Thursday, May 14, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
I just find it in poor taste as there are several young girls who see the Miss States as something of a role model. I'm no prude, but when girls as young as my niece are exposed to this, it gives them the sense that it's okay to be this way. I've always said one should embrace sexuality, but I never once said that children so take half nude photos of themselves at the age of seventeen, such as the ones Prejean had taken.
Prejean spoke against the naysayers that spoke out against her. What she said doesn't change the fact that she's still a skank. Nothing, not even God, could change that fact.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Peggy McGinn says the 56-year-old Chambers was found by her 17-year-old daughter Sunday night and the cause of death has not been determined.
Chambers starred in the 1972 film "Behind the Green Door," which was more widely distributed and attracted a more mainstream audience than the usual adult fare.
Chambers, whose given name was Marilyn Briggs, was once a model for Ivory Snow. She was among the first porn superstars when the stag films of the 1940s through 1960s gave way to the more polished sex films of the 1970s.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
The 90's bombshell taking it off for the camera comes at a time when several women across the nation are joining the sex biz. No connections, I'm sure.
And while their mothers are off shooting porn, teenage girls are "sexting" it up. One group of girls have gone as far as to sue a prosecutor who was going to charge them with child pornography.
As my little old, prudish grandmother would say, "Aye dios mio." It seems everyone and their mother is getting on the sex bandwagon.
Being the sort of person who cries when a condom commercial airs on television before 9PM can be disastrous if you cringe at the thought of talking to your teen about doing the nasty. Abstinence-only ideology isn't cutting it - what can we do to stop teen pregnancies if we refuse to teach them the alternative of safe sex?
Because we'd rather be the ones sucking on the breasts of our sister-in-laws, or pleasing our brother-in-laws – admit it, you've thought of it – we must question if humans are monogamous creatures. Some say we're not; others say you make the commitment to one person and only one. If you're looking for some new excitement, however, a nice guy has made a list for you to follow to avoid problems. But to be honest, I think one woman is enough for me. And I didn't write that because she's standing behind me, grimacing. I mean it. Seriously. She's not standing behind me.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
How does anyone judge whether or not he or she is of good moral character? The most obvious arises: those who deal or do drugs; those who are incline to take bribes; those who are racists; those who are sympathizers to child molesters; those who run sex shops (such as illegal prostitution and sex trafficking). These are the sort of people that came to mind when I thought about it long enough. However, good moral character has a plethora of connotations. For instance, the pornographer releasing the 100th triple-X Blu-ray title (may be NSFW) may seen as a person of poor moral character by a few of you out there. Or the person who shoves his hands down his pants and masturbates to online fodder, may be consider an individual of poor moral character. Even the woman having sex would be considered a person of poor moral character. None of these, however, would exactly exempt them from serving on a jury.
Sex sales – we've all heard the concept before. Yet, for every Calvin Klein commercial there is a group of people crying to the FCC that sex is destroying the innocence that is found in the youth of America. However, the very same youth of America they're aiming to protect are being arrested for creating, having and networking child pornography. Tougher laws are being pushed after one girl decided to take her own life after nude photos were distributed to several classmates through the very technology that she used to take them.
Several parents place the blame in the wrong mediums: sexuality on the television; sexuality in music; online pornography; celebrity sex tapes. If you can think it, it's been blamed for being responsible for the sudden boom in child sexual activity. Child upbringing starts at home and what you allow and don't allow your child to watch. Every parent has a different way of parenting, but by making something taboo, one is only driving their children into it. Talking to your child about the consequences of their actions might be a better path to take. As one porn filmmaker said, "Once you make an adult film, it never goes away."
With current situations, however, it's not surprise that sex is getting so much attention again (as if there was ever a time when it didn't). The economy is crashing and the sex industry – namely, the adult movie industry, is seeking government help in the form of a bailout. What an absurd idea, am I right? So absurd it's like calling the deputy attorney general a pornographer due to court cases and free speech issues he'd taken on in the past. It would seem that the lyrics of the off Broadway musical turned internet meme is flawed: the porn industry isn't immune to the recession.
Where does this leave us, though? Are we in our current position because we're people who don't possess good moral character? Some say we need a spiritual bailout and turn to imaginary friends in the sky for aid. In fact, I think we're quite the opposite of needing a spiritual bailout. If anything, we're in a great need of spiritual purging.
