mara. trans lesbian. mid-30s.
this is my sideblog for my writing and other nsfw stuff. there will probably be a lot of incest.
currently writing Entanglement, a slow burn siscon romance.
ojovivo
The Bowery Presents
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
Mike Driver
Cosimo Galluzzi
EXPECTATIONS
Keni
hello vonnie
Monterey Bay Aquarium
occasionally subtle

oozey mess
cherry valley forever
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

blake kathryn
we're not kids anymore.
d e v o n
YOU ARE THE REASON
Today's Document
No title available
macklin celebrini has autism
seen from United States
seen from South Korea
seen from Peru
seen from United States

seen from Australia
seen from Ecuador
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Ukraine

seen from United States
seen from Laos
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@marassong
mara. trans lesbian. mid-30s.
this is my sideblog for my writing and other nsfw stuff. there will probably be a lot of incest.
currently writing Entanglement, a slow burn siscon romance.
filtering down ao3 results from 14000 to 6 based on a single tag is foul. im sorry none of you are as enlightened as me ig.
normal one. next question.
peer review
DIYHRT.market is back as valerie.vg
Polyamory is safe for work. Polyamory is safe for kids. Polyamory is safe for day time tv. Polyamory isn’t more sexual than any other relationship and it can be just as romantic, sweet, and healthy.
this is absolutely going to cause me to lose every single follower i have but i Do Not Care so anyways, i have something id like to say.
incest is not inherently damaging whatsoever as long as its consensual. there is zero scientific evidence that consensual incest is damaging. NONE. of course, incestuous abuse absolutely exists and is extremely damaging to the victims of it, but what i am talking about is consensual relationships between adults.
before you call me insane, here:
in an article by clare kasemset from stanford university, she states that one of the main (and only) scientific reasons that incest is illegal is that "the offspring of partners with a high level of consanguinity are more likely to have birth defects". however, this is eugenics: disabled people's children are also very likely to have children with birth defects, and anyone really could potentially have children with birth defects. this argument is simply that incestuous relationships should be illegal so that birth defects cease to exist. keep in mind, the definition of eugenics is "to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable"; in essence, make sure that the only people born are "desirable", which would include being able-bodied. kasemset goes on to explain that "the act of incestuous sexual intercourse does not cause harm". incest does not inherently cause harm. the only reasons people give for the illegalization of incestuous relationships are eugenics and the potentially offensiveness of it due to the fact that "the vast majority of people in this country have deep-seated beliefs that incest is immoral".
article source: https://ojs.stanford.edu/ojs/index.php/intersect/article/download/137/35/615
in an article by maria campo redondo and gabriel andrade, they state that "incest represents a risk, but this is not reason enough to illegalize incest". this is because "other circumstances of sexual intercourse may lead to similar risks, and yet, such practices are not illegal". think of how AIDs is used to say that homosexuality should be illegal, how the possibility of miscarriage is used to say that people should only be getting pregnant at young ages, how the possibility of disabled children is used to say that disabled people shouldnt be having children: all of these are arguments that rely on nothing but "disability should be eradicated". ableism is so extremely ingrained in our society that people constantly search for the cure to every disability so that they wont have to deal with disabled people existing. i have had friends who have been told "your children will be disabled though!!!!! 😥" for being disabled just like those who are in incestuous relationships have. you should be allowed to have a child as long as you or someone else is capable of taking care of them, no matter if that child is disabled or not - a child potentially being disabled is not a morally wrong thing. as the authors of this article say, the reasons why incest is illegal "do not relate to public health and genetic risks".
article source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/phil.12332
in a paper by jeff sebo, he states that "incest increases the incidence of inherited genetic diseases by about three percent". three percent. that is only three out of every hundred children born out of incestuous relationships. the argument of incest increasing disabilities is not only founded on eugenics, but founded on a very small statistic - especially compared to the fact that the probability of an autistic person have an autistic child is, on average, 3.45%. it is no different from any genetically disabled person having a child. advocating for incest to be illegal based on the possibility of disabled children is no different from advocating for disabled people to be sterilized.
