I just can't believe this could have happened - Mum had sex with son [Archive]

Cutglass

06-05-2005, 20:16

Mum had sex with son, 18
By ROBIN PERRIE

A MUM faces jail after she admitted having sex with her 18-year-old son.

A court heard how Sylvia Payne, 45, and teenager Mark were lying on a bed when he suffered a panic attack.

Payne comforted him with a hug and “one thing led to another”, magistrates were told.

Another member of the family found out and was so disgusted they alerted police.

At first Payne, a jobless mother of seven, denied the allegations. But she later admitted having full consensual sex with the teenager. They arrived together for the hearing in Workington, Cumbria.

Prosecutor David Handsford told the magistrates: “It seems they were in bed watching a video. Mark had suffered a panic attack and when she gave him a cuddle and comforted him one thing led to another.”

Mike Woolaghan, defending, said: “There is a lot that has gone on in terms of abusive behaviour within the family and Mrs Payne is perhaps as much a victim in this as anyone else.”

Payne, of Maryport, admitted an offence under the 2003 Sexual Offences Act. The case was adjourned until August 25 for sentencing but she faces up to two years in prison.

Trever

06-05-2005, 21:37

Originally posted by JonJParr
You serious??? Despite whether they're adults or not it's still entirely unnatural, disgusting, filthy and abhorrent!

But if it where two unrelated men (or women) it would be ok.

It seems 'right and wrong' is something that the media decides. If you were to say "I think being gay is unnatural and disgusting" you would be called a 'Homophobic' But when someone says that it's disgusting and filthy for a mother and son to have sex surely they must be Incestaphobic.

I personally disagree with pedaphiles, therefore I must be a pedaphobic.

The world's gone crazy

:loopy:

jayjay

06-05-2005, 21:44

Originally posted by Trever
But if it where two unrelated men (or women) it would be ok.

It seems 'right and wrong' is something that the media decides. If you were to say "I think being gay is unnatural and disgusting" you would be called a 'Homophobic' But when someone says that it's disgusting and filthy for a mother and son to have sex surely they must be Incestaphobic.

I personally disagree with pedaphiles, therefore I must be a pedaphobic.

The world's gone crazy

:loopy:

Are you for real?
Yes its appaling for a mother to have sex with her son:gag:
No its not disgusting for 2 people regardless of gender to consent to sex
For the rest of your post.I must be be treverphobic

Trever

06-05-2005, 21:55

Originally posted by jayjay
Are you for real?
Yes its appaling for a mother to have sex with her son:gag:
No its not disgusting for 2 people regardless of gender to consent to sex
For the rest of your post.I must be be treverphobic

Just seems like double standards to me.

:confused:

t020

06-05-2005, 21:59

That's digusting. :gag:

nslack

06-05-2005, 22:03

I don't understand how you can think it's "Double standards" Trever, can you please elaborate.

jayjay

06-05-2005, 22:10

Originally posted by nslack
I don't understand how you can think it's "Double standards" Trever, can you please elaborate.

I second that

Trever

06-05-2005, 22:13

Originally posted by nslack
I don't understand how you can think it's "Double standards" Trever, can you please elaborate.

Well let's have a look.

Being gay is unnatural.

Mums having sex with sons is unnatural.

But yet one is ok, but the other isn't

Double standards.

nslack

06-05-2005, 22:17

I can't remember anyone here saying "Gay sex is wrong", I certainly didn't :confused:

Or is that your opinion? (not impling it is, just curious)

miniminch

06-05-2005, 22:19

Originally posted by nslack
I can't remember anyone here saying "Gay sex is wrong", I certainly didn't :confused:

i think god may, of all the good things he said, have made a mistake on this one!

t020

06-05-2005, 22:24

Originally posted by miniminch
i think god may of

Or he may *have*...

jayjay

06-05-2005, 22:26

Originally posted by Trever
Well let's have a look.

Being gay is unnatural.

Mums having sex with sons is unnatural.

But yet one is ok, but the other isn't

Double standards.

