Child Sexuality vs. Incest Morality

Child Sexuality vs. Incest Morality

by Peter Fritz Walter

What modern-day child protection does is advocating emotional incest, and thus what it gives to our children is entanglement, not freedom. Children who enjoy their sexuality by having sex play with other children and adult mates are not confused about their emotional attractions and sexual preferences. Much to the contrary, these children have a mindset that, compared with their virgin comrades, is based upon what Freud called reality principle. Under the definition of modern child psychology, they would have to be considered more adult than most of our current adults that are raised like infantile idiots. They are in fact more responsible, more considerate, more socially minded and less selfish than the prototype of the castrated consumer child. 

In my discussions of this topic, I regularly get the question why, if this was so, society was so hard on admitting and accepting the existence of pedophilia as a natural counterpart to children’s own love wishes? My answer is that this society is so deeply ingrained in incest in every possible form that admitting children’s emotional and sexual freedom would jeopardize the expectation of most parents to be the foremost and exclusive love mates of their children.

There are many people in our culture who think that allowing the child to be sexual would naturally encompass children having sex with their own parents. When I object that children, if let free to choose their sex partners would in most cases not opt for their parents but for peers or adults other than their parents, people seem to be puzzled in a really interesting way. I namely see in those moments that they are more puzzled and disturbed by the idea that children have sexual relations with strangers than with their own parents. 

They are in fact more sympathetic to the idea that children have incestuous relations rather than free choice relations outside of the family web! And this is, sorry, really a perverse idea and it shows the deeply perverse base setup of our patriarchal society that considers children first of all as pleasure toys for their parents and extended family, and only afterwards as people like you and me who have the right to choose their partners instead of complying with the unwritten law to serve as kiss cuties for consoling sexually frustrated elders that happen to be their parents. 

After all, let us ask the pertinent question: Why should parenthood grant sexual privileges? 

My guess is that when one day we have enough discussed, publicized and mourned about rampant incest within the modern nuclear family, and all the cards are on the table, the taboo on pedophilia will be lifted, because it will be seen that it’s after all more natural to have children copulating with choice partners than to tie them as sex dummies to their parents.

It is noteworthy to observe that people who reject children’s right to be sexual and to live choice relations rather than being night pillows for their neurotic parents are often sexual virgins and as such sexually as little experienced as most consumer children. In addition, by actively defending incest, such individuals may unconsciously strengthen the repressive child-abuse paradigm of the majority and defend parental interests in controlling and manipulating children, instead of serving the true interests of children for autonomy and self-regulation in love and sexual matters.

Abandoning morality and returning to love will not result in upholding incest, except in the rare cases that the sexual interaction between parents and children is mutually agreed upon and shared as a conscious bonus in the parent-child relationship. 

In the regular case, incest serves but the parental interest for affirming and re-affirming control and dominance, and leaves the child little space for yes-or-no decisions. 

Whatever one may think regarding this subject, nature has given us millions of potential love mates, and the moment we choose sex within the family instead of sex within the world, we show that family life has an undue dominance over us and that we have not made the step from the cradle into the world—which is a world of free choice and not a world of freedom within a lion’s cage.

Interestingly, outside of the Western world, I never met a child who upon my question affirmed of wanting to engage in, or having engaged in any sexual affair with a parent or close relative. To most of these children, the very idea of incestuous sex is clearly negative or not even occurred in their mind because they were busy and satisfied with love and sex relations outside of the family. 

With prostitute children in Asia I found that these children clearly distinguish between the relationship they maintain with their father, on one hand, and that they wish to be platonic, and the erotic relationships they maintain with their male sex clients, on the other hand. 

Incest is nothing bad in my view, nor do I believe that it’s per se immoral. And yet it is not a viable option when millions of other love partners are available. The deep unhealthy codependent attachment that emotional incest typically results in is clearly counter-productive to building autonomy and personal strength in our youth. 

Instead of advocating more incest, we should advocate more erotic love options for our children outside of the family.

Download as PDF

Categories Child SexualityTags , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close