he also explains that family is not dramatically different from any other relationship, and that there "are numerous important relationships in our lives—some of which are based on blood, others of which are not—and it is ridiculous to assume that our family members, whoever they may be, are necessarily our emotional centers". for many, many people, friends can even more important than family, or family can seem much more similar to friendly dynamics than typical family dynamics. the argument of families is also very often used against queer people by saying that it ruins the inherent family dynamics that are supposedly present, when in reality, families all function very differently and many people see their siblings or cousins as more like friends than how families are typically portrayed. as the author says: "no relevant moral distinction neatly separates our family relations from the other relationships in our lives".
he also explains that many people claim that incest "turn[s] out badly frequently enough to warrant a categorical ban". incestuous relationships are often abusive ones, this is very evident. however, "the outcome of our test will depend largely on how we run it". if we only ask abuse victims what their experience was (as many, many articles do), we will come to the conclusion that it is all abusive. only looking at people who were children abused by adult family members is not looking at the effects of incest, but looking at the effects of child abuse. yes, there may be a lack of scientific evidence for incest being good - but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and there are many, many person experiences from people. on top of that, "those who breach the taboo are branded as outsiders, they suffer the effects of social ostracism, and since others misinterpret this suffering as caused by the act and not the label, they are used as evidence in support of the taboo". if someone is in an incestuous relationship, they will be hated by everyone, which will lead to them being depressed and possibly suicidal - not because of the incest itself, but because of how its treated.
source (PLEASE go read this its very well-done): https://jeffsebo.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/the-ethics-of-incest1.pdf
look. i came into this respectfully disagreeing with you, but then i looked into it myself, and i do have to say: i agree, mostly. this is one of the few times i will talk about sexual topics on my page because this one's unavoidable it's inherently going to be brought back to sex sorry. i also mention sexual violence, csa and sexual assault in this, so be wary.
first off, i acknowledge that you have fair points, quite a few actually. first of all, the concept of incest is very much more heavily demonized than it really needs to be. i would like to assume this is not only due to the stigma around it being a paraphilia but also because of history showing the effects of long-term inbreeding, and how it caused intense health risks for individuals. i agree that there are likely many circumstances where the same family dynamic does not apply to individuals who would be blood relatives, such as for example cousins who see themselves more as friends like you said. i would also like to add the fact that some forms of incest are not directly genetically harmful, such as a pair of adopted siblings, something i cannot remember if you mentioned.
i do agree that it is definitely a strange double standard for incestuous relationships to be criminalized due to the reason of "a possibility child comes out disabled." i would like to add the fact that it also paves the way for someone with very bad-faith intentions to attempt to, as you alluded to, criminalize disabled people having children as well.
in doing my own reading on this, i found a quote by martin o'reilly, stating, "indeed, it’s worth noting that with respect to huntington’s disease — a distressing, impairing brain disorder — if one parent has it, there’s a 50 percent chance any child he/she has will also be born with the fatal disorder. But if we don’t punish those carrying defective genes from having children, why then should we punish incestuous partners? if we’re not prepared to prevent carriers of congenital disorders from having children —or, for that matter, having sex — then it seems quite arbitrary and discriminatory to only punish incestuous partners." i think it's a pretty well-stated commentary on this phenomenon and the double-standard enforced here. i'm not going to make commentary on the ethics of attempting to stop anyone from having children who are disabled or who may be disabled, simply because it is a highly complex issue that i am not one side on. i can recognize points on both sides that are well spoken, and i can see people on both sides having genuinely good-faith opinions on the matter.
however, i would not use the word eugenics here. i feel as if that may be too heavy a word to be using in this situation, as eugenics has been used as part of a collection of ideologies used to systemically discriminate against and even genocide individuals before, which i would not like to compare the act of incest to. i feel as if that waters down the suffering victims of eugenics have gone through.
