Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
BTW, this is going to sound bad, but if I was the your fiance and you told me this not sure if I would proceed with the marriage...I would have to think about it for awhile. Yes, you were a kid, yes, it sounds like your family life growing up was not normal to say the least....but what you did was wrong. You knew it, he knew it, you were 14 so you knew the difference between right and wrong. It says alot about you as a person, and it says alot about your family, how you were raised, and would me question if your morals/beliefs as a result of this are really inline with mine. Besides, he deserves the right to know so that he can decide for himself if he wants to spend the rest of his life dealing with the baggage that comes from a family as screwed up as your's was and is !!!!!
Pretty much a consensus of comments - DTMFA.
But as someone who's been through this personally, and as a professional who deals with this routinely, I strongly urge you to google "cycle of violence." I suggest doing this when you have a substantial amount of time, and only when you are alone or are with only people who you trust and are supportive. It is very likely that you will react very emotionally as you read. You will be amazed that your unique experiences are actually not only very common, but are predictable and part of a well-documented pattern.
You will learn that you are involved in a toxic relationship and there are psychological reasons why it will be difficult for you to break the pattern and get out.
But you need to get out. AND, before you allow yourself to get into a new relationship, you need to better understand the relationship you are in, why you got into it, and why you stayed, knowing it was bad.
Good luck. You have the power to make your life better.
That, and good luck getting your girlfriend to not laugh in your face if you suggest financial or other "penalties" if she dumps you while she's on the other coast. If I had a romantic partner who seriously suggested something like that to keep us honest while apart, I would break up before moving -- it's frankly creepy. You stay with someone because you care about them, not because they have made it too injurious to leave.
The financial dissolution of a marriage is not a penalty, by the way; it is the division of jointly acquired assets.
I thought she dumped her mother because her mom called the cops and tried to physically prevent her from having an abortion? That's not "freaking out"; that's actively causing injury to TSA, her brother, and likely her dad. And I'm guessing those weren't the only times her mom sabotaged her.
Not sure why you're assigning blame for getting rid of mom. I can only assume you've never had the "pleasure" of a toxic parent. Sometime you need to cut yourself off from certain relatives.
It's God's plan! He designed us this way. Who do you think Adam and Eve's children had sex with? Incest is OK according to the Bible.
I'm not saying it wasn't wrong, but I'd say it was wrong more along the lines of, I dunno, stealing your parent's car to go joy riding or something.
The only think TSA is "guilty" of is having natural feelings and not having a developed enough brain to resist them.
@108: What's wrong with her continuing relationship with her father/brother? Her father does not seem to have done anything bad to her. And she seems to believe (and probably is) just as culpable in the issues with her brother as her brother is. Only her mother forcefully tried to circumvent TSA's will. Sounds like the relationship with the mother would have been just fine if not for that.
Several times in the past few years I have had serious issues with people being complete turds to me, our mutual friends have said "Oh that's just how he/she is..." while I have basically been ordered to stay on my best behaviour because I'm "better than them".
Thankfully my actual partners are mature and sensible, but CPaS's situation just reminded me of that. It sucks being the only grown-up in the room, sometimes...
@114: Well, we enforce the criminal law by penalizing people who violate it, for instance. The idea is to make it less likely that someone will choose to break up with you by requiring the process of ending a relationship to be difficult.
I don't know why you think stabilizing a relationship is a bad thing or creepy. I mean, some people will leave someone as soon as they find someone better, but if people want to make it less likely, they should have that option.
There is a trade-off between the length of a relationship and the potential quality of your partner. If you change partners regularly, you have the opportunity for novelty as well as always dating someone of your preferred age. You could keep "trading up" in whatever you value, to get a better and better partner when you get the opportunity, but you lose the benefits from building a long-term relationship. And if someone wanted those benefits it makes sense to structure things to encourage long-term relationships.
Hence, marriage, for instance, which you must think is creepy also.
You oversimplify things when you say "You stay with someone because you care about them, not because they have made it too injurious to leave." Any relationship has benefits and drawbacks, and people often have mixed feelings. In hard times, people often stay together because they care about the person and because they don't want to lose the relationship or its benefits, or they don't want to move, or they don't want to give up mutual friends, or they don't want to go through the emotional pain of a breakup.
Nonmonogamy is another way to encourage long-term relationships because then you don't have to end your relationship to date or have sex with someone new. (And for some people, monogamy might be a way to encourage long-term relationships!)
There are definitely penalties associated with divorce. I wasn't specifically referring to financial ones, I meant more like the waiting period required and process involved and so forth.
But there are financial ones as well. For one thing, there are often legal and court fees. You may have to move or sell your house or property quickly. You lose the tax benefits. And, yes, depending on the state, you may be required to pay some form of support, or, in community property states, give up some of your individually earned income.
Interesting fact: there are some states that have a special type of marriage (so-called "covenant marriage") which is harder to get out of than a regular marriage, and you can choose either type of marriage when you get married. Which is a great idea, because people should be able to lock themselves in, if they so choose.
I don't think TSA did a darn thing wrong, and she has nothing to be ashamed of. I can sympathize with why her mother wanted to go to the police--wouldn't you do that, if you thought your 14 year old was being preyed upon by an older boy, no matter who he was? But I can also sympathize with why this upset TSA, because she believed that the brother was innocent and didn't want to see him harshly punished for something she participated in. It also forces her to play a victim role that may have made her feel worse about what happened.
