be allowed to raise children? (btw: downsides are not yet universally accepted, which is strange with the huge amount of study material).

Incest is illegal not because of child defect chances or because of the trauma it would cause the children but because it's usually done under force by one of the two party's. Now in this case seeing as the two haven't seen each other since the girl was 1 years old until she was 31 years old she couldn't be forced into this relationship anymore then another woman could be forced into a relationship. We aren't making those illegal because of chances like this are we?

There is no force, they are both adults who know what they are doing, and although I won't say it's turns me on or something they should be allowed to do it.

However they should be careful with children and try not to have them anymore as there is a greater risk, although hugely overestimated.

Actually if you can trust Freud and the Westermarck effect (from my limited understanding on the subject) then it would only be logical that two people whether brother or sister father or daughter mother and son or whatever other kind of relation would be sexually attracted to each other if they spend their lives apart from each other

Freud arguing that all family members are eventually sexually attracted to each other.

Westermarck arguing that people who grow up together especially during the first six years of their life have no attraction to each other at all.

Combine those two and you would know why most people don't want to have sex with their family members but why these people would look at it completely differently.

Yea, I said it in far fewer words:

Originally posted by Robtard
Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really have been more responsible and not had children.

And let's be clear, the possible and highly-unlikely issues the child of a gay couple might have are more the result of the child's peers, not the rearing skills or supposed perversion of the parents.

If someone is going to argue the, "If little Billy witnesses daddy #1 kissing daddy #2, he'll learn it and then become gay.", then I have a question: How is it possible that straight couples produce gay children?

Originally posted by Devil King
And let's be clear, the possible and highly-unlikely issues the child of a gay couple might have are more the result of the child's peers, not the rearing skills or supposed perversion of the parents.

That's what people are saying about this kid. People will find out that her parents are related and . . . be mean? (cause that would liek nevar happen to a kid wid normal parentses)

Originally posted by Fishy
How about homosexuals, the psychological damage done to children because of gay parents hasn't even been confirmed yet but lot's of people think it will damage the children, should gays by that right not be allowed to raise children? (btw: downsides are not yet universally accepted, which is strange with the huge amount of study material).


Children raised by two gay parents are only low confident because of the constant stigma they recieve from society about thier situation. Now....whose really at fault there? The Gay parents or society ?

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
Children raised by two gay parents are only low confident because of the constant stigma they recieve from society about thier situation. Now....whose really at fault there? The Gay parents or society ?

blame?

well, blame is more often ascribed to action than inaction, and given that the state of the world is know prior to child rearing, the positive action of the gay couple to raise a child could be seen as them bearing the responsibility for the inactive feelings of society.

It can be worded so that the blame goes the other way, but who cares about blame, it doesn't solve any problems.

Same with the defects a child may face from the genetics of the parent. It is statistically impossible to say that any defect a child has came from X, unless in the rare cases it is passed along through one or two genes. If two people incestuously have a child with birth defects, it is nearly impossible to attribute it 100% to the incest, and not to the random chance that a child would be born defective.

Much like smoking and cancer.

incest? well s hit happens! guess what, someone out there is having sex with an chicken or a goat or their own hand.

incest is just a rare phenomenon. to some people it might be "EWW incest!" to some people like me, "incest? just another s hit in life"

I wonder if Nero the roman leader or caesar is inbred because hes pretty fukt up in the head.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's what people are saying about this kid. People will find out that her parents are related and . . . be mean? (cause that would liek nevar happen to a kid wid normal parentses)

Gay parents can't have children on their own, 2 men or 2 women require a person of the opposite gender to contribute to the situation; so the likelihood that the child suffering defects would not be an action taken knowing the possibilities. I seriously doubt a lesbian couple would ask the father of the partner carrying the child to donate the sperm.

Genetics aside, it's totally a social issue. I can't think of anyone I know that would willingly procreate with a member of their own family. I'm simply pointing out that the correlation between the social stigma of a gay couple raising a child together is a far cry from the social stigma associated with incest, especially considering the over-whelming stance on the subject that would be common in both Australia and the US.

However, given the outcome of this particular situation, I'd love to know what many of our esteemed pro-lifers-except-in-the-case-of-incest would have to say on the matter. If this case were to bolster the idea that a child born of incest can live a happy, healthy and normal life, I don't see how they can hold that out to be an exception. And lest say a healthy baby were born to the victim of incestual rape and the mother doesn't want the child, but a gay couple are willing to adopt it? What then?