my original arguments were for the unhealthy power dynamic between individuals who have grown up as family members, but... there is no evidence i can find of that power dynamic other than in fringe situations. i have only seen criticism of your reference of "destroying a family dynamic" or "emotional harm to the other family members," and commentary proving the exact opposite, or commentary on incestuous abuse, or incest not practiced by two consenting adults (see: child abuse). in fact, in the abstract of a book i found legitimately criticizing incest as it would harm the family dynamic, the author directly states "that being said, i argue that there is insufficient legal justification for all consensual, adult incest to be criminalised. i examine four potential arguments in favour of consensual, adult incest being illegal, and conclude that none of them succeeds in justifying a total legal prohibition against it."
turning back to martin, who puts it in a way that really puts it into perspective for me, specifically when he talks about an explanation by vera bergelson, detailing "the legal scholar vera bergelson points out this argument is both overbroad and redundant. it’s overbroad in the sense that it applies to cases where power dynamics, abuse, or exploitation do not exist. (speaking of which, we don’t prohibit nonincestuous adult relationships merely because one partner is older, richer, or has more social status than the other). the argument is also redundant as there are already statutes directed at child abuse and statutory rape, as well as sexual exploitation or violence (irrespective of the age of the victim). the sexual acts between relations here would be immoral not because they are incestuous, but because they would amount to rape, violence or exploitation; we already regard such behaviour as wrong, independent of whether or not incest occurred." honestly if i could quote his entire breakdown of it, i would. i'll try not to, though.
while i would love to treat this going into this with the passion of a thousand suns throwing out proof that it's actually really terrible and you are So Stupid To Believe That.... well, first of all, this was something written in complete good faith with cited scholarly sources and second of all i don't do that usually lol. and third of all... there really is no evidence! i would love if someone could pop into this and give some articles that disprove op and i's statements in defense of consensual incest, i've found that every article i've seen talking about it in a negative light have been
only speaking of incest between father and daughter, especially in cases of csa. paints all father-daughter relationships as the father directly asserting dominance over the daughter (which in most cases may be the case) and paints any other situations, like mother-son incest, as either the woman being the victim (denying the concept that women can be aggressors and/or rapists and that men can be victims of rape) or somehow the son is the problem.
treating sibling incest as somehow the fault of the father for not being "dominant enough" in the family, therefore causing the brother to be the source of power. repeat the earlier statements about father-daughter relationships.
ignoring the concept of incestuous relationships between, say, cousins, or aunt and nephew.
for these, i would check out this article which in the preview breaks down parts of weinberg's incest behavior. additionally, if you feel privy, feel free to do as i did and browse google scholar attempting to find one link to an abstract or synopsis that isn't in defense of consensual adult incest. seriously, it's more difficult than you would think.
i... have had every argument i had dismantled, honestly. i had one about the increased amount of inbreeding that would come from the decriminalization and normalization of incest, but guess what: good old martin coming back again. "this might be a fair objection if there was good reason to assume the decriminalisation of adult incest would lead to a significant rise of inbreeding. but as we know, there are already a small number of countries that currently don’t ban adult incest, and we’ve no reason to believe there are significant instances of inbreeding in those countries. there’s also evidence to suggest the practice will never become widespread: various studies have shown that people who live together in close proximity during early life become desensitised to future sexual attraction."
....so, yeah. op, you're right on this one! seriously, i invite anyone to try and disprove this in a way that a. cites evidence that is either as reputable as or more reputable than ours (hey, i'd take anything above a blog post lol), b. doesn't use "it's gross" as a reason, and c. doesn't inherently dismiss the concept that women can be aggressors or perpetuates the concept that all family dynamics have to be the Nuclear Family, Actually. hell, i'm lenient on that last one, that's an opinion you can have, even if i personally don't agree with it.
also, just to recap op's first commentary: this is not on the topic of sexual abuse. this is not attempting to erase the effect on incest on sexual abuse, or how victims of incest especially as children may experience large amounts of trauma relative to that. abuse is fucked up and bad, that isn't a hot take or anything. i recognize that abuse, especially sexual violence, especially sexual violence against a family member is really fucking bad. that being said, this is specifically referring to cases of consensual incestuous relationships between adults.