Maybe there's a lot more to the story between TSA and her mother than we know, but if the main reason for their estrangement is the mother's reaction to this situation, I hope that TSA will eventually be able to establish a relationship with her again. The mother's actions may not have been good for TSA at the time, but they also make sense in some respects, and obviously the mother is traumatized by what happened as well. She can't be expected to react and behave perfectly under those circumstances.
@Hunter78
Dude, I prefaced it with the fact that it was judgemental. No need for name calling.
And yes, guys dig girls for the chemistry, but it is our history that makes us the person we are today. Fact, the girl slept with her half brother. Fact, she got pregnant by sleeping with her half brother. Fact, she had an abortion. Fact, she no longer talks to her mother because her mother tried to stop her from getting an abortion and called the police on her half brother. FACT: it's been 12 years and she has not forgiving her mother. BIGGEST FACT - she has concealed all of this from her fiance.
Putting everything aside that happened when she was 14…it’s these last two facts are probably the most revealing.
- While I do not agree with her mother trying to stop her from getting an abortion, TSA was only 14 at the time. TSA had already shown poor judgement by sleeping with her half brother and by not having safe sex (she got pregnant). It’s a parent’s job to love, care for and protect their children. The mother probably thought she was doing this. Note, I said thought. And quite possible her mother is one of those Christian anti-abortion zealots. In which case the incest and pregnancy probably drove her stark raving mad at the time. All this on top of her husband’s son from an affair coming to live with them. That’s a lot to handle…even for the best of moms.
But either way, it’s been 12 years and TSA has not forgiving her mother for trying to do what she probably thought was right at the time. The mother made a mistake, yes. But she can’t forgive her mother. Hmmmm says a lot (Empathy, compassion, forgiveness).
- She has not told her fiancé. No need to go into too much detail on this except to say that it would appear she is not very open or honest with her fiancé.
So yes, it’s the chemistry we dig. But it’s the complete person (inside and out) that we love.
Are you kidding me? She was 14, not 5. She was old enough to know right from wrong. Is 14 still a child, yes. Was she still growing and maturing, yes. But she was still old enough to know right from wrong. The irony is that you are right that in most states she is not old enough to have consensual sex, but she is old enough to be charged as an adult for murder. Go figure.
But for the life of me I can’t see how you could possible say “I don’t think TSA did a darn thing wrong”. She did do something wrong. She did 2 things wrong…had sex with her half brother…and she had unprotected sex. Should she still feel ashamed about it? No. We all make mistakes, it’s part of who we are, we learn from them, and probably most importantly we have to own up to them so that we can accept them and move past them. Too many people make excuses either for themselves or for others (she was too young, she did not know what she was doing, it wasn’t my fault, etc).
Without knowing the whole story, I too agree that the mother’s reactions made sense at the time, and that she was just trying to protect her daughter. Yes, the mother probably handled it poorly, but a situation like this is tough for all involved and the mother probably over reacted. It would be hard not to.
With regards to “hey, old enough to be judged by you”. Yes, I have no problem saying that what she did when she was 14 was wrong. Does it make her a bad person? No, it makes her human. And I hope one day she finally gets past it and no longer feels ashamed for what she did when she was 14.
The source of TSA's Mom's attitude toward the half brother is understandable. Husband has affair while actively making family with her; live with it. Mistress dies, and she is forced to accept husband's infidelity in form of his son; live with it. The boy gets her daughter pregnant.
Just rereading the above makes my head hurt. I have no idea about the Mom's religious beliefs, but it's pretty clear that the Mom's role in this was shut up and take it til this point. Then for whatever reason (she tries to protect her grandchild) she went against her husband's flow, she gets chucked out by her family. Pretty fucking brutal from that angle.
I have sympathy for TSA, but I feel sorry for her Mom. Until TSA resolves the issues underlying thier break, then all she's doing is burying the trauma. Since I am attempting to create a resolution myself (with family issues of neglect and betrayal), I can tell her the stakes could be the stability of her future marriage. At least all of her parties are still alive
Peace.
CPAS: Fuck her. Fuck her good, hard, and long. Fuck her and fuck her and fuck her. Fuck her how she likes it. Fuck her how you like it. Ignore her except for the fucking. When she starts the yelling, walk away. ESPECIALLY if she ever says something like, "DONTCHU WALK AWAY FROM ME!" When she STFU, fuck her REAL good. Make her get there, the right way.
Then, one day, when she's yelling at you, stare at her. When she stops the yelling say, "If you EVER scream at me again, I will stop fucking you. We can talk. But the next time you raise your voice at me is right after the last time I fuck you."
She might be worth keeping, if you can show her that you are more valuable than getting yelled at ever deserves.
Count me in the exes as friends category. I feel if you can't be friends you're not really over them, or they're douchebags. But a blanket refusal of contact to me spells unresolved relationship issues.
Really, the ending up with a nasty asshole thing is very common for those of us who grew up in dysfunctional families. The assholes make us feel safe because they are familiar (like "mommy" or "daddy") and/or you may even believe you can "fix" that person—giving you a false sense of control (this is called codependency). BTDT. Seen it too happen too to male friends sadly. :(
Stabilizing a relationship BY THREATENING PAINFUL CONSEQUENCES if it ends is creepy. Jesus Christ, you even mentioned beating them up as one possible example consequence. On what planet is that not creepy? So is telling your boyfriend he owes you ten thousand dollars if he dumps you. Ask for that from me and I'd dump you on the spot, just for that.