It seems that several of us have forgotten what really makes this country great: The idea that every man is created equal. It is in our inalienable right to love another person; one could say it's our god-given right. Marriage, as it turns out, isn't.
Our freedoms have been compromised by the devout and homophobia has spilled over the Supreme Court. Relying on hate mongers to pass laws and keep the interest of this country's people is as intelligent as letting the KKK decide if the Holocaust is historically correct.
It's sad thought that the very people who'd hinder love from flourishing are thought to be those of good moral character. It would seem that these people don't follow or understand the teachings they preach. Rather than accepting individuals into their lives, they cast stones and expel them from their chapels. It seems they'd rather seen a child go homeless and die on the streets than to fathom the idea of two men or women raising it. And from hate springs more hate – no one is born homophobic (or racist for that matter), it's their upbringing. And unlike homosexuality, this sort of mindset can be changed and needs to be changed if we're ever going to thrive in this time of need.
We need to escape this "Mrs. Grundyism," as A.C. Grayling called it, and progress toward a better future. (For those of you scratching your head on the definition, in his essay "Sex," he describes it as: the moral conservatism which presumes to tell other people what to think and how to behave.) By allowing the government or our so-called moral leaders to tell us who we can and cannot marry, we're losing a little bit of ourselves in the process. We cannot call ourselves the land of the free if there is an exception tagged on by an asterisk.
We come at last to the question that started all this: What does it take for a person to be of good moral character? Acceptance is one – possibly the most ideal trait. But is acceptance alone going to do it for us? Perhaps none of us will ever be a person of good moral character.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
However, one filmmaker gives out a very great caveat: "Once you make an adult film, it never goes away." You might find yourself in a bigger pickle than Kim Basinger.
Perhaps it's not a regret toward ever doing a nude scene but, rather, the fact that her teenage daughter's friends have seen those movies. In fact, that is the case. Most boys paw at the chance to see their friend's attractive mother naked, but Kim makes it easy. All they have to do is go down to the video store and rent out a movie.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
At least she's still brown.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Now I made a comment about Dr. Manhattan's blue penis in an earlier post because I was shocked (but mostly amused) to see a family bring their kids into the theater to watch the film. Now I'm not a parent, but I know what bad parenting is - you know, the sort of person who takes their kid to a Rated-R movie would equate a bad parent.
I don't see what's so hard about a person getting online and read a family friendly review site before deciding to take your kid to a film. It's not that hard! Besides, I know better than to ever think a Rated-R movie is appropriate for a kid - we do remember what Rated-R means, right?
But assholes like Dr. Ted Baehr aren't rational people. Rather, they'd like to shove their backward dogma down our throats so he can please his fake god. We all know people like Baehr probably have stockpiles of porn - possibly gay porn, because you know they hate that the most - and they masturbate in public places so kids can see them. You're not a good person, "Dr." Baehr, nor are you an educated man. If you don't like the blue penis, too bad. But you can't say shit about brutal violence (it's in the Bible), sex (it's in the Bible) or rape (it's in the Bible), because they are the foundation of your religion.
With that being said, I wish I had his e-mail so I could send him countless pics of Dr. Manhattan's cock.
To be frank, I want to believe that this commercial wasn't suppose to hint blow job, but it does: The lady does suck out the creamy contents of a yogurt container. I'll let you decide for yourselves.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
A few years ago, Madonna was only pushing 50 and she was gyrating on the floor. I remember this clearly because I woke up one morning, turned on VH1 and puked. I missed class that day. I called my professor to tell him I had gone blind and was up-chucking the contents of my stomach: "You saw Madonna, didn't you?" was all he managed to say.
Monday, March 9, 2009
I think we should all send a message to Chris Brown that clearly states that those who abuse women should not be looked upon with celebrity, but with scorn. That no man should be awarded and rewarded for his abusive deeds. So head on to his Myspace post and tell Slugger that he doesn't deserve shit from us little people.
Far from the actions of the fore-mothers of feminism, the new breed of feminists have little to complain about. Still, illusions of the glass ceiling are pressed on when a college faculty member accidentally makes a remark on how girls aren't as good as math as boys - something that isn't completely dishonest, just not politically correct (studies have shown a lack of enthusiasm in girls when it comes to math and science - this doesn't mean they're bad at it, just that they're not into it; at the same time, I would like to state here that my girlfriend excels where I fail in algebra, noting that, while some females aren't interested in math, others are really good at it). However, in a nation where women are in control of their bodies - unless the prolifers have their way - and what they do, there can be little to say that objectification exists. It's not like there hasn't been a time when I've turned on the television to see a buff man walking around without a shirt - is this objectifying men? Where are the arguments with that? Why hasn't anybody stood up for us? This is coming from a guy who was never muscular - I went from super thin/scrawny to chubby/overweight (something I'm currently in the works of fixing).