Originally posted by Devil King
And lest say a healthy baby were born to the victim of incestual rape and the mother doesn't want the child, but a gay couple are willing to adopt it? What then?

Better to be dead than have two daddies who do each other up the ass?

Originally posted by inimalist
blame?

well, blame is more often ascribed to action than inaction, and given that the state of the world is know prior to child rearing, the positive action of the gay couple to raise a child could be seen as them bearing the responsibility for the inactive feelings of society.

It can be worded so that the blame goes the other way, but who cares about blame, it doesn't solve any problems.

Same with the defects a child may face from the genetics of the parent. It is statistically impossible to say that any defect a child has came from X, unless in the rare cases it is passed along through one or two genes. If two people incestuously have a child with birth defects, it is nearly impossible to attribute it 100% to the incest, and not to the random chance that a child would be born defective.

Much like smoking and cancer.

Using "purebreed" dogs as an example, their is a correlation between birth-defects and inbreeding/incest. It isn't a far reach that humans would/could suffer from the same problems. Odd that muts tend to have much better health than dogs who's family tree is equal to a bare trunk.

You really believe that there isn't a link between smoking and lung cancer/cancer rates? You actually believe what the tobacco-scientist tell you?

Edit: Cats too.

Originally posted by Robtard
Using "purebreed" dogs as an example, their is a correlation between birth-defects and inbreeding/incest. It isn't a far reach that humans would/could suffer from the same problems. Odd that muts tend to have much better health than dogs who's family tree is equal to a bare trunk.

You really believe that there isn't a link between smoking and lung cancer/cancer rates? You actually believe what the tobacco-scientist tell you?

Edit: Cats too.

no, I may have gone a little too tangential with that stuff, I was more trying to express that looking to "blame" someone for the death of the child is somewhat a exercise in futility (or, I guess it was more about who to blame for abuse a child raised by homosexuals receives in society).

the main thing though, is the correlation not equaling causation thing. Yes, I firmly believe that smoking causes cancer, and that incest leads to defects. However, in any individual case, there are normally so many variables involved, that isolating the single cause is not possible.

For instance, many non-smokers get lung cancer, and many smokers never develop it. There are many reasons why someone might develop lung cancer. For this reason, in any individual case of lung cancer, it is impossible to determine its specific cause(s), yet, when generalized over groups, the correlation between smoking and lung cancer becomes obvious and essentially irrefutable.

Originally posted by Outbound
A South Australian woman has given birth to her father's daughter after the couple had sex.

John and Jenny Deaves reunited 30 years after Mr Deaves separated from Jenny's mother.


Jenny was 31 and just two weeks after meeting, father and daughter had sex.

"John and I are in this relationship as consenting adults," Mrs Deaves told the Nine Network.

"We are just asking for a little bit of respect and understanding."

Their nine month old daughter Celeste, shown on TV, appears fit and healthy.

Mrs Deaves said soon after reuniting with her father she began to see him as a man first and her father second.

"I was looking at him, sort of going, oh, he's not too bad.

"Like you might look at a man across the bar at a nightclub."

Mrs Deaves brought two children, Samantha and Alex, into the relationship after splitting from her former partner.

Mr Deaves admitted that he "initially" thought having sex with his daughter was wrong.

"Emotions take over, as people no doubt realise, there are times during your life where emotions do rule the heart, it rules the head," he said.

"I knew it was illegal, of course I knew it was illegal but you know, so what."

Mrs Deaves said the physical relationship with her father was like "a sexual relationship with any other man".

For Mr Deaves the sexual relationship was "absolutely fantastic".



FFS, now we officially have inbreds. Funny story though.


Is this real?

they seem happy and the kid is healthy. Admittedly I find it a bit disgusting but so long as they are both ok with it then I dont really care.

There first kid died, then they had another kid even after clearly knowing the consequences... they should be crucified

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
There first kid died, then they had another kid even after clearly knowing the consequences... they should be crucified

Because they're just like Jesus?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Because they're just like Jesus?

No, cause its a fun way to kill people.