Yes, there are additional considerations in deciding to stay other than "Because I care about her." Examples include "Because it would cause a lot of pain to everybody involved, to smash the family like that" or "Divorce is generally a financial catastrophe for all concerned, except the lawyers, so maybe staying together and working it out might be wiser." You will note, however, that all of these involve consideration of the other people, which is a minor variation on "Because I care about her." They aren't examples of "Because I'm stuck in the trap she laid, and dare not chew off my own leg."
There's nothing wrong with running these calculations in your head when contemplating making a run for it, especially if they cause you to reconsider. (Seriously, in most cases (i.e. barring abuse), what you are feeling at the moment is just infatuation, and once that wears off, both you and the new squeeze will be in basically the same relationships as the ones you both left. Is it really worth it to cause so much pain?)
Still, that's a LOT different than setting it up at the outset so that if you leave I get to beat you up or empty your bank account in retaliation for leaving.
When he was finally unable to tolerate further torment from her drug-addled vacuity, vicious mood swings and vituperative emotional manipulation (which often included explicit reminders of just how far out of his league she really was), she would react with outright violence, situations so out of control that most folks would have called the cops, though I and others would come and extract him instead. There was one time where in the midst of an argument, she grabbed his favorite sweatshirt, cut it up with a butcher knife right in front of him, then proceeded to throw it on the ground, and piss on it. She literally hiked her skirt up and let loose like some kind of Bob Guccione centerfold. Ultimately, only moving to opposite corners of the country could break their twisted, psychopathological bond.
DTMFA might be even harder for this guy than it seems. If she's anything like that one (who knows, they might even BE one and the same!) he should consider filing a restraining order first.
When he was finally unable to tolerate further torment from her drug-addled vacuity, vicious mood swings and vituperative emotional manipulation (which often included explicit reminders of just how far out of his league she really was), she would react with outright violence, situations so out of control that most folks would have called the cops, though I and others would come and extract him instead. There was one time where in the midst of an argument, she grabbed his favorite sweatshirt, cut it up with a butcher knife right in front of him, then proceeded to throw it on the ground, and piss on it. She literally hiked her skirt up and let loose like some kind of Bob Guccione centerfold. Ultimately, only moving to opposite corners of the country could break their twisted, psychopathological bond.
DTMFA might be even harder for this guy than it seems. If she's anything like that one (who knows, they might even BE one and the same!) he should consider filing a restraining order first.
It amazes me how TSA's story keeps percolating through my brain, and causes me to reexamine all the opinions expressed here. Going back to the beginning, ie before the brother shows up, the problems stem from the CPOS father. In fact TSA's problems are side effects of the CPOS's creation. The Mom caused... what? She's toxic because she responded badly to the (statutory) rape of her daughter? The Mom, TSA, and the brother are victims of the CPOS's actions.
The more I think about it, the issue of abandoning her mother is more shameful, because, in my opinion, it's a case of blaming the victim. TSA isn't 14 anymore, so it's time to do the grown up thing of considering another person's point of view and trying to solve the problem instead of running away.
In the case of any ex-lover from an affair, the consensus opinion of most experts is that an ex-lover can never remain a friend because the only way to ensure that the affair is over is to sever all contact. This is a bomb waiting to explode when the other person in the relationship or marriage is unaware of the affair. It is just tempting fate. When they are aware, it is futile to attempt to reconcile until and unless the affair is both really, truly over and as importantly that it is demonstrably over. That is only possible after all contact is severed. The ex-lover has to effectively be expunged. Letters, diaries, pictures, gifts, memories, compromised friends all have to be eliminated which is why it is so hard for most people to reconcile. The cost is to just high and people can't or won't pay the price. It is a whole lot easier and less painful (for both parties) to start over with some one new. Children make reconciling or starting over so much more complicated.
I know I'm way off topic, but I may as well continue with my rant. The first victim of an affair is credibility. Since the cheater has engaged in lies, deceit, and betrayal, it isn't so much that they don't have credibility as that they have negative credibility. Some how they have to prove that they aren't lying before they can start to prove that they are telling the truth. Where one ends and the other begins is impossible to tell since they tend to overlap. How a cheater asserts any right to privacy while striving to reestablish their credibility is beyond me. Any attempt at secrecy or privacy is typically viewed with varying degrees of suspicion. As I said, reconciling is difficult if not impossible for many people.
Fiance has a right to know something, but maybe not the details of exactly who was involved. What does he need to know exactly? That you had a deeply tragic experience in your teen years that caused a serious breach within your family, and he may end up dealing with after-effects. I would include not only the pregnancy and how it ended (I think TSA did succeed in getting an abortion), but also a hint that "you may hear other versions of this story". I would share with him your complicated feelings - you blamed yourself for years, etc.
If he asks to know more, say, "I would prefer not to go into more detail - but I'll listen to your thoughts, feelings, and concerns". Fiance might want to know if the person who fathered that child is still in your life (and yes he might have a right to know that) so he may need reassurance that you're not currently involved, voluntarily or coerced, in any clandestine relationships.
A therapist might help you formulate what needs to be shared and what does not.
I would also advise any family members that you're still on speaking terms with exactly what you do end up telling your fiance, including that you didn't reveal the identity of the father.