Have you got children?
Your views in my opinion are slightly misguided but you are entitled to them no matter how strange I and many others think you are.
Having sex with close blood relatives is not for me:gag:
Tend not to get genetic deformity with same gender sex though.

Trever

06-05-2005, 22:30

Originally posted by nslack
I can't remember anyone here saying "Gay sex is wrong", I certainly didn't :confused:

Or is that your opinion? (not impling it is, just curious)

Not impling anything. Just seems strange that two unnatural acts get treated so differently. Personally I cant see any difference between the two.

To quote JayJay "No its not disgusting for 2 people regardless of gender to consent to sex"

:thumbsup:

nslack

06-05-2005, 22:34

Thanks for explaining it, now I understand your points a bit better, I see the link your trying to make :thumbsup:

but i still don't get how you can see no difference between them.

jayjay

06-05-2005, 22:36

Originally posted by Trever
Not impling anything. Just seems strange that two unnatural acts get treated so differently. Personally I cant see any difference between the two.

To quote JayJay "No its not disgusting for 2 people regardless of gender to consent to sex"

:thumbsup:

Think you were implying lots .
Please don't quote me out of context.
Blood relatives should not be having sex !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Trever

06-05-2005, 22:39

Originally posted by jayjay
Have you got children?
Your views in my opinion are slightly misguided but you are entitled to them no matter how strange I and many others think you are.
Having sex with close blood relatives is not for me:gag:
Tend not to get genetic deformity with same gender sex though.

Sorry Jayjay I don't think you understand the point that I was trying to make.

Trever

06-05-2005, 22:40

Originally posted by jayjay
Think you were implying lots .
Please don't quote me out of context.
Blood relatives should not be having sex !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now you're getting it :clap:

LordChaverly

06-05-2005, 22:42

There was quite a good film on this theme some years ago called 'Spanking the Monkey'. It explored how an incestuous relationship might develop between mother and son - in this case because the son was caught up in an emotional battle between his manipulative and estranged parents.

nslack

06-05-2005, 22:43

I've got it, but my head hurts, it's past midnight and I'm only 16, too much thinking hurts (especially after a general election)

jayjay

06-05-2005, 22:51

I'm not 16 neither is my partner .We have both read all posts and no I don't get it :confused:
maybe its the beer.I'll read it tomorrow and let you know.

Kthebean

07-05-2005, 12:50

I really do think that this is disgusting - the sun's coverage of it, that is. Why is this of national importance, and why does the public need to know about it?

The case itself is just sad, in my opinion. The defence lawyer has said there was a history of abuse in the family which makes sense - no well adjusted mum goes shagging her son does she!?

The Sun sickens me. They'll do/report ANYTHING to sell papers, even something as sad as this.

(his lordship - spanking the monkey? I worry for you :) )

SHarper

07-05-2005, 18:29

He only wanted "bitty", but it looks like he got the lotty.....

BAZZO

07-05-2005, 18:47

Bertrand Russell said that the reason the church forbade incest was that its mix of sexual pleasure and family love would be so addictive that folks wouldn't need religion!
That's what my mum told me anyway..

scoop

07-05-2005, 20:13

Originally posted by Trever
Well let's have a look.

Being gay is unnatural.

Mums having sex with sons is unnatural.

But yet one is ok, but the other isn't

Double standards.
Since when is being gay unnatural?

Ann*

07-05-2005, 20:37

Originally posted by jayjay
Yes its appaling for a mother to have sex with her son:gag:

I believe that the Sun actually said that the mother "admitted" that sex took place between herself and her son....it doesn't say who initiated the sex ~ it might have been her son...why should mother be the only one to be facing gaol, her son was 18 and therefore over the age of legal consent, should he not also be facing charges?

raskel

07-05-2005, 20:44

more to the point
how did the 18 year old get turned on by his mother? :gag:

Hels

07-05-2005, 21:05

Sorry but this is sickening - just lock them up and throw away the key

Sierra

07-05-2005, 21:15

Originally posted by steelcitybab
more to the point
how did the 18 year old get turned on by his mother? :gag:

Here here, bab.

There is clearly something terribly wrong with these people. I don't believe that this just happened, either. Maybe it's just coming OUT now, but I'll bet it's been going on awhile.

