Ask a guy who wants to marry his sister anything

Ask a guy who wants to marry his sister anything

Other urls found in this thread:

psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/124/1/22/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

pics?

How the heck do you think you're going to accomplish that?
Also, greentext story.

Is she hawt? Will you post pics?

Older sister or younger sister? If younger, then please kill yourself degenerate.

She is only my half-sister and I met her only 1 time in my life.

>If younger, then please kill yourself degenerate.
Hmm? Why do you say that? You're saying wanting to fuck someone who is younger than you is morally reprehensible? You are quite dumb, are you not?

OP, post pics.

how do you know you want to marry her if you have only mite her once ...

>You're saying wanting to fuck someone who is younger than you is morally reprehensible?

No. Because older siblings should look after their younger brothers and sisters instead of exploiting them sexually. Especially if they're older AND genetically stronger (older male, younger female).

>No. Because older siblings should look after their younger brothers and sisters instead of exploiting them sexually.
Why do you characterize sexual interactions as necessarily exploitative when age differentials are present? Are you suggesting only sex between people of identical ages are non-exploitative? That's silly.

Also silly is your characterization of sexual acts as being antithetical to "looking after" someone. Sex is pleasurable, and having sex with someone is just about the nicest thing you can do for them. Your attitude here makes no sense!

>Especially if they're older AND genetically stronger (older male, younger female).
Well, if no physical coercion is involved, then what relevance is strength? You haven't really thought this out, have you?

Sorry, can't do that. Yeah I am low, but I can't fall THAT low. All I can say is that I have pics. And she is Eastern European (I live in Western Europe btw) and I know for a fact that she is worried about me.

But that is all I am going to say.

Well, describe her body for us. Her personality. Why do you wanna marry her? Does she like you back?

>Are you suggesting only sex between people of identical ages are non-exploitative?
Siblings. We're talking about siblings.

>Also silly is your characterization of sexual acts as being antithetical to "looking after" someone.
Only because you can't read. I'm calling exploitation as antithetical to caring or "looking after".

>Sex is pleasurable, and having sex with someone is just about the nicest thing you can do for them.
You obviously don't understand why no children in no civilized legislation is able to consent by law. Neither in terms of sexuality nor in, say monatary issues.
Same goes for sexual relations between adults and children. Surely not every such relationship is abusive but a huge majority of them are. And what a 10 year old said doesn't matter in court, even if there is/was proof about him/her giving consent.
Long story cut short: the relationship of dependancy between siblings makes any consent invalid because an agreement does not necessary result from a willing of the sexual act but could also be made due to the fear of disappointment and demaging the relationship as siblings or even rejection.
Of course the chance of this to happen increases with a bigger age gap and bigger difference in physical strength.

>Well, if no physical coercion is involved
You do not have beat someone to threaten him to do so. You don't even have to say it verbally, for example when something similar happed before and the weaker part knows exactly what may happens if he/she does not do what being told.

>Siblings. We're talking about siblings.
What's your point?


>I'm calling exploitation as antithetical to caring or "looking after".
Your characterization of incest as necessarily being exploitative is what's under question here. And saying I can't read, dude? Your writing skills are atrocious. I'm sure you aren't literate enough to notice how.


>You obviously don't understand why no children in no civilized legislation is able to consent by law.
Well, this is simply untrue. It is also totally irrelevant, as no one mentioned children.


>Surely not every such relationship is abusive but a huge majority of them are.
There is just no evidence for this claim. And the available evidence suggests the opposite:

psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/124/1/22/
"Many lay persons and professionals believe that child sexual abuse (CSA) causes intense harm, regardless of gender, pervasively in the general population. The authors examined this belief by reviewing 59 studies based on college samples. Meta-analyses revealed that students with CSA were, on average, slightly less well adjusted than controls. However, this poorer adjustment could not be attributed to CSA... Basic beliefs about CSA in the general population were not supported."

Common beliefs are often unsupported and baseless. This one is a great example.


>the relationship of dependancy between siblings makes any consent invalid because an agreement does not necessary result from a willing of the sexual act but could also be made due to the fear of disappointment and demaging the relationship as siblings or even rejection
Well, "could" is the operative word here. And this would only be saying something against coercive sex, not incest per se.


>Of course the chance of this to happen increases with a bigger age gap and bigger difference in physical strength.
Please provide supportive evidence for this claim, especially as regards age gaps.

>You do not have beat someone to threaten him to do so. You don't even have to say it verbally, for example when something similar happed before and the weaker part knows exactly what may happens if he/she does not do what being told.
What you're describing here is the dynamics of a hostile, dysfunctional relationship. Again, it's silly that you'd stereotype incestuous sexual relations as involving coercion, when sex is highly pleasurable and among the nicest things you can do for someone. Please drop these silly beliefs of yours. They are antiquated, baseless, false, conservative nonsense.