Good for them.

dont knock it until you've tried it

My money is on that this has been happening for hundreds of years and its getting scandalisingly alarming only because of our efficient telecommunications system we have today.

Same applies for data collected on global warming. We have only been colecting this data over the last hundreds of centuries. Global Warming has happened before and nobody bothered recording it.

did anyone hear about the story about the twins that got married or something? that was weird, i think there was a thread or maybe not...but tis incest and weird

no; but i have watched the dreamers

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
was that the twins that were separated at birth then like 25 years later they met completely by coincidence and got married? . but as soon as they found out they got divorced. ye thats the one, i cant understand how they wouldnt know though? i mean c'mon when you look the same, have the same birthday, both adopted, its kinda obvious.

Its sick and they should be shot.

Originally posted by phoney
Its sick and they should be shot. Are you one of those crazy people?

I think it is morally repulsive and wrong by my own standards. I would never do it obviously.

But if two consenting adults want to do it, far be it for me to pass a law saying they can't.

Originally posted by GCG
no; but i have watched the dreamers

That wasn't really incest though, was it?

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
was that the twins that were separated at birth then like 25 years later they met completely by coincidence and got married? . but as soon as they found out they got divorced.

Pwned.

ha-son180

Interesting history..... I wonder if they really were being sincere to themselves when they done that.


Weird thing is that the child is going to be brother of her own mother.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Are you one of those crazy people? No but they are.

Mmmm...incest.

If you like screed up genes ..sure go ahead...screw up the person in the mist of it too..

Oh, and don't forget your ogor genes...lol




This message giving not by the corporation of this site and not liable for any comments there of

Originally posted by Deja~vu
If you like screed up genes ..sure go ahead...screw up the person in the mist of it too..

Oh, and don't forget your ogor genes...lol




This message giving not by the corporation of this site and not liable for any comments there of

I don't particularly like screed in any form. hmm

GENES AND YOU, THE REAL TRUTH...sponsored by non conformist CONFORMITY . We are not responsible for any language used in this proceeding or one not in compliance to the SU BILL 24..US..102. every CRIMINAL HAS A RIGHT TO BE HEARD BUT NOT DURING THE STATES BREAK TIME"...rULE 434... aT THIS TIME CLOTHING WILL BE CONFISCATED...

pLEASE MAKE A LINE TO THE LEFT.


MAN, THAT WAS HARD WITH A WIDDLE BUz

Originally posted by AJ 1000
No but they are. Nah, I think the person that calls for people to be killed for falling in love is the crazy one.

I don't think that the falling in love bit is the problem here:

Its the f***ing.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I don't think that the falling in love bit is the problem here:

Its the f***ing. Nah, I am pretty sure the problem is the intrusive law giving and the ignorant moral standards society holds.

I'm better now, does anyone care?

Originally posted by Deja~vu
I'm better now, does anyone care? Shut the hell up.

I bring out the best in you, I know.

awesome....
wrong turn 3?

Originally posted by Deja~vu
If you like screed up genes ..sure go ahead...screw up the person in the mist of it too..

Oh, and don't forget your ogor genes...lol




This message giving not by the corporation of this site and not liable for any comments there of I love making mutated Ogre babies.

Wait..what?


For realio though, IMO, incest is wrong, you get physical mutations from that, a friend of mine has slightly deformed arms because his dad is also his grandpa.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, I am pretty sure the problem is the intrusive law giving and the ignorant moral standards society holds.

It's not love, just a daddy-fetish, more of a kink.

Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
I love making mutated Ogre babies.

Wait..what?


For realio though, IMO, incest is wrong, you get physical mutations from that, a friend of mine has slightly deformed arms because his dad is also his grandpa. That sounds like a sick man. Who could do that to their own daughter...

hmm pixie babies might be cool if not ogre.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
That sounds like a sick man. Who could do that to their own daughter...

hmm pixie babies might be cool if not ogre. 1. Yeah, he's a dick, he raped her.

2. Ogre>Pixies.

Originally posted by Robtard
It's not love, just a daddy-fetish, more of a kink. I am glad you can speak for those people. Being all knowing, is such a sweet feat.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I am glad you can speak for those people. Being all knowing, is such a sweet feat.

Yes, it is.