My personal take on child molesters is that there is no hope of redemption for them. They cannot be "cured". They are criminals, to be sure, but not in the same category as say, a bank robber, or car thief.

I believe that something happens inside their heads, some sort of moral breakdown. It's as if they've crossed a bridge into the land of evil, and there is no coming back.

This is very sad, selfish and sick. How could any mother ruin her son's chance at having a normal life?

:( Sierra

Fareast

15-05-2005, 04:09

Isn't it rather odd that people who would turn a blind eye at almost anything that two adults can do , sexually , when it gets to incest they throw a wobbler----"disgusting" , "lock 'em up"
"I cannot believe this " , "aargh "......etc....Admittedly incest is illegal just as gay sex was, not too long ago , but there are worse things to scream abuse at. I suppose it can lead to a weakened genetic stock , so if incestuous partners took precautions , it would presumably be o.k. ? Also , what about an incestuous relationship between two brothers ?Or sisters?
Reading the previous comments , it seems to me that people are getting confused between their repugnance of incest and the moral argument. We are all entitled to be disgusted by something but we shouldn't then transfer that disgust into an ethic or a law , without good reason. Years ago , that's exactly what the anti-gay crowd did , and years before that , a woman , "taken in adultery " or giving birth out of wedlock , was similarly regarded with disgust.
To paraphrase someone who's identity I've forgotton , "There is nothing more unedifying than seeing the English public in the midst of one of their moral crusades".
"Lock 'em up "."Throw the key away ", "Filth" "Should be burned at the stake "
Welcome to the new enlightened Britain !!

Don_Kiddick

15-05-2005, 06:58

So it's like the thin edge of a wedge? :confused:
first childbirth out of wedlock.
then homosexuality...
soon incest will be'legal' +/- acceptible..

what's next?

Beastialty? Paedophillia? Gang rape?

:suspect: can you see my point?

Don_Kiddick

15-05-2005, 06:59

Originally posted by rubydazzler
Daily Mail/Sun - Sun/DailyMail ..... hmmm.

I have no views about it. Other than - it's not something I'd do myself. But they're both adults ... a possible 2 yr gaol sentence seems a bit over the top really.
What if it had been a jobless father of 7 & his daughter?

JoeP

15-05-2005, 07:17

Well,

Socially there are probably a number of reasons why incest has always been frowned upon in most societies. Apart form the breach of trust between parent and child, there are the practical issues of an increased risk of genetic abnormalities of offspring , aspects of inheritance and property law, religious taboos, etc.

The gay sex betweem unrelated adults comparison fails on a number levels - the genetic issue is impossible, inheritance / property laws unaffected, no breah of parental trust.

It leaves us with the social and religious taboos, admittedly, but you'll often find that taboos in societies are usually underpinned by practicalities. It's quite possible that teh reason why incest is viewed (rightly to me) as a very serious taboo is that it IS underpinned with the above issues that good disrupt society. Adultery and homosexuality could inflict damage on a developing society but probably not to the same degree over generations.

Just my two-pence halfpenny.

Joe

Fareast

15-05-2005, 07:45

Don Kiddick:-
Yes , I do see the point you're making and I agree with you on one level. We've seen , over the years , a much more relaxed attitude towards various sexual practices and we have to ask ourselves , I suppose , as a society , "Where do we draw the line ?"
Well it is a difficult question , with no easy answers and all revolves around freedom , responsibility and effect and I guess philosophers have been arguing about these matters for about 3,000 years and still are !
I would say there's a sort of parallel argument going on about drugs-----a lot of people believe that cannabis is pretty harmless but the same people would be against the legalisation of heroin. Yet , if we are going to have real freedom , as opposed to conditional freedom , it would be difficult to counter the argument that everyone should be allowed to , "got to hell" the way they choose .
All very complex and we'll perhaps never sort it out completely to satisfy everyone.
What really surprised me about some of the previous responses , is that you could sense the sheer hatred pouring out , at least by the language they used , concerning incest. They seemed almost demented by shock and horror and by a problem which is not exactly breaking up our society. If S.F. had been operating 20 years ago , I'm willing to bet we'd have heard the same tone and the same reaction about gay sex.It seems pretty general these days -----people getting hysterical over comparitavely minor problems.
I've never seen a similar outburst about the horrible scenes of violence and glorification of violence which is all around us in films , on videos and on , "the telly". Pretty odd that !