>the one who claims it's okay to fuck your little sister is also the one trying to justify paedophilia

colour me surprised

also thanks because this proves exactly my point that older brother - younger sister is NOT the same as vice versa. And people fucking their younger sisters are disgusting subhumans that need to be put to sleep forever.

>colour me surprised
I am not justifying pedophilia. I am clearing up a common misconception you buy into. You are the one who brought pedophilia up, anyway. Why, exactly, was it on your mind, hmm?

>this proves exactly my point that older brother - younger sister is NOT the same as vice versa
No, showing you that you were wrong about something does not prove your point. Quite the opposite, in fact. If you want to prove your point, you need to address each of my responses.

>And people fucking their younger sisters are disgusting subhumans that need to be put to sleep forever.
I would say that, if anything, you are a degenerate. Do you know what degenerate actually means? A degenerate is a morally reprehensible person. You supporting the stigma against incest calling for violence against those who engage in it is ethically unjustifiable. But, you are clearly quite stupid anyway, so I doubt you'll understand this any time soon, if ever.

>You are the one who brought pedophilia up, anyway. Why, exactly, was it on your mind, hmm?
Everything I worte applies obviously only to those cases in which the younger party is still underage.
If you are 45 and your "little" sister is 43, then do whatever you like, Billy Bob. It's none of my business then.

>showing you that you were wrong about something does not prove your point. Quite the opposite, in fact
so the fact that I might have been wrong (which I actually wasn't) on a totally different issue means that I'm wrong in every discussion? Big words for someone calling other people stupid.

>Do you know what degenerate actually means?
kek, a lesson about how other people are degenerates by someone who wants to rape the little sister he should protect and calling it "pleasurable for both"

>You supporting the stigma against incest
falls claim. I did not support any stigma on anything. I didn't even talk about incest since my understanding of incest is most likely a whole different than yours.

>calling for violence against those who engage in it is ethically unjustifiable
yet again false claim since I didn't talk about incest. see above.

>Everything I worte applies obviously only to those cases in which the younger party is still underage.
Why are you bringing up underage sex? Did the OP say he's an adult and that his sister is underage? Remember, you said earlier that, if his sister is younger (you didn't specify any ages or age gaps), he's a degenerate.

>so the fact that I might have been wrong (which I actually wasn't) on a totally different issue means that I'm wrong in every discussion?
No. The fact that you were wrong about something, in itself, does not mean you were right about some other thing. Why does this have to be explained to you?

>kek, a lesson about how other people are degenerates by someone who wants to rape the little sister he should protect and calling it "pleasurable for both"
If you were actually interested in proving your point, you'd stop with these lame attempts at character assassination. I guess you're just not too confident in your beliefs. I don't blame you.

>I did not support any stigma on anything. I didn't even talk about incest since my understanding of incest is most likely a whole different than yours.
So, you came into a thread about incest, then changed the subject to pedophilia, and I'm the pedo??

>you came into a thread about incest, then changed the subject to pedophilia

>constantly tries to call me out on my alleged reading incomprehensibility
>fails on reading the OP properly

This thread is about asking someone who plans on marrying his sister anything, not about incest. You could ask him what the capital of Tanzania is as well.

>you said earlier that, if his sister is younger (you didn't specify any ages or age gaps), he's a degenerate.
Hence I was more specific in my last post. I don't understand why you're bringing this missunderstanding up after I clearified myself.

>you'd stop with these lame attempts at character assassination
Nice try. It was you who called me degenerate first. I was addressing people in general which match the definition or precicly paedophiles.
And if you say that child rapists don't classify as degenerates, then it's you who defends paedophilia and thus matches exactly the definition of a degenerate.

>This thread is about asking someone who plans on marrying his sister anything, not about incest.
Are you suggesting he has no intentions of having sexual relations with his own wife?

>Nice try. It was you who called me degenerate first.
>first
You're saying I called you a degenerate before you made that lame jab at my reading comprehension?

>Are you suggesting he has no intentions of having sexual relations with his own wife?
No, I'm saying that the sexual relations OP has with his wife is not the thread's topic. I'm pretty sure OP also takes a dump every now and then, yet this isn't a thread about scat.

>You're saying I called you a degenerate before you made that lame jab at my reading comprehension?
Here you call me "quite dumb". Note: it was BEFORE I even responded to you once.
Here you call me a degenerate before I did.
Besides, I don't know why critisizing your reading comprehension is considered by you as an argumentum ad hominem since it was the main reason why you tried to put words in my mouth.

>No, I'm saying that the sexual relations OP has with his wife is not the thread's topic.
So, why did you change the topic from marriage to pedophilic sex? Also, are you not aware that marriage voids age of consent considerations? You seem really uneducated.

>Also, are you not aware that marriage voids age of consent considerations? You seem really uneducated.
Also, are you aware that you don't know where OP lives and you can't say shit about age of consent or marriage restrictions in his country?

But, yeah, the american assumes everyone lives in America and calls other people uneducated. kek