Originally posted by ScarletSpeed
By having sex they could potentially give birth to a mutated baby, and that is harming the baby and also why it is illegal. Although they lucked out this time and the baby is fine but that's still no excuse. It's against the law.Its like you saying its ok for a terrorist to go onto a subway and set off a bomb because they believe they are doing the right thing.I don't have a bleak view if that's the case then any normal person out there that thinks incest is wrong has a bleak view. The majority of people thinks its wrong for a reason and I am in that majority... I apologise for being normal Saying it's against the law is a pretty weak point to be honest.

You're saying it'll harm the child and the child will be deformed, yet, it's stated that the child isn't deformed. As for harm, how many children go unharmed?

seriously though how ****ed up can you be to do that though? the main question is why do people do it? why do they get some satisfaction out of it? i can understand if the world eneded and 2 people who didnt know they had any relation procreated thats a diffrent story but seriously people are bizzare now a days

Freud would be peeing his pants from happiness, if he lived to see this.

The point is, this girl did not grow up with her father, and therefore was unable to develop an attachment for someone she doesn't know.

That man may be her biological father, but he is equally stranger to her therefore her attraction is partially that of a daughter and partially that of a lover.

(ZOMG Freud was right! LOLWTFBRBLMFAOPLZKTHNX!)

It is therefore not 'weird' for them to be together. Lack of 'traditional' relationship has been replaced by a sexual one.

Freud would be 152 if he lived to see this, so he'd be pissing himself from incontinence.

What about the cases where child and parent did grow up together and they still both develop a mutual sexual attraction?

I cant fathom banging my mom....I'd rather die.

I don't know if that speaks volumes about your ethical code or how your mother looks.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Freud would be peeing his pants from happiness, if he lived to see this.

The point is, this girl did not grow up with her father, and therefore was unable to develop an attachment for someone she doesn't know.

That man may be her biological father, but he is equally stranger to her therefore her attraction is partially that of a daughter and partially that of a lover.

(ZOMG Freud was right! LOLWTFBRBLMFAOPLZKTHNX!)

It is therefore not 'weird' for them to be together. Lack of 'traditional' relationship has been replaced by a sexual one.

It's sad you think always acting on a sexual attraction is normal and healthy. It's great this child turned out to be physically healthy, but her mental state will be fragile and always in question when she finds out just how she got here. Many children that are products of rape have a difficult time accepting that fact and have problems in relationships and trust. Imagine a child learning she is a product of illegal incest.

Originally posted by Robtard
Freud would be 152 if he lived to see this, so he'd be pissing himself from incontinence.

What about the cases where child and parent did grow up together and they still both develop a mutual sexual attraction?

According to Freud everyone develops unconscious sexual attraction to their parents.

In majority of cases this is suppressed by Superego.

People who grow up with parents and find them sexually attractive and more importantly act on that desire have a Superego which is unable to suppress ID.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
It's sad you think always acting on a sexual attraction is normal and healthy. It's great this child turned out to be physically healthy, but her mental state will be fragile and always in question when she finds out just how she got here. Many children that are products of rape have a difficult time accepting that fact and have problems in relationships and trust. Imagine a child learning she is a product of illegal incest.

Its sad that your theoretical knowledge of complex phenomenon stretches all the way to shock news paper articles of some local gutter press.

I'm afraid I don't understand the b*tchy tone from lil b*tchiness. I am a psychologist and I don't read tabloids or listen to shock jocks, thank you. People forget there are emotional consequences that come along with sex in addition to physical ones and that this young woman seems to act on every sexual desire she feels seems sad to me. It's not normal and it's not healthy to act on every sexual feeling one has. It's even less normal and healthy to learn that one of your sexual exploits was illegal and feel not the slightest bit of confusion about it.

Also, don't take Freud too seriously. He had about six patients total and prescribed them cocaine. Not many in the psychology field take his "theories" seriously since they aren't backed by any empiracal evidence. All he really did for the field is get the name out to make it well-known, and invent the best type of therapy which is patient-driven rather than therapist-driven.

Originally posted by Robtard
I don't know if that speaks volumes about your ethical code or how your mother looks. Incest no good....very bad....

I wouldnt care if my mom looked like Angelina Jolie, NO.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
I'm afraid I don't understand the b*tchy tone from lil b*tchiness. I am a psychologist and I don't read tabloids or listen to shock jocks, thank you. People forget there are emotional consequences that come along with sex in addition to physical ones and that this young woman seems to act on every sexual desire she feels seems sad to me. It's not normal and it's not healthy to act on every sexual feeling one has. It's even less normal and healthy to learn that one of your sexual exploits was illegal and feel not the slightest bit of confusion about it.