If I married someone who had a big family secret like that, and I found out after marriage, I'd likely stick with them but it would be a shock. Fiance will have to deal with some of these family members and he's going to feel strange esp if he was kept in the dark the whole time and then things come to light later on.
Agree the dad is a CPOS, but that doesn't excuse the mom's actions. Those actions trigger my toxic "spidey sense," as they involve narcissism, rage, and physical confrontation. These are the same types of interactions CPAS describes, and everyone (rightly) tells him to DTMFA.
If mom's reaction was out of character, then maybe TSA should think about giving her another chance. But I'm betting it wasn't.
Again in our case, the children and stepchildren got therapy to find out why it happened, why it was inappropriate, learned appropriate boundaries, grew up and became normal and responsible citizens. They did not see any reason their spouses needed to know this information as on the few occasions they felt it necessary out of some misguided sense of all or nothing honestly, the lover/potential spouse reacted by being appalled the siblings/stepsiblings still were in contact, wanting to go beat up the perceived instigator, and basically not allowing any sort of agency for the "victim" at all.
I am predicting, should TSA tell her fiancee, it's very likely he will want to go kick the shit out of brother and ban him from the family blah blah blah. Insist he's never to be around their children, that sort of thing. Or decide she's some sort of depraved slut. People who read Dan's columns are generally more open minded and look how many people here feel sorry for the MOTHER who decided all on her own how this would be handled (any woman who tried to force her 14 year old daughter to give birth to her half brother's baby while simultaneously trying to have him arrested has a fucking screw loose, period, no matter her feelings on abortion).
It is quite likely mom was a bitch and a half outside of this. I mean let's look at fact here, her husband has a child with another woman and she insists they're to have no contact. What the hell kind of woman does that? Okay let's assume they had no contact by the dad's choice. What the hell kind of woman builds a family with a man who abandons his first born son? Fucked up.
I hope the kids had therapy about this like we had in my family. If not they need to get it. If they have, they, or at least TSA, needs more. People who have been through this and had therapy don't talk about it. There's just no need to. And we've discovered most people just don't fucking get it how yes, we're normal people who might have made a mistake or been involved in something that does not need either current white knighting nor armchair mental health lessons from people who don't know wtf they are on about.
That said, I do know some people who had an affair, realize that was a dumb thing to do, or ended it for whatever reason, who just move on and say nothing but still see one another socially and just pretend it never happened. That can work too.
It's not just an ego/pride thing.
wendykh, you make an important point that people who were once victimized can have problems understanding similar situations without putting it in terms of their own experience. However, why are we expecting perfect reactions from people who have been through serious traumas? And why expect people to behave rationally when reacting to potential (or real) harm to their own children? For most people, those issues also come with a lot of self-blame, which will be even more difficult for someone who survived abuse and thinks s/he failed to protect the children. No, TSA's mom should not have foisted an unwelcome role of victim on TSA, but wouldn't most parents react that way? How many would back off from blaming the half-brother without the benefit of, say, a therapist's help?
I don't think any 14 year olds should ever be having sex, so in that sense, yeah, it's "wrong". However, the very reason I think 14 is too young for sex is the same reason I don't assign blame to the ones who do it--or at least, not in the way you do. There's a difference between taking responsibility and deserving blame, and that's true at 4, 14, or any other age.
I do agree with you that she needs to tell the fiance, though. If my husband suddenly came out with a story like this today, I would not be terribly upset with him for having kept it a secret. However, it would be better to have told it earlier. Not only is it better for the fiance to know the truth, but it's better for TSA to enter the marriage knowing she has disclosed everything important to the man she wants to trust and love forever. Secrets can wear terribly on people, even if nobody else ever finds out. And in this case, for purely practical reasons, she has to tell because there are lots of other people who know what happened! The fiance cannot find out from someone else, period. It has to come from her.
Sure, it's great when families all can get along, but this idea that somehow TSA not having anything to do with her mother is inherently bad for TSA doesn't make sense. She mentioned it, but she clearly didn't portray it as some big issue in her life that she doesn't speak to her mother, and those reading more into it are clearly injecting their own issues.
When I met my partner he wasn't speaking to his mother. When he explained why I didn't think she sounded all that bad and I encouraged him to re-establish contact with her.
What a mistake. He eventually did and what a mistake. Encouraging him to do that is what I consider my one true mistake in our relationship. They reconnected and it lasted about a year before he wrote her off again, and this time, having seen and experienced her for myself, I was glad he did. How much I regret pushing him to speak to her again, and as a result putting him through all that crap, which I didn't understand, all over again.
We don't know the whole story behind why TSA doesn't speak to her mother. And from her letter that doesn't seem to be a particular issue for her anyway. Trying to make it into one is missing the mark.
What I do know is that the idea that staying on good terms with parents is somehow inherently, vitally important, is B.S.. TSA isn't a little girl anymore. If she has decided that not being in touch with her mother is what she needs why not accept that she understand her situation better than any of us?
Give yourself a time out, go to another room, have a drink, whatever, but never interact with your kids when you're furious.
152, that's exactly why I wonder if TSA should try to resolve some issues with her mother. She could have many excellent reasons for never speaking to the mother again. However, if one of the most important reasons is that the mother tried to call the cops on big brother, and generally reacted poorly to finding out that her 14 year old was having incestuous sex, well... I cut that mom some slack for the poor reaction. Few people would handle that situation with impeccable grace and ease. If someone just said, hey, I'm not speaking to my mom for good reason, that would be one thing. In this case, though, we seem to be hearing a crucial reason, which is why I'd advise caution. I'm very happy with my parents, thanks, so no projecting my own issues here, but I've seen other cases close up and personal where family ties are severed, and people really, really suffer. Like I say, it's very hard to predict all the fallout that will happen, and how much it will hurt the person who decides to do the cutting-off.