While these ads should make me feel insecure - I'm far from perfect - because half the time I wonder if my girlfriend would rather have a fit, buff guy who can throw her around with ease. However, I manage to swallow the fact that I'm not that sort of guy.
No one fights for the guy who's in his underwear, crossed armed and muscular because nothing ever happens to men - right? So when a woman does something similar, we're automatically labeling it objectifying because woman are capable of getting raped and ads like those that American Apparel releases causes rapists to do what they do? The same is said about pornography, but it's simply not true. Rapists don't get false illusions from pornography - they're already messed up in the first place.
While I may not agree with American Apparel's inconsideration for placing billboards with ads like the one pictured above because children may come across it - and I'm all for protecting the innocence of children - I don't believe that spray painting, "Gee, I wonder why women get raped," across it makes a political statement. Rather it diminishes those women who were, are and will be raped because a man has a power issue, not because he saw a billboard, an ad on his computer, in a magazine or on television.
While I find it stupid that those out there were even pissed at the fact that TV lesbians do not compare to real lesbians, I'm the sort of person who boycotts a movie about a small Mexican "dog" because I find it poorly represents my people. I suppose I can understand where you're coming from, angry lesbians.
However, a few of you may have noted that this year hasn't been a stellar year for the lesbian, or homosexuals for that matter. With the evil Prop 8 passing even after we elected the country's first black president, has hindered our ideals of an accepting America. The I'm-just-not-that-into-you mindset has swept across the boob tube when the subject is on the fairer sex who loves the fairer sex: I whole-heartily disagree. Rather than seeing it as the country no longer has any love for the lesbians on television, we should look at it as the country no longer wanting to caricature homosexuals in general because of the series stereotypes that may be pushing Prop 8 supporters to make absurd claims when it comes to same-sex marriage.
Okay, maybe it wasn't the best step forward for my mother, who eventually handed me the money to make the purchase myself, but the fact remains: She bought me the book knowing what she was buying. Later, when I mentioned the event on a blog of mine, Susie Bright commented on the post, stating the 2008 edition was in fact the final edition. So this year, while roaming the aisles at Barnes & Noble, I notice the empty feeling that I will not being seeing another edition. Great.
My mother is probably one of the many people who I've come across of that thinks pornography when they hear the word erotica. One time, on a bus to Brownsville, when I was visiting my at-the-time girlfriend, I pulled out the 2002 Edition and started reading. Because it was a morning bus ride, no one really sat around me to begin with, but the moment the neighbor across the isle saw the sort of "smut" I was reading, his face slackened and suddenly I was a leper. When I got off the bus, the girlfriend saw the book and made a face. Ironically enough, the collection would be the first book she actually wanted to read that wasn't forced on her.
Several years later, I'm sitting at my computer reading a Google Alert that informs me that a website (and I won't link it here because I don't feel the need to) with the term erotica has sold for a nice chunk of money. Curiosity, once again, gets the better of me. Sadly, I am disappointed. I suppose I'm an unusual guy - pornography, while fun to watch, isn't something I wanna see. Disappointed, I find myself wondering if erotica does in fact equal pornography. It's something I'm still attempting to figure out.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
"Look at that one," my girlfriend-at-the-moment says, pointing out the window. We're in downtown Brownsville, transvestite prostitute territory, as one of them emerges from the shadows in skinny jeans, heels, a blouse that barely covers the paunch of her stomach, badly placed makeup and a receding hairline that is noticeable from space. We cackle at her, not out of prejudice, but at the plain fact that she assumed she looked good coming out of the house like that.
All my significant others (past & present) have on thing in common, however, (and this does fall in to the topic of conversation) and that's the very fact that they feel/felt inadequate when it comes to their chests. Most of them were proportionate with their bodies - can you imagine a thin girl with large breasts (that's some serious back problems we're dealing with) - or a chubby girl with larger breasts than need be (again, the added weight would crush her). And I've done my best to keep the current one (and when I was with the past ones) comforted that their breast size didn't add anything to my affection - large, small or completely flat, I loved them nonetheless and they shouldn't attempt to be define by their cup size.