Also, don't take Freud too seriously. He had about six patients total and prescribed them cocaine. Not many in the psychology field take his "theories" seriously since they aren't backed by any empiracal evidence. All he really did for the field is get the name out to make it well-known, and invent the best type of therapy which is patient-driven rather than therapist-driven.

You psychologist and don't take Freud ''too seriously''?! What are you 16?

I hardly think you walked past the psychology book, let alone a psychologist.

People disagree with Karl Marx, but that doesn't mean sociologists and philosophers will ''not take Marx too seriously'' because he was homeless and poor for a large part of his life.

Get a grip, will you.

Freud's theories are one of the most important of our time, regardless of weather one agrees or not, and if you really WERE a psychologist you will know that sexual attraction between families is a tiny proportion of all of Freud's theories and writings.
The only reason that any Joe Bloggs knows of Freud's name is because of this particular view is considered bizarre and controversial by many.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
I am a psychologist . . .

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e384/super_hottie_2/sock.jpg

You could have used a clean sock. That looks like one on Bardock's "jerk socks".

Originally posted by Robtard
You could have used a clean sock. That looks like one on Bardock's "jerk socks". crylaugh crylaugh COKE CAME OUTTA MY NOSE!!! crylaugh crylaugh

I thought Coke was supposed to go into your nose?

White people... what a waste.

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
I thought Coke was supposed to go into your nose?

White people... what a waste. shouldn't you be raping a white woman?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
You psychologist and don't take Freud ''too seriously''?! What are you 16?

I hardly think you walked past the psychology book, let alone a psychologist.

People disagree with Karl Marx, but that doesn't mean sociologists and philosophers will ''not take Marx too seriously'' because he was homeless and poor for a large part of his life.

Get a grip, will you.

Freud's theories are one of the most important of our time, regardless of weather one agrees or not, and if you really WERE a psychologist you will know that sexual attraction between families is a tiny proportion of all of Freud's theories and writings.
The only reason that any Joe Bloggs knows of Freud's name is because of this particular view is considered bizarre and controversial by many. I thought being one of the first had something to do with it as well.

I've lived in the town they moved to, oh they are going to cop it, the locals aren't known for their open mindedness and even the most liberal person i know draws the line on incest. They'll be ran out of town.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
You psychologist and don't take Freud ''too seriously''?! What are you 16?

I hardly think you walked past the psychology book, let alone a psychologist.

People disagree with Karl Marx, but that doesn't mean sociologists and philosophers will ''not take Marx too seriously'' because he was homeless and poor for a large part of his life.

Get a grip, will you.

Freud's theories are one of the most important of our time, regardless of weather one agrees or not, and if you really WERE a psychologist you will know that sexual attraction between families is a tiny proportion of all of Freud's theories and writings.
The only reason that any Joe Bloggs knows of Freud's name is because of this particular view is considered bizarre and controversial by many.

No professor, no colleague I've ever had really takes to Freud's theories. Yes, he was a very important figure because he brought psychology to the forefront and his theories on how we manifest our anger/sadness is very thought-provoking. However, most dismiss the whole idea of the id and the stages of development, one of which strongly focuses on the unconscious desires to kill the same-sex parent and have sexual relations with the opposite-sex parent. If you're into a philosophy rather than a science, then Freud is supercool. If you want to do psychological research, you stick to the people that can support their theories with evidence. Any "real" psychologist will tell you that.

This woman and this man sound to me like they have social and emotional problems and that they use sex to try and make them disappear. But by all means, if you condone incest, I suggest you try it and see what it's like and see what damage it does to your psyche.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
No professor, no colleague I've ever had really takes to Freud's theories. Yes, he was a very important figure because he brought psychology to the forefront and his theories on how we manifest our anger/sadness is very thought-provoking. However, most dismiss the whole idea of the id and the stages of development, one of which strongly focuses on the unconscious desires to kill the same-sex parent and have sexual relations with the opposite-sex parent. If you're into a philosophy rather than a science, then Freud is supercool. If you want to do psychological research, you stick to the people that can support their theories with evidence. Any "real" psychologist will tell you that.