15-05-2005, 08:47

Originally posted by Fareast
You must have led a pretty sheltered life if you're shocked by that report.
Admittedly , it's not very edifying but these days........?........!

Does this happen frequently these days then :gag:

Robbie Loving

15-05-2005, 08:55

Originally posted by kathythebean
I really do think that this is disgusting - the sun's coverage of it, that is. Why is this of national importance, and why does the public need to know about it?

The Sun sickens me. They'll do/report ANYTHING to sell papers, even something as sad as this.

What planet are you on Kathy,
Pick any paper up, and look through and see how many stories you find of "national importance" in each one, yes the sun may not be at the top of the list, but they wont be far behind!!

perhaps the public don't need to know about this story, if that is the case you dont have to keep reading!

but as it is..... they did write this story..... and you aired your view on the subject of this..... so where does your problem lie?

Fareast

15-05-2005, 09:00

Well , it would be difficult to know , wouldn't it ? It's not the sort of criminal offence that's easy to discover, by its very nature.
All we do know is that it's been going on a hell of a long time !There were some well-reported cases during the Roman era , I believe. Didn't Caligula marry his half-sister or something like that ? Also , later , Lucretia Borgia , I think , was into some kind of incestuous relationship ; no doubt someone more au fait with History could fill in the details.
It's a subject that keeps popping up in fact and fiction over the years. As long ago as the 1950's there was a French book/film about it called Les Enfants Terrible , I think. Sorry to be so vague about all this but where I am , I haven't got access to any reference books whatsoever , and I'm internet-illiterate too !
What surprised me was the shock-horror reaction of many replies on the subject at what seems a comparitavely harmless crime compared with some of the crimes we read about today.

rubydazzler

15-05-2005, 10:08

Originally posted by Don_Kiddick
What if it had been a jobless father of 7 & his daughter?

I did say I had no more to say and I don't want to be drawn into an argument - but as you've quoted me and you're now bringing hypothetical situations into the discussion, I will comment further. Although I'm not sure why you are placing such emphasis on being "jobless". People are mostly jobless through no fault of their own and don't deserve to be denigrated. If your concern is that the female in this case wasn't in paid work she was hardly "jobless" as she had 7 children to look after.

The only other thing I'd have to say about this case is that I've never heard of a man being able to have straight sex unless he wanted to, so why is the woman getting most ofl the blame here? It doesn't seem that he was the one doing the reporting either. I think people who get into these situations are more to be pitied than blamed.

It seems to me that in any cases involving sex, there often seems to be an element of salaciousness running through the reporting and the discussing of them. An "oohhh look at these dreadfdul people, how can they do something like that. I never would and neither would anyone I know. But I'll read and talk about it cos it's sort of exciting in a horrible way" type of response. I find it pitful more than interesting and I would hope that the two people concerned can put it behind them and that neither have to suffer being imprisioned for a moment of madness.

Fareast, thank you for posting such reasonable and understanding additons to this dicussion. Perhaps having lived longer lives than some others, we've learned the value of trying to understand and make allowances for other people during the course of them?

Robbie Loving

15-05-2005, 10:13

Originally posted by rubydazzler
I find it pitful more than interesting and I would hope that the two people concerned can put it behind them and that neither have to suffer being imprisioned for a moment of madness.

but the likelyness is..... it was not just a moment of madness.

Kirsty_87

15-05-2005, 10:13

it takes two to tango (so to speak) if the mother has gone to court for this then so should the lad, as he is 18 and not a child!