Then there's the problem: The Tranny with the larger, "perfect" tits. Oy vey.
Anyway, there I am sitting next to my mother who accompanied me to the film because we do that sometimes when Dr. Manhattan comes out in all his glory. And believe me when I say this, he's naked throughout most of the film and the camera doesn't shy away from his dong. This isn't anything new for me. I've seen worse movies with my mother - Y Tu Mama Tambien comes to mind, as well as a few other movie. However, what made me smirk was the fact the family sitting in front of us contained children ranging from the ages of 9-11 years old (two boys and one girl). How do you even explain that to them? I don't really find it all that offensive if boys see a penis on screen because they have one, but the girl?
Okay, parents, calm down! There's a simple way to avoid all this: DON'T TAKE YOUR CHILDREN TO A RATED R FILM. If you happen to let that slip, then you better be prepared to explain to little Jimmy or Stacey why the man's penis is blue and why it just hangs there. You may also want to prepare yourself for when they ask, "Does the penis get bigger when he gets bigger?" You only have yourself to blame.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Now I've done essays on modeling sites - not suggesting that this is what my niece will be doing if/when she gets the gig - that focus on underage models. What they basically suggest is fodder for the perverted - the moral loophole! - as none of the children are nude or in the midst of coitus, but their faces and the poses are so provocative that it makes your stomach churn. I remember having nightmares of child erotica after researching for the essay - the topic of course was on the "moral" loophole.
One person might say censorship, but by censoring the world around us, we are only creating more taboos that will in the future cause more problems. Also, we create a false sense of security that will only mean that sooner or later those walls we build around the youth will crumble and they're hormones will be raging. Rather than any of these things, talking to a child is the best way to get through to them. Most of us cringe at the thought of "the talk," but it must be done. Be in their business - not through a totalitarian way, but in a caring parent (the average teenager, however, will not know the difference).
We'll also have to accept one thing, though. Teens and kids will make mistakes and rather than mulling over them and getting upset - which will only cause a gap in the relationship - always allow them to know that you are always by their side.
And with that in mind, here are your links:
I'll be frank, I didn't read the entire article because Fox News bores the crap out of me, but that shouldn't stop you from doing so. I just know that this guy there is the one that may have started the whole process of procreation between two animals rather then asexual activities. Awesome, hu?
Here's the website. I'm sure the site itself is completely not safe for work.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
However, I got an e-mail about her being offered one-million dollars from an adult movie company - probably Vivid, or Hustler because they get off on shit like this - as well as a full year's supply of diapers. I'm sorry, but is there anyone in the world who really wants to see this mother of eight get plowed by Ron Jeremy (not saying he will be the guy doing her, but Ron does do a lot of people)?
Exploiting your child is one thing, but creating a sense of fame because you had eight is just beyond grotesque. Please, Octomom, do us all a favor and vanish back to the rock from whence you came.
I don't mind sexting so much that as long as it is done between two consenting adults who know the consequences of the act. Since the moment we could take pictures, man wanted nothing more to photograph the nude body - even paintings were done and some of them are rather pornographic. However, technology has grown to a point where it can turn a simple perv to an expert peeper - you name it, micro cameras, nanny cams, and the most recently attacked, camera phones, which allow you to take a more discrete photo of a person unwillingly. This, of course, is against the law. And I have no problem with that.
What I do have a problem is charging a consenting adult who agreed to have his/her photo taken and then the jack ass who took it distributing it any which way. Unless you know for sure, and you can't, that that was the model's intention. That's returning to the bedroom, and what goes on in the bedroom between consenting adults so be kept out of the rule books. Period!
The second incident wasn't too long ago. We were waiting for our order at a local McDonald's when I brought up the wife of a certain college professor whom I thought went around without wearing a bra. The woman's in her fifties, but nevermind that because girlfriend was still mad at me for even noticing. In my defense, I retorted with, "What if a guy with an incredibly large, or incredibly small penis was walking around expose. Can you seriously tell me you wouldn't notice, even if you wish you didn't?"
In all the hoopla of this, the main thing about her and bras is that women are supposed to wear bras in order to keep their shape, prevent them from sagging and a bunch of other things. However, a recent article says otherwise. The bra myths only apply to the growth stage, the article states and that they aren't designed to prevent sagging either. Wow. Does this mean we're going to see more women on the street without one? For my health, I most certainly hope not.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Have we learning from Paris Hilton - or better yet, Kim Kardashian? Like a journal/diary, no one makes a sex tape or a set of photos unless we want someone to watch them. So if you don't want someone watching you do the naughty, or naked, then don't make a record of it. Plain and simple, right?