Obviously we don't have complete information, but the information we do have suggests that the call was motivated by malice, not protection. By anger, not by concern.
I agree that "calling the police when someone has sex with your 14 year old daughter is not necessarily an irrational response." But we're not faced with that general scenario; here the daughter is already pregnant, and the guy who knocked her up is her brother, your husband's son, and (I'm assuming) your step-son. And in that scenario, bringing all that family drama into the public sphere serves no rational purpose.
I don't know if we have any real crucial facts at all. She mentioned what her mother did, and then that she no longer had contact with her. She didn't say those were the specific, or only reasons, or if such behavior was a one time aberration or an on going pattern. Also what stood out to me wasn't the calling of the cops, which you seem to be focusing on, but the attempt to force TSA to bear a child conceived in incest. Even many right to lifers accept incest as a reasonable exception to their no abortion stance.
Trying to force a child to carry a baby conceived in incest to term is really extreme in my opinion. And if this was not an aberration in her mother's behavior then not only does she have reason to cut off contact, she would be foolish not to.
I know a lot of gay people who have had to cut off their parents due to the way their parents treated them, and most of them have done just fine. Almost all of us lose contact with our parents eventually when they die, and most people manage to go on and not suffer for it. It is the natural order of things. If someone feels their relationship with their parent is toxic and wish to end contact before the parent dies there is no reason to expect worse repercussions.
Sure, for some people there may be issues if they did that, just as some few people never manage to get over the death of a parent, but there is no reason to think it is inherently so. And no reason to assume so in TSA,s case based on what she has revealed.
I'm all for children keeping in contact with a parent when reasonable. I just don't buy the expectation of dire consequences when they don't, and have learned not to second guess the decissions of those who make such a choice for themselves. At least not without knowing a lot more details about the circumstances than we do about TSA and her mother.
I'm truly sorry for the pain your family has endured. I am also very sorry for the pain that my family has endured, especially my own pain. I wasn't penetrated, but I was fondled and grabbed and stalked in my own home by family. I assure you that anything smelling of abuse around my children would Send. Me. Off. And, I assure you it would be all about me and my wild feelings of rage and protection.
I could come up with a counter argument disparaging TSA's teenage behavior, but w/o support what good would it do? I think TSA, her mother, her brother and his dead mother are all victims of the CPOS father. That doesn't help her with her problem of informing her fiancee. I also think she should consider trusting her future husband with who she is.
Peace.
I used the example of the drunken friend or family member at a family gathering because that was how the younger generations in my family found about such things. So much for honest, open communication. It set us such wonderful examples of what being normal, responsible adults was all about.
Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the only true victim in your family was the mother. Your response sounds a lot like that of a guilty, self absorbed teenager who still has a lot of growing up to do. You really need to educate yourself on post traumatic stress disorder. As bad as your experiences were they don't even come close to the horrific experiences of the mother in your family. You complain about people being judgmental and not understanding your situation, but you display the same things towards your step mother.
Shame and guilt are disabling experiences. They are also very powerful weapons. Weapons that play leading roles in the classic family games of "Blame The Victim (Shame The Victin)" and "Do What You're Told". Oh yeah, and "Keep It A Secret (Don't Dishonor Our Family)". Of course these games are also used within other games: KIAS with the combined DWYT/BTV defense strategy (the best defense is a good offense); this is my presumption for the game that was played in wendykh's family. Our family was a pretty straight DWYT with the "It Never Happened" offense (You have to sleep in the same room with blind drunk "Uncle Ernie" because nothing ever happened to him to make him this way). Actually "Ernie" was a step uncle, and it was my step mother that forced the issue despite my pleading to sleep with my sibs, so for my family as a whole it wasn't that bad (just for me).
Wendykh, I find talking about what happened, initially in the safety of Therapy and later with your loved ones, absolutely essential to overcoming the damage. In fact I have to thank you for forcing me to confront my experiences outside of my victim perspective. You aren't alone, you and your family are not the only ones to have experienced shameful tragedy, and most importantly it's not your fault that you are a victim. If you can't be open about your whole life with your SO, then I suggest your therapy needs aren't over.
Peace.
I don't assign blame for TSA having sex at 14. I too think that 14 is to young and I think it would be better for children to wait until they are older.
But I do think that a 14 year old girl sleeping with her 16 year old half brother is wrong. It's incest. For me there is no grey area on this aspect of the scenario. They were both wrong to do this.
BTW, I never said this was the type of mistake we all make. And I disgree with Debra Lieberman saying "this could happen to anyone". Crashing your car, drinking and driving, getting in a fight, cheating on a lover, getting drunk at a party and making a fool of yourself, etc can happen to anyone. I would never put sleeping with a family member in this category (ie could happen to anyone). What I did say (or at least try to say), is that we all make mistakes, that we need to own up to them, accept them and pick ourselves back up and move on from them. No matter how big or small. Whether it's crashing a car, and yes, even sleeping with your sibling. In short, taking personal responsibility for our actions.