Fareast

15-05-2005, 10:24

Rubydazzler ,

Thank you for your kind comments.
There aren't many advantages in getting old [ as I know only too well !] but I suppose it does help a person to get more of a true perspective on various events.I'd hate to be thought of as complacement----in fact I feel more strongly about some things thanI did when I was younger.
Part of the answer , too , is that anyone over 60years old was brought up in a Britain where it was considered dignified not to get hysterical or even overly-excited by things.Today , more people , to my way of thinking , break out in hives and rant and rave at the most trivial of events. Either they haven't enough to keep them occupied and/or their lives are so controlled , predictable and , thus , boring , that the least bit of scandal or bizarre behaviour sends them into a tizzy or a tantrum.

Don_Kiddick

15-05-2005, 10:33

Originally posted by rubydazzler
I'm not sure why you are placing such emphasis on being "jobless". People are mostly jobless through no fault of their own and don't deserve to be denigrated. If your concern is that the female in this case wasn't in paid work she was hardly "jobless" as she had 7 children to look after.

err; cos you did.
Originally posted by rubydazzler
"a jobless mother of seven" - hardly living an idle life if she has seven children to look after ....

so for equalities sake, I used the word jobless too. As men are equally capable of looking after 7 children.

It seems to me that in any cases involving sex, there always seems to be an element of salaciousness running through the reporting and the discussing of them. An "oohhh look at these dreadfdul people, how can they do something like that. I never would and neither would anyone I know. But I'll read and talk about it cos it's sort of exciting in a horrible way" type of response. Ever heard of the phrase "sex sells"?It's used to sell everything from chocolate bars to newspapers.

Fareast, thank you for posting such reasonable and understanding additons to this dicussion. Perhaps having lived longer lives than some others, we've learned the value of trying to understand and make allowances for other people during the course of them?

Yes, presumably me being a whippersnapper at 39 I fall into the 'never lived' category :roll: and by rite have no worthy opinions ?:D

Fareast

15-05-2005, 11:01

Well , Don , just think , you're 24 years behind me [not sure about rubydazzler ! ]. Now , going backwards in time , think what your views were when you were fifteen ! Probably changed quite a lot .So , in another 24 years , they are likely to change too ?
I think Rubydazzler was saying that as you get older , inevitably , one hears about , for example , "shocking" sex cases year after year and one is inclined to yawn a bit and say , "so what ?" , especially if no third party was involved.There have been so many cases and a few days later they are usually forgotton . The things we should really be angry about and the law should stamp on firmly are any crimes of violence and crimes that drive people to despair. The way a lot of posters reacted to this pretty ordinary case of incest was ferocious for what it involved.

rubydazzler

15-05-2005, 11:06

I can't get into tit for tat postings with you donkiddick, as you know what happened last time . I don't want to make more work for the mods. So - sorry, I must deny you your fun today :)

Just as a general observation, I do hope that on SF a compliment to one poster isn't going to be regarded as an insult to another? Credit where due - as my granny used to say.

[Quote from Robbie_Lovin] "but the likelyness is..... it was not just a moment of madness."

You're right, of course,. Possibly there is the likelihood that something happened more than once. However, we have to keep in the forefront of our minds that this was consensual, between two adults, according to the reported case, not child abuse or an incident that was complained of by one of the parties to it.

But really, although it's not a common occurance and most of us would never even think of it, did they harm anyone but themselves? Do they really deserve to go to gaol? Isn't the shame of the court case enough and maybe some community service or something? If this had never been reported, who else but them would have known? On a scale of brutal rape of a stranger, breaking in and beating an old person, torturing and neglecting a child, ongoing domestic violence ... is this comparable in any way? We don't even have the full details to base our opinions on - just a newspaper report

Probably I'm the one that's out of step, but I just don't think it is. And yes, I know I'm comparing apples and oranges etc etc. And I'm being drawn into this discussion once more, against my better judgment and my own rebuttal of these types of debates on another thread! . So I'm leaving it there.

t020

15-05-2005, 11:18

Originally posted by rubydazzler
I can't get into tit for tat postings with you donkiddick, as you know what happened last time . I don't want to make more work for the mods. So - sorry, I must deny you your fun today :)

Copping out again then - it's starting to become a habit now isn't it? :hihi:

Don_Kiddick

15-05-2005, 11:39

Originally posted by Fareast
Well , Don , Now , going backwards in time , think what your views were when you were fifteen ! Probably changed quite a lot .So , in another 24 years , they are likely to change too ?
.
It's funny but I can't remember much of my teen thoughts as they were usually clouded with self pity at being bullied at school & at home. So I've put them somewhere out of reach - if ya get me drift :thumbsup:

I confess I was trying to wave my red rag at Ruby on this occasion 'cos of some of her recent posts/ responses to mine :hihi:
:wink: sorry Ruby - I was having fun today & you sussed me -

been there done that eh, owd lass? ;)

DK

rubydazzler

15-05-2005, 12:30

*INTERMISSION* - curtain goes down, music plays, rubysells icecreams and lollies from a tray to help everyone cool down on a hot afternoon ....

Originally posted by Don_Kiddick
I confess I was trying to wave my red rag at Ruby on this occasion 'cos of some of her recent posts/ responses to mine :hihi: :wink: sorry Ruby - I was having fun today & you sussed me -DK

Donki, I admit that I didn't like having my posts pulled ... because I try never to get anyone's goat unecessarily. No-one can get your goat if they don't know where it's tethered, as they say. Guess I know where yours is tethered now :D Mine isn't tethered on my age, hon. So if you WANT to get me mad, you'll have to do better than calling me owdlass. :rolleyes:

IRL I've never found it helpful to try to beat someone into submission with repeated variations on a theme, t020. And I react in the same way online. I make my contribution to the debate and only if someone posts something that replies directly to my points do I come back in again. You made such a significant contribution to this debate jsut now, that I'll probably never feel it necessary to come back on anything you post in future either :D

You really should get back on topic now :cool:

foo_fighter

15-05-2005, 13:54

Originally posted by rubydazzler
...But really, although it's not a common occurance and most of us would never even think of it, did they harm anyone but themselves? Do they really deserve to go to gaol? Isn't the shame of the court case enough and maybe some community service or something? If this had never been reported, who else but them would have known? On a scale of brutal rape of a stranger, breaking in and beating an old person, torturing and neglecting a child, ongoing domestic violence ... is this comparable in any way?...
But given that people have been sent to jail for speeding, where absolutely no-one was hurt in any way, not even psychologically, then, a custodial sentence looks all together more appropriate.

The short fact of the matter is that the law was broken, and an appropriate sentence will be given.

Oh, and for the record, my reaction...

...:gag:

t020

15-05-2005, 13:58

Originally posted by rubydazzler

IRL I've never found it helpful to try to beat someone into submission with repeated variations on a theme, t020. And I react in the same way online. I make my contribution to the debate and only if someone posts something that replies directly to my points do I come back in again. You made such a significant contribution to this debate jsut now, that I'll probably never feel it necessary to come back on anything you post in future either :D

That's funny - last time I posted to directly reply to (and question) your dubious statement in another thread, you failed to respond and then threatened to tell the mods that I was harassing you by asking for a response. Other wonderful contributions by your good self include personal attacks against me in one thread, and timo in at least 2 threads. They're just including the ones I've noticed. Strange practice for someone who has "never found it helpful to try to beat someone into submission".

miniminch

15-05-2005, 14:16

Originally posted by t020
That's funny - last time I posted to directly reply to (and question) your dubious statement in another thread, you failed to respond and then threatened to tell the mods that I was harassing you by asking for a response. Other wonderful contributions by your good self include personal attacks against me in one thread, and timo in at least 2 threads. They're just including the ones I've noticed. Strange practice for someone who has "never found it helpful to try to beat someone into submission".
I, on the other hand, have always found it helpful to beat someone into submission - so back off car boy or I'll come knocking!:mad: :)

Rebecca

15-05-2005, 14:16

So, sex between blood relations is disgusting and repulsive?

but is it not a fairly common male fantasy to watch attractive twin sisters getting it on?

I don't really think the issue is whether or not this is disgusting, dirty etc - that is a matter of personal taste, and whether it is natural or unnatural is irrelevant - you can't say that something is bad or wrong simply because it is unnatural.