i have a couple more points (effect of incest on abusive relationships and how that may make it harder to escape them but how that is the fault of the abuse and not an inherent fault of incest and how there's tons of societal complications in all different power dynamics that also make it harder to escape but those aren't criminalized yadda yadda my thoughts are all over the place here bear with me) but i'm gonna leave it there. don't worry no-more-rqs i'm getting sent to superhell for my terrible incest defending right here with you. lol
Some tags and comments that pass peer review
Tags that should see the light of day
Just adding that incest as a subject is not inherently “sensitive content” and saying that is like saying “we should censor gay couples in media”
The links were dead, so I uploaded the articles to the internet archive ♡
What you must understand is:
1. Men are systematically privileged over women.
2. Men love to take advantage of that privilege while simultaneously denying that it exists.
3. This dynamic does not change when the men and women in question are trans.
Men get very upset when confronted with this!
Is it really so hard to imagine that consang isn't a kink thing? That maybe, just maybe, some people happen to fall in real, honest love with those they are related to? I suppose viewing it as some perversion makes it easier to dismiss, to decide "this is just another freak for me to insult", but that doesn't make it so.
I'm old enough to remember when every straight person was convinced, CONVINCED, that gay couples were into it for exclusively sexual reasons! Despite every second of the AIDS crisis displaying the lengths of love these couples would go for eachother, reactionary narratives maintained the majority. It wasn't until much later that the "love is love" narrative finally caught hold, and now...to say gay people are in it exclusively for sex is considered as backwards as can be.
And honestly, even if it is sexual for some, I don't see why that is deserving of disrespect. Sex is a normal part of life. What matters is if anyone is hurt, and in consang...nobody really is.
But again, consanguiphobes don't want to admit that, because that means they do not get to be the good guy. They have to admit they have done harm, and go through the work of improving. And who on earth wants to do that?
btw "incest" is a social construct too but I dont reckon yall are ready for that convo
"afab only housing" is honestly beautiful. it's #progress to use inclusive language when discrimating against trans women
you might as well just say "no men, and yeah I think men includes you trannies (but trans men aren't men you ladies are welcome 🥰)"
^^^
I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter was one of the best works of sci-fi of our generation and one of the best works of transgender fiction ever written, and there are world renowned authors who still have successful careers after they publicly assassinated the nascent woman who wrote it. I don't think they should ever know peace.
Isabel Fall is the patron saint of works unwritten and art unmade by a culture that cannot tolerate trans women
I think this constantly and then I get angry for thinking it, because trans women should not have to be martyrs or saints to animate our politics and our art. that work should have been her debut, not her epitaph. I should be moved by her career, not her absence. I could spit.
read it again
whats cool about being trans is my parents are totally right. i did kill their beautiful son. im the thing that animates his corpse in an ever more convincing parody of a happy girl. i devoured him from the inside out and now there is nothing left of him and he is dead dead dead and there is only me, with my hollow eyes and dark eyeliner and long hair, and my big smile. my limp, effeminate gestures belie the marionetting of the boy they loved. my fagginess is his death. already his body becomes a fitter home for my parasitism in full; the tits, the hips, the thighs. sorry about your kid. thanks for the biomass <3
having a process for people who have done morally horrific things to make amends, rejoin community, and do right going forward is actually fundamentally crucial for the left. having a clear and accessible pathway for people to be socially (if not interpersonally) forgiven is how you get people radicalized against capitalism and imperialism and white supremacy and patriarchy. its how you turn "these people think i am a bad person" into "these people think something and someone coerced or forced me into doing bad things, and these people want to help me do something about that."
if you want more revolutionaries, you must have a system to turn guilty, traumatized, angry bystanders and collaborators into revolutionaries. and I say a system and process because its not "oh the drone operator said they were sorry and felt bad so its all good now :)" there is no shortcut here. but it is absolutely necessary. no revolution is comprised of morally pure people. in many cases, the most devoted revolutionaries are the ones who know exactly what it is like on the other side.