As for the shame. I am sure she felt ashamed after the fact. And it appears she still does because she gets panic attacks when she thinks about telling her fiance about it. Once she truely accepts it and owns it, she should no longer feel shame about it. This is not to say that she should not be sorry it happened (ie or regret having done it). I think all of us here on this board have done things that we were ashamed about, but then we put it behind us and were able to say "damn that's something I regret having done". We are not proud of it, we accept it, but we no longer feel ashamed about it.
Depending on where TSA lived it was not statutory rape. While each state has different limatations on this, most accept that if both are minors and the difference in age is less than 2 to 3 years (depending on state), and the younger one has reached a minimum age (14 is pretty typical, althought there are some with lower, even down to 10), then it's not statutory rape.
In New York and California it is statutory rape as both parties must be at least 18. Which, while I do not think it is wise to be having sex at 14, 15, 16...I think it is stupid for these states to have laws making it illegal for say two 16 years olds or two 17 years having sex.
@171 this was not puppy love (ok, may be the daughter developed a crush, but for a 16 year old boy it is more likely to be a case of taking advantage of an opportunity) I doubt if he even considered her, a relative stranger at that time, to actually be his sister. That doesn't happen over night as most members of any blended family will tell you, there is more likely to be resentment rather affection at the beginning. So some lenth of time passed before they started, if only long enough for the mother to let down her guard. I think TSA was more likely to be 15 or 16 and the boy 17, 18, or even maybe 19. TSA doesn't say whether this was her first sexual encounter or his. Somehow I kind of doubt it, particularly for the boy
Your comment that "we all make mistakes" did imply that this was the sort of thing that might happen to anyone. And indeed, it would be more likely to happen to me than your example of drinking and driving would, since I know the odds that I'm going to kill someone else or myself after making that decision--one where any 16-or-older driver is fully cognizant of the implications.
In short, I don't understand your complaints about TSA--her values, her current relationship prospects, and so on. What makes you think she did not "take responsibility" for what she did? She had an abortion and has suffered through the condemnation of her family and others who found out about her actions. Most people who have incestuous affairs never even go through that. She has a difficult conversation to have with her fiance, and you and I agree she is obligated to tell him. Failure to do so would be irresponsible, yes, since it's unfair to leave him in the dark while the rest of the family knows something so significant in her history.
I can understand why some are talking about statutory rape, what with her being 14, and the half-bro being 16. However, in her letter, she clearly stated "He didn't rape me; I wanted to have sex with him". Judge as you feel you must, but please, stop throwing the word "rape" around.
And the half-sibling sex is not shocking to me, as you say, any more than cousins having sexual encounters is shocking. I'm sure it happens all the time. Heck, there was a time in the not-terribly-distant past when a cousin would have made for a likely marriage prospect, keeping the money in the family and all.
The law deems minors incompetent to judge whether sex is consensual. (And, in my opinion, in this case that supposition was proved correct.)
Depending upon the state, a 16 year old is considered capable of understanding their own consent, and the consent of the partner(s) when engaging in sexual acts. So in the eyes of the law, a crime was committed, and the crime was rape. The two are fortunate to not have been in a country where penalties exist for incest.
Peace.
You could end up in jail or prison, because your girlfriend was yelling at YOU. That means it is usually the male who gets arrested.
The "Domestic Violence" laws include yelling. If the neighbors hear the yelling and call the cops, guess who goes to jail...?
Dan's advice is correct, you need to "DTBA" or Dump This Bitch Already.
She is broken inside, maybe irreparably. It's not your job to fix her even if you could. Staying will only hurt you more, and worse. Get out ASAP and go far away. Cut this cancer out of your life forever and WORK ON REBUILDING YOUR SELF-ESTEEM. You probably don't sense it yet but you've suffered a lot of damage as a result of your time with this person. Now is the time to remind yourself of all the reasons you're great, and believe it.
Good luck, man. I feel for you.
Cousins getting together isn't a squick overload? Since when?
I mean it's objectively/genetically sort of whatever. But emotionally? Uggghhhh *shudder*.
I met a group of my cousins when I was 18. One of them apparently experienced this lack-of-Westermark upon meeting me. I was lucky enough to not feel the same way. I feel sorry for people who fall through those inbreeding-protection loopholes and find themselves attracted to people who they shouldn't.
I would like to clarify a few things regarding your post saying that it was rape (ie statutory).
Many states (in fact more than half the states) have what's called a "close in age exception". In some states with this exception it is still a crime, but it makes the crime a misdemeanor, not a felony. In other states it makes it totally legal for minors to engage in sex as long as gap between their ages is not more a certain number of years. This gap can be as low as 2 years and as much as 5 years. Here in NJ the gap is 4 years. As such, if TSA lived in NJ then what happened between TSA and her brother did would not be rape. Minor note, most states also include a minimum age with the “close in age exception”. That is, the younger party has to be at least a certain age for the exception to apply. Here in NJ the minimum age is 13 (way to young if you ask me). So a 17 year can sleep with a 13 year as long as the 17 year old is less than 4 years older. So if the younger party is 13 years and 4 months, the older party can be 17 years and 3 months.
Personally, why I do not think it is wise for children at this age to be having sex, it's going to happen so I think it makes total sense for the laws to account for this. Why? Because hell hath no fury like a lover scorned. Without this law, all the jilted lover has to do is say they had sex with the other party. They don’t have to claim it was forced, they just have to admit they had sex with the other party. Or worse, as in the case with TSA, one of the parents finds out that you were having sex with your older boyfriend/girlfriend, they can go to the police to file a complaint. In either case, the police have to investigate. In the case of TSA, I am inclined to think that they lived in one of the states that has the “close in age exception” because it seems like they could have easily proved that they slept together (she was pregnant).