It would seem that troll has found away back, or another has found me - either way it's the same M.O. However, because this blog is dedicated to beauty, fashion (I know, right? You're wondering where all that is located on this blog) and, first and foremost, sexual freedom, I don't want to call out a group of fetishists unless they're something way too deviate for me (e.g. pedophiles, if you can call that a fetish). In light of the scat troll, I have come to realized that, while I originally thought furries were disturbed people, I don't understand two things about pornography:
- What is wrong with the women/men who partake in eating or having fecal matter touch them in these videos, and
- What in the hell is wrong with people who masturbate to scat porn?
A lot of you may not know this, because I never wrote it here, but the reason for my distaste in Katy Perry is her two singles, "I Kissed a Girl" and "UR So Gay." While not homophobic in lyrics, it does bring down the notch for those in the GLBT community, something I happen to be a part of even though I don't go shouting it out on the rooftop of every building - you know, because I'll be arrested. While they lyrics of the latter song aren't suppose to boil anyone's blood, I find it completely offensive to my cause - the new image of man. As for the first song, it is often mistaken for bisexuality but should be noted that it's more about "barsexuality" than anything else.
Nevertheless, Katy Perry - with her Zooey Deschanel physique - is incredibly beautiful, not to mention, talented.
What humors me, as well as others, is the fact that Myspace, while being so anti-sexual, kept several porn stars actual profiles even though their pictures are as "racy" as the video. In the long run, it's not so much sex that upsets Myspace, but the idea of actually educating its users. Well played, morons.
Someone do her a favor - despite what she said - get this girl a cheeseburger.
[On a side note, this blogger would also like to state that work, stress and sleeplessness have only attributed to his weight gain, not his weight loss.]
Friday, February 20, 2009
However, let me bring up a theory: I believe people like Kim Borchers have such a boring sex life that they have to instill it on everyone else, and then turn around and play the Helen Lovejoy card by saying, "Won't somebody think about the children."
Nothing media-wise is damaging to a minors' psyche, except in the cases where bad parenting plays a card. There are a lot of people who want other entities to raise their children. If Kim Borchers were to simply sit down with her kids and have the inevitable sex talk, then she can be assured that she's making some sort of progress with them. But to censor something? Well, Kim you might as well plaster on a tiny mustache upon your upper lip and ring in the Third Reich.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Anyway, here are you links:
Anti-pornography Catholic Propaganda
Because he's gay, Rupert Everett can't get work
GLBTQ target of crimes
The Perfect Lesbian Myth
What is said in bed
Teen masturbation and condom use supporter
Gay is not the new black
Lily Allen wants to pose naked
Brooklyn Decker Nipple Slip
Teen girl faces child porn charges
Scarlett's sexy ad
From students to sex stars
Miley's Pedo boyfriend exposed
Butt ugly woman shows a 14-yr-old her tits
To be honest, I think Taylor Swift is just the sort of role model the girls of this country need. There's a fine line between being sexually free and just being slutty - Taylor Swift chooses not to discuss sex, not because it's taboo, but because it's her choice. She chooses not to be provocative like the teen celebrities before her, and that is her choice. So kudos Taylor Swift for living your own decisions rather than being influenced by those in control.
However, just because you don't talk about sex doesn't mean that'll keep people from imagining you naked - they're going to do it regardless. Also, I disagree with the definition of rebellion that she puts out. That is not rebellious, that's just mundane.
Either way, her management said that the tape isn't new and that the couple haven't been sexually involved - or involved on any level - in quite some time. The tape is simply old footage that wasn't released the first time around and that Chyna did not consent to it being put out in the public. However, I say, anyone who makes a sex tape does it so others may see it. Why else would you document it?
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
I don't care how much of a nerd TV Guide thinks we are, but a lesbian isn't going to make us go around creaming out pants. What will probably get us all hot and bothered will be the erasing of Bruce Wayne's death. Because that shouldn't have happened in the first place. This is Ben Reilly (Spiderman reference) all over again. But only with a lesbian and sans clones.
