(Untitled)

[tellshannon815]

I will completely understand if anyone chooses to skip this particular discussion, I'll be putting up another one soon I'm sure anyway as I want to get more in for Fannish 50 (which went a bit by the wayside during Evil Virus of Doom back in June and not properly picked up) so feel free to just come back to that one, whatever it may be

Comments

[geekslave]

For me, stuff like parent/child is off-limits no matter what; full siblings as well. I understand why Wincest happened - especially because, as you said, there were barely any other characters at first. While I could understand it and even sometimes see that kind of chemistry, I couldn't go there because they were full siblings and raised together.

Like you, stuff like stepsiblings who weren't raised together doesn't bother me at all. Unless characters share blood, I don't really care. Like, on a soap I watch, a couple got together even though they share two siblings (through different parent combinations.) Many people find it squicky, but I don't since the two aren't genuinely related and didn't even meet until they were adults.

Stacey

[tellshannon815]

If it wasn't for the fact that the soap couple you're talking about are actually together, I'd be thinking that was something that's happening on a UK soap right about now. In the UK case, "Bobby" had a crush on "Anna" which wasn't reciprocated; they've now found out that before either of their parents were together, Bobby's father "Ian" used to be married to Anna's mother "Cindy" who he's now reconciled with. They'd had no reason to think that was possible; Cindy's just come out of witness protection, Bobby was always under the impression she'd long since died, Anna didn't know Cindy was married before meeting her father "George". Even though there's no blood relation there (although they also share two siblings, one living, one deceased) there were people out there who found that squicky.

[geekslave]

Wow, and I thought American soap storylines got complicated.

Stacey

[trepkos]

It doesn't truly bother me between siblings unless there's a power imbalance. I occasionally read wincest, and downloaded loads of mixes.

[honeymink]

I've written Cesare/Lucrezia when I was in The Borgias/Boriga: Faith and Fear fandom. Frankly, most of the stuff I write has been because others have asked me to write it so I will say this about that particular pairing - not just with them but the whole era etc. I did a lot of research before writing and I always prefered writing about the politics than relationships but people wanted to read the incest because I think it's forbidden (and doubly so in the beginning when Cesare is a cardinal and Lucrezia runs away to a nunnery, thinking about taking vows -- the latter was a bit twisted for the show but irl she indeed spent a lot of time in a nunnery) and because the respective actors had a certain chemistry, I suppose. Obviously historically this has always been a rumour and never proven, but again historically the ruler of Perugia openly lived with his sister in an incestuous relationship at the time. So there - it wasn't a favourite thing for me to write but people enjoyed it for reasons I can see to some degree why

[tellshannon815]

Betty and Cheryl definitely weren't first cousins - I can't remember how far back the relationship went, but I do know Hal and Clifford weren't siblings. That reminds me, Polly and Jason were a couple I hadn't even thought about, but they would be related in just the same way.

As for in laws, I wouldn't count that as an incestuous pairing any more than I'd count Betty and Jughead, since that's not a blood relationship (I did just google the legality of it in the UK - at one time marrying an in law was banned full stop, then banned as long as the original spouse was still alive, then eventually allowed).

[honeymink]

I think Betty's and Cheryl's (and yes you're right Polly's and Jason's) great-grandfathers were brothers. I think that makes them second cousins once removed but don't quote me on that I'm really bad at this stuff.

And yes, you are right about the legality and how it developed. If we think about it, it goes back to Henry VIII's whole argument for his divorce from KoA - Leviticus 20:21 "If a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing". Hence them having needed a dispensation in the first place (apart from them being related to begin with).