Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A. A man with a young son (2 or 3) marries a woman with a young daugter. The kids grow up together, but are not related by blood. They decide to start dating or get married to each other.
B. Same scenario as above, except the kids meet as teenagers.
C. Two kids with the same mother AND father are separated while still very young (2 for the older, let's say). They basically have no memory of each other. They start dating or decide to get married, and only later learn that they are related by blood.
D. Same scenario as C, but they're only related to each other through one parent, not both. Again, no memory of each other.
My ex-girlfriend would take more exception to the latter two scenarios than the former two--whereas I would have the most difficulty with A, and not so much with any of the others.
"You don't marry family," she would say, without defining what family is. In my definition, family is more about who you've grown up with as a member of your household, and not so much a bloodline relationship.
By the same token, a "step" father can be more of a father than someone genetically related to you.
While the last sent. you said is true, I think all are gross. ANY kind of sibling blood, or step, or half...in any case is some kind of form or shape of a sibling. What is this the south? Sorry to my relatives from the south. I know that is a stereotype.
I guess my point being that in the latter two scenarios, there was no foreknowledge that you were even related. And in the former two, there is an obvious familial relationship, but not blood relationship.
The former two are even "technically" legal, while the latter two are not.
I guess my point being that in the latter two scenarios, there was no foreknowledge that you were even related. And in the former two, there is an obvious familial relationship, but not blood relationship.
The former two are even "technically" legal, while the latter two are not.
I would be horrified to find out that I was in love with my brother.
I'd say C and D because they are blood relations.
But if they do not know, then who can blame them.
They had this scenario on Niptuck.
Christian was Matt's bio father and had a girl by another woman.
They actually had sex before they found out.
Matt ended it but the sister wanted to stay with him.
A. A man with a young son (2 or 3) marries a woman with a young daugter. The kids grow up together, but are not related by blood. They decide to start dating or get married to each other.
B. Same scenario as above, except the kids meet as teenagers.
C. Two kids with the same mother AND father are separated while still very young (2 for the older, let's say). They basically have no memory of each other. They start dating or decide to get married, and only later learn that they are related by blood.
D. Same scenario as C, but they're only related to each other through one parent, not both. Again, no memory of each other.
My ex-girlfriend would take more exception to the latter two scenarios than the former two--whereas I would have the most difficulty with A, and not so much with any of the others.
"You don't marry family," she would say, without defining what family is. In my definition, family is more about who you've grown up with as a member of your household, and not so much a bloodline relationship.
By the same token, a "step" father can be more of a father than someone genetically related to you.
If you KNOW that the other person is related to you, i.e. is 'family', then I'd say you should look elsewhere. It is a big world - I can't think of a good reason to justify pursuing a relationship with a relative.
I think situation A is the strangest because growing up together should make the two feel the most like siblings. There is a reason people use the saying "I love you like a brother/sister" to convey non-romantic feeling. Situations C and D are also weird, but I can understand how that can happen IF and only IF the two don't realize they are siblings. Once they find out they are siblings, then that's just not right - especially if they go on to have children. Situation B doesn't seem too horrible (assuming they aren't young teens doing the hanky panky every night while their parents are asleep). They didn't grow up together, so they don't feel the sibling bond, and they aren't related.
Personally the second two (C and D) bother me more - from a scientific point of view. Inbreeding can lead to serious genetic issues.
However I wouldn't support the first two either.
isnt it strange though that we are always worried about inbreeding? i myself am all against it, but when you think back in history, even in the last century. it was not uncommon for people in the higher/richer sects of life to marry their cousins and have children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