Anyway, I open my blog today and see something that automatically catches my eye. Kinseyette, over at SEX in the university, posted a caveat for lovers who prefer the woman on top - ahem, such as myself. I'm awfully careful with myself and with my lover, so it's not much of a problem - this isn't the first time I heard about such things, a guy - homosexual guy, I should say - that I knew in high school told me something similar and it used to make me laugh because...well, I won't talk about why it made me laugh. Anyway, here are your links:
Sexy toys for kids
Smart teens still want child erotica off the air
Katy Perry offends queer community
Naked Sax (NSFW)
Mardi Gras events
Kicked out for being lesbian
Lesbians are bisexual
here & here
Cartoon nudity has parents fumed
Bikini Girl nude
Debunked Sex Myths
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Mother Teresa and Isaac Newton were virgins for good reason, but they're not the sort of people you want to name drop when explaining that you're celibate as well. Mother Teresa was a nun and celibacy comes with that territory; as for Isaac Newton, well he was a mathematician and that's the sort of thing that doesn't get you laid. So, if you dissect the argument correctly, Jill Laing is either a nun or a mathematician, which, seemingly belonging to the Church of Latter Day Saints, I'm assuming she's neither as nuns are mostly not nut jobs and LDS-folk still believe that Native Americans were originally white, so they probably don't have intelligence under their belt anyway.
There's nothing wrong with celibacy, though. If you're a Katy Perry, it's just a ridiculous joke. My main concern about Laing's inability to accept that homosexuality isn't a choice - we're are living in a century where the earth is round, right? You can choose to not have sex, but you can't choose who you will love. It's that simple. And her suggesting that there is "evidence" that proves that homosexuals can go straight is null and void as most of it resides in the church, and we all know that the church always alters things to follow its belief.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is, if you're going to compare yourself to someone, don't go around name dropping historical people who have made a difference. I've read about Mother Teresa and peruse - because I had to - some of Newton's works, and Jill Laing, you are no Mother Teresa or Isaac Newton.
The other day, a friend of mine wrote a short declaration of love for scene girls on a quasi-popular networking site forum. The backlash was incredible. Several youngsters threw down the pedophile gauntlet and continue to call him some sort of creep. Granted that my friend is probably a creep, those teens were too quick to judge that all scene girls were their age because you know Suicide Girls and Gods Girls are so not scene. Besides, the correct term for a pervert who likes girls/boys of late adolescence is hebophile, instead of pedophile, while is the "affection" of pre-pubescent children. Get your insults correct!
While the ones found on the aforementioned softcore porn sites have piqued my interest, I don't care much for scene girls. I met one. A close friend of mine happens to be the father of one and she carries herself highly, which isn't a bad trait just as long as you don't do it around college students and college graduates because, to be frank, we're not impressed by how smart you are in high school.
So as my friend is being labeled incorrectly, I'm pondering what is so special about scene girls. Is it the cropped hair? The sneer on their faces as if they're being angry or scary? Is it the fact that none of them seem to know what the term "in moderation" means when it comes to their makeup? Their horrible taste in music? The fact they can possibly be traps? I should ask; I really should.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
In her 1992 book, Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices, Brenda Love wrote:
The taboo against incest originated for several reasons. Genetic defects in offspring has been cited most often. However, many tribes only restricted marriage between relatives; not sex. The taboos was used to promote kinship with other tribes, and to avoid sexual disruption or confusion of roles in the family unit. Sibling incest was once thought to produce only female offspring. This belief might have been one reason patriarchal societies prohibited these marriages.
But may still cringe at the idea of two people who are closely related doing the nasty - believe you me, I am one of them. Love's book, however, only deals with parent/offspring (I stray away from using the term child because, while many times incest crimes are between someone of underage and his/her parent, many cases have been proven to be with consenting adults; I'm making an attempt to talk about those relationships and not the child sexual assault cases), and does not touch on the subject of siblings. However, she had this to say:
The Egyptian royalty used matrilineal descent in choosing successors because they couldn't prove paternity. Royal sons could only rule if they married their sisters. Sometimes they were married at birth.That's just wonderful.
What piqued my interest on the subject of brother/sister incest was an article that was e-mailed to me. In it, a woman speaks about her relationship with her brother (the intro to this post was actually inspired by that article) and how natural it seemed, all the while knowing that society would never understand. There are several people out there in the world that have such experiences, hiding them in the closet in order to keep them sacred, secret, safe.
Maybe we'll never understand the incestuous relationship, and maybe we'll never have to, but in the dark they happen more than we think.
I'll touch on this subject again, perhaps leaning to the parent/offspring relationship as well. It'll be heavily researched when it's posted.