This woman and this man sound to me like they have social and emotional problems and that they use sex to try and make them disappear. But by all means, if you condone incest, I suggest you try it and see what it's like and see what damage it does to your psyche. Wouldn't it only do damage to my psyche if a) I didn't want to do it and b) society would stigmatize me for it?

Judging by the publicity this story has generated and considering there is a whole thread about it, society does stigmatize people for it.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
Judging by the publicity this story has generated and considering there is a whole thread about it, society does stigmatize people for it. But is that the people's fault or societies?

Originally posted by Bardock42
But is that the people's fault or societies?

"People's" as in the father and daughter?

Originally posted by dadudemon
"People's" as in the father and daughter? Yeah

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah

I figured. It wouldn't make sense if you meant it the other way and, imo, you don't seem like the type of person to make a mistake like that.

This'll turn your tastes sour.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7369851.stm

Wow.




Wonder whether she is hot.

"His wife Rosemarie had allegedly not been aware of what was going on."

She didn't know after 24 years and 7 children being birthed?

oh my ****ing god...

Jesus ****, twisted bastard.

can we say WHITE TRASH

Originally posted by Bardock42
Wow.




Wonder whether she is hot.

Whu Whut?

I fear this is not an isolated incident in Bardock's part of the world

Sickos.

Originally posted by shiv
Whu Whut?

I fear this is not an isolated incident in Bardock's part of the world Depends.


Is she hot?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Depends.

http://www.theincontinencestore.com/members/999468/uploaded/Protect_UW_refast_bag.jpg

Originally posted by Bardock42
Is she hot?

Maybeh.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Maybeh.

I really start to wonder why you know so much about adult diapers.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I really start to wonder why you know so much about adult diapers.

Depends.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
You psychologist and don't take Freud ''too seriously''?! What are you 16?

I hardly think you walked past the psychology book, let alone a psychologist.

People disagree with Karl Marx, but that doesn't mean sociologists and philosophers will ''not take Marx too seriously'' because he was homeless and poor for a large part of his life.

Get a grip, will you.

Freud's theories are one of the most important of our time, regardless of weather one agrees or not, and if you really WERE a psychologist you will know that sexual attraction between families is a tiny proportion of all of Freud's theories and writings.
The only reason that any Joe Bloggs knows of Freud's name is because of this particular view is considered bizarre and controversial by many.

I don't know where you studied, but every professor I've personally had considers Freud a pervert and his ideas archaic. Yes, he was one of the first. But that doesn't make his theories untouchable or in any way relevant.

I wonder if the mother/daughter thinks of her children as her brothers and sisters? Or whatever.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
I don't know where you studied, but every professor I've personally had considers Freud a pervert and his ideas archaic. Yes, he was one of the first. But that doesn't make his theories untouchable or in any way relevant.

I don't study too much psychology...but is neo-Freudism more legit than Freudism? In other words, is it more up to date and accurate?

Originally posted by Robtard
Using "purebreed" dogs as an example, their is a correlation between birth-defects and inbreeding/incest. It isn't a far reach that humans would/could suffer from the same problems. Odd that muts tend to have much better health than dogs who's family tree is equal to a bare trunk. this can be observed in humans as well (see: jewz)

Originally posted by red g jacks
this can be observed in humans as well (see: jewz)

You're trying to hard. It would be humorous if you were a bit low-key.

i cant help it im too ambitious

also, im serious

Originally posted by red g jacks
(see: jewz)

A single amoeba poses no threat. But, given the chance to congregate, they can be awfully detrimental.

It doesn't bother me what these sick ****s do...it pisses me off that they happen to live in the same country as me...but they are welcome to each other.

Where I draw the line however, is children. They knew the risks of having a child, and they went ahead anyway, and neithor give a damn about the problems little Celeste may suffer later in life.

They are two incredibly self centred and selfish people.

It pisses you off it happened in Australia because you live there? Like there isn't dozens of incestuous relationships in the Northern Territory and there hasn't been worse things done in general. Snowtown was worse than this. Port Arther was too.

those 2 sick freaks belong together but, seriously, why have kids?



Originally posted by exanda kane
This'll turn your tastes sour.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7369851.stm

Thats messed up. That man should be shot by this time.