Knowing my childhood home got turned into a cabin that's fully isolated and in the middle of nowhere... the temptation to rent it alongside a bunch of kinky friends and have the wildest time playing out all the roles of a nuclear family but kinky as fuck... all the while it's happening in the very places I learned what family was... I feel like Freud would disintegrate if he met me...
ngl i think it’s more incestuous to like take your sister out on a nice date and be in love with her than to just fuck her. take your sister on dates! make her feel loved! it’s good for sisters!!!
happy pride!!!!
real! happy pride :3
yknow in spite of the fact that the entire world is currently turning itself upside down to prevent me and my friends from having a good day, i really can't imagine being anything other than a trans woman. this shit kicks ass. we are so cool
i know we’re both just messing around pretending to be whole but look at me. if the train was coming would you move. if the ground was falling from under your feet would you even notice or would it just be another tuesday for you. if somebody stabbed you could it hurt worse than you already do. what i’m saying is that i love you but i think we both drive over the speed limit when it’s raining. what i’m saying is that i want to hold your hand and i understand about how you sometimes have to sit down in the shower. what i’m saying is that i’m here for you and if the train comes please move.
i wrote this 7 years ago, somehow. every day someone else finds it and whispers to me - oh, i understand this. something always turns in the wash of my stomach: i am so, so glad you feel seen. i wish you had no idea what this post was about.
i wrote this while working in a program for new writers. on wednesdays, two of the teachers would be contractually obligated to read our writing aloud to the group of 300+ teens. i had never read my work in public before. i had something like 6k poems and was panicking about it. none of them are good enough. sometimes the train is howling. it is hard, actually, sometimes, even as an adult.
and then i thought - what is one thing i wish i could tell all of them. each of these 300 kids. what did i need to hear, at 16?
i wanted to tell them about the day you wake up, and the sun feels warm finally. i wanted to tell them about carving a life out of soapstone, your hands turning bloody. i wanted to tell them that sometimes yes - it actually does feel easy. i wanted to tell them about weddings and cookie dough and long road trips. about albums of new music and old friends laughing and the sound of snow falling.
you will learn the pattern of the train. you will learn to close your eyes when you hear the engine rumbling. you will learn to let yourself have the grey days in their lily-soft numbness. sometimes it will feel like life is wet paint, and god has smeared your canvas across a sewer grate. sometimes it will be so boring it isn’t even pronounceable - the tenacious, soundless blankness. survival isn’t just ugly nights and wild mornings. it is also the steady, unimportant moments. it is just driving with your seatbelt on. it is calling a friend on the way home. it is burying your face into the fur of your dog.
when i had finished reading this poem aloud, the auditorium was silent for a solid minute. someone stood up to take a picture of where it had been projected onto a screen, and then three more people followed the action, and then - like a bad internet story, people remembered they were supposed to be clapping. kids came up to me after it - thank you for writing that. i think i hear a train coming.
i would write this differently now, i think, but it has been 7 years. i still live by the tracks. i also haven’t picked up a blade in over 10 years. the scars are still there, but these days i only pick up scissors to cut my hair. i know why you can’t tell your mom about it. i know how the numbness slips over everything, a restless horrible cotton. i know how when you dropped the dish, you weren’t crying about the broken glass. i know about feeling like all the roads have closed their exits, that you aren’t supposed to still-be-here - and yet.
i am still here, and still yours, and i haven’t forgotten. what i’m saying is if any hope is calling to you - i know it’s hard, but you have to listen. i’m saying keep driving, but slow down the car. sit down in the shower, i’m not judging you. we can stay in the dark with the good hot water and do nothing but stare. notice the stab wound. make it through another tuesday.
i know what it is like to miss yourself. do what you need to. come home to me. i am writing to you, my past self, from the future. i’ll be waiting for you.
and when the train is coming - please move.