Key point is that each state is different and it would be wise to check the laws for your state before jumping to the conclusion that it is statutory rape for a child under 18 to have sex. It would also be wise for parents of teenage kids to check them to make sure they know what their kids can and can’t do legally.
PS and interesting read about a man that landed on the sex offenders list for sleeping with his wife. -> http://www.woai.com/content/news/newslin…
I think we will have to agree to disagree with regards to me saying "that we all make mistakes" implying that "it can happen to anyone".
Everyone makes mistakes as there are no perfect people. So yes, mistakes can happen to anyone. But I think when we start talking about the "types of mistakes" that we can filter down the list from "happening to anyone". For me I think my thought process is tied to the fact that when we say "it can happen to anyone" we are usually doing it to 1) make a person feel better about something they did because it happens to a lot of people. Or 2) we say it to someone that was the "victim" of something that happened to them that was outside their control, like being mugged, getting fired / laid off, etc. But TSA and her brother are not victims in this situation, and as such I will stick to the first usage (ie make someone feel better about something they did). I don't ever see myself saying something like this to a murderer, a child molestor, etc. I am not saying that what transpired between TSA and her half-brother is anything like these two crimes I just mentioned, just trying to make a point on the types of things that I would never tell the wrong doer that "it could happen to anyone". Right or wrong, I guess for me there is no grey area when it comes to incest. Maybe it's my religious upbringing that has me not seeing grey areas with regards to incest. While I can totally understand how any normal teenager gives into their emotions and sexual urges and sleeps with someone, guess I just can't understand how those feelings where so strong that they could ignore the fact that it was their sibling, that it was incest. And as such, I am not one who thinks sleeping with a sibling "could happen to anyone".
I doubt if the age exemption for statutory rape applies to incest, since incest is still a crime in all States
I don't view it as quibbling......AS with statutory rape....laws for incest are different in each state. In some states they only target / penalize parental figures for sleeping with their underage childrem, in some states if both parties are over 18 there is no penalty (ie crime), so a son/daughter 18 or older can sleep with their biological parent with out any repercussions as far as the law is concerned. Of course the recent news last year about the Columbia professor having a 3 year affair with his daughter was interting in that even though the daughter was over 18, and consented, unlike her father she did not get charged with a crime.
Anyway, there is right and wrong, then there are the laws, and then there is how the prosecutors choose to apply them. So I don't think it's quibbling because it varies so much between each state / jurisdiction.
I have been there myself and thanks to Dan's advice, I was able to DTMFA. I have a long way to go before life will be somewhat normal again, but I am grateful for the courage I got from SLOG to go through with what would have been unthinkable after a 20 year relationship, even if it was filled with torture. Heed the message, CPAS, you are worth it.
You'll find women who value you for who you are rather than finding a scratching post for the fire-ants in their brains based on what you're not. You'll find women who want to get naked and tactical with you just because they dig you. You'll find a proud face in the mirror and never go back.
S
It doesn't disturb me all that much, really. Marriage to cousins was quite common in the past, and is still fairly common in some parts of the world, like the middle east. I think the U.S. and Korea are two places that specially frown on cousin marriages, so maybe that's why it seems like more of a "squick" factor here.
By the way, the Westermarck effect only applies to people you grew up in the same household with as a young child. Which in many cases does not include cousins.
The fact that in America (and many other western, English speaking countries.. ie. the readership of this column) it is considered "gross" is exactly my point.
I was pointing out that it was weird for someone to use it as a metric for normalcy/acceptace when really, it's IS pretty frowned upon (whether or not it's taboo status is valid is up for debate and I actually argued myself that it WASN'T valid)
I must have been really unclear so...
1. I didn't argue that cousins shouldn't be attracted to eachother, or not hook up.
2. I didn't say anything was wrong with it, I said that it personally grossed me out. Not unlike how scat grosses some people out.
3. I'm aware of how Westermark works, the example I gave was an absence of it... so... yeah.
Finally... I think it's actually pretty ludicrous to compare homophobia with a fairly common revulsion towards the thought of fucking one's cousin. Not really fair at all. If someone lives in a culture that's okay with it, then I wouldn't feel bad for them, but where I live? (Large, North American city) I imagine attraction to one's cousin would bring up a lot of unpleasant shame/guilt stuff, and stigma if it was followed through on and etc. And I would feel bad that the mechanisms that prevent that kind of attraction didn't kick in or weren't triggered for WHATEVER resaon, because it would've saved them a lot of trouble.
And again, I don't see how this is different than homophobia, or why it's ludicrous to compare cousin marriage to someone who lived in a very homophobic area and grew up with a lot of shame and guilt around being gay.
You wrote: I feel sorry for people who fall through those inbreeding-protection loopholes and find themselves attracted to people who they shouldn't. I misread that and thought you were referring to cousins. I realize now that you meant you think brothers and sisters shouldn't be attracted.
I apologize for misreading, though I still don't agree that people "shouldn't" be attracted to siblings. They usually aren't, and there are slightly increased genetic risks for any offspring they might have in some cases, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be attracted. There's nothing objectively wrong with the attraction or having sex with a sibling. You could argue having kids might be wrong because of the genetic risks, though that's true for a lot of unrelated couples as well (if both people have mental illness in their family, for instance).
Also, I don't know what you mean about the mechanisms that prevent cousin attraction. As far as I know there aren't any such mechanisms.
Okay, I used the word "shouldn't" but I thought in the context of my post (which started off with what I thought was a clear statement that there's nothing ethically wrong with it) it would be clear that I meant it was a cultural "shouldn't" not a moral "shouldn't".
I guess it wasn't.
So I'm going to try my first post again and hopefully it will be clearer.
1. I expressed surprise that people were using cousin hookups as a standard of normal, non-taboo sexuality.
Here are some cultural examples of cousin-mating being considered taboo/unnatural/gross/frowned-upon in popular/mainstream/western/modern culture:
-using "cousin fucking" as shorthand for hillbilly
-People making fun of royalty for being inbred.
- Ever watch Arrested Development? There was a huge, lengthy plotline centering around George Micheal's attraction to Maebe and emphasising how taboo it is.
- a few weeks ago on the Daily Show, look up the clip with the disapproving man!
those are the first few that came to mind. I'm certain there's more. In my personal experience, I only told a few select people about my cousin - all of them were HUGELY shocked and mortified. I did not respond that way to him. I was largely indifferent to the fact that he wanted to sleep with me. BUT if you asked me to envision having sex with a relative? I'd probably throw up in my mouth a little. Anyway, him and I are buds now.
2. I pointed out that it was not actually morally wrong, and that genetics suggest it's not even wrong in the context of having children. And then mentioned, (I thought as an aside) that I personally found it really gross on a visceral level.
3. I then told a personal story where I had a first cousin express attraction towards me.
4. I said I felt sorry for people who slipoped through those loopholes. For example, adopted children who go on to have sexual relationships with their birth parents. I feel sorry for lots of circumstances - that doesn't mean I think that person is "wrong" in some way. I feel bad if someone gets murdered or attacked for being gay. I feel bad for someone who ends up feeling attracted to someone because of circumstance and is perceived negatively for it.
Oh well.
oftentimes Dan gets more info in his emails than he shows in the versions he presents to us. The fact that he says "you fall somewhere between "Ron Jeremy" and "unconventionally attractive" on the male beauty spectrum." suggests that he had some reason to believe the mailer was... male. :)
Cheers
I understand what you mean about feeling sorry for the circumstances. I feel upset that there are idiots who stigmatize consensual incest, as well as idiots who stigmatize being LGBT. But I don't feel bad that people have attractions to close relatives, any more than I feel bad for people for being gay. And I don't think of it as a 'loophole,' because that view presupposes that there's some sort of law or obstacle preventing genetic attraction that a few people can escape somehow. Hope you can understand my point of view.
You may be right that there are stereotypes about cousin sex in pop culture, unfortunately.
I agree that the attraction we have for someone is outside our control, whether it's a brother, sister, cousin, parent, another person of the same sex, farm animal :-), inanimate object, etc, and that laws can not prevent who/what we are attracted to. Where my opinion differs from yours is how we choose to act on our attractions. Obviosuly for me, consensual incest is something that I find offensive/taboo, and yes, even disguisting. And yes, I think to act on this attraction is wrong, both morally and depending on the circumstance, legally. Again, I don't think the fact that someone has this attaction is wrong. But what we feel and how we act on our feelings are two different things.
My problem is when people confuse what they find disgusting with what is actually morally wrong. Everyone's got things that appeal to them or disgust them. But if you actually look at consensual incest, as much as it might disgust you, it's not actually wrong. There's no reason for it to be, unlike everything that is actually wrong like murder, theft, or rape. It doesn't violate anyone's rights and it doesn't unfairly hurt anyone.
I think it depends on the connotation you lend to "feel bad for". I don't pity the trait in and of itself, I feel bad for the circumstances surrounding it. And therefore, the person under those circumstances?
In terms of what I meant by loophole... I think under most "normal" circumstances, siblings aren't attracted to eachother. Though it's not "bad" for a sibling to be attracted to another (although I think you can agree that this CAN help lead to VERY bad situations which is suggested by your repeated emphasis on 'consensual') but it typically doesn't happen when siblings grow up together. As is my understanding, anyway. Maybe that wasn't the cleareset word either. Perhaps 'hiccup' would be more descriptive? I really don't know. :/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngWI9-n9V…
Yes, I agree that consensual incest is nothing like murder, theft, rape, child molestation. And yes, I find incest disguisting, but I also find it morally wrong, and I am not confusing the two.
@mydriasis
I can't speak for blackrose, but for me the emphasis on saying "consensual incest" is so that it is clear I am talking about two people that "freely and willing agree" to engage in the sexual activity. Primarily so that it does not get confused or lumped in with the type of incest where the older sibling or parent forces it (rape) or does it when the second party is too young(child molestation / statutory rape)
That is what I was implying, yes.
The intensely socialist kibbutzim of Israel raised all the kids together, so they all were brothers and sisters. This was a problem when they reached pairing-off age. The solution was that the kibbutzim all sent their kids to the same beach in the summer (Eilat), and let nature take its course.
The intensely socialist kibbutzim of Israel raised all the kids together, so they all were brothers and sisters. This was a problem when they reached pairing-off age. The solution was that the kibbutzim all sent their kids to the same beach in the summer (Eilat), and let nature take its course.