The real issue is whether or not this is really a matter for the state to be intervening in. I don't think it is, these were two consenting adults, and what they do behind closed doors, providing that they are not harming anyone, should be the concern of no-one but themselves.

miniminch

15-05-2005, 14:29

Originally posted by Rebecca

but is it not a fairly common male fantasy to watch attractive twin sisters getting it on?

I don't get you - you need to explain in more detail - PM me the 'ins and outs' if you want.

Yours breathllessly:D :love:

Sidla

15-05-2005, 14:47

On a lighter note - imagine if she'd have got pregnant!

"Meet my mom and my grandma - here she is!"

venger

15-05-2005, 16:54

Originally posted by Sidla
On a lighter note - imagine if she'd have got pregnant!

"Meet my mom and my grandma - here she is!"

"my wife and sister" ~ Bill Hicks

Mike Woolaghan, defending, said: “There is a lot that has gone on in terms of abusive behaviour within the family and Mrs Payne is perhaps as much a victim in this as anyone else.”

PMSL

jgharston

15-05-2005, 17:17

Originally posted by venger
"my wife and sister" ~ Bill Hicks

This reminds me of a film I can't remember... Part of the dialogue was:

She's my sister...
<slap>
She's my mother...
<slap>
My sister... My mother...
<slap>

I wish I could remember what it was.

--
JGH

rubydazzler

15-05-2005, 17:26

(t020, you're doing it again! Everyone can't agree with you everytime. Learn to let go or you'll find that life gets very wearing. I " threatened" you with the mods because you wouldn't stop pming me about something I'd clearly said my last word on. I've been online for over 5 years now on numerous sites and I've never reported anyone yet. I didn't retaliate to timo when he personally insulted me on two threads, did I? Let him fight his own battle with me if he still has one, (which I doubt as he's a reasonable man, and we've exchanged pms on the matter)

Drags the thread back onto topic again

As to foofighter's comment. Has there actually ever been a case where someone was gaoled for merely exceeding the speed limit? There must have been considerable danger to life and limb, surely? AFAICS, there was no danger to anyone else here, except the two people involved? But if we must swell the prison population further still, so be it. I concede the point foofighter. A law has been broken and punishment must follow. My point is that need the punishment be a prison sentence.

t020

15-05-2005, 18:06

Originally posted by rubydazzler
(t020, you're doing it again! Everyone can't agree with you everytime. Learn to let go or you'll find that life gets very wearing. I " threatened" you with the mods because you wouldn't stop pming me about something I'd clearly said my last word on.

You said your last word on it, but you could have had the courtesy of answering my query rather than threatening to report me (despite me doing nothing wrong other than wanting an answer).

max

15-05-2005, 18:31

MOD: Please keep this thread on topic and restrict personal comments to the pm facility.

Sierra

15-05-2005, 18:36

Originally posted by miniminch
I don't get you - you need to explain in more detail - PM me the 'ins and outs' if you want.

Yours breathllessly:D :love:

Mini, you are soooo naughty! :nono: :hihi:

:) Sierra

Aaarrrggghhh

15-05-2005, 18:40

You see, what a load of rubbish, even starting / allowing a thread which is copy from a tabloid with prevy stories in it everyday? OK so lets all scan the shelves tomorrow morning and ask here what everyone else thinks of random gutter press articles....ahhh sheffield...home of the intelligencia...

max

15-05-2005, 18:43

Originally posted by Aaarrrggghhh
home of the intelligencia...

Oh, and we love irony too. ;)

Aaarrrggghhh

15-05-2005, 18:56

Originally posted by max
Oh, and we love irony too. ;)

The royal we or what mate?

Actually I don't feel as if this 'town' is my home, in case you thought you understood... I am a traveller.

minis4free

15-05-2005, 19:39

You guys should watch nip/tuck - they're pursuing a incest story line on there..

Deavon

15-05-2005, 20:12

Originally posted by Aaarrrggghhh
[B]You see, what a load of rubbish, even starting / allowing a thread which is copy from a tabloid with prevy stories in it everyday?

Prevy stories? What on Earth are you on about?

robbie

15-05-2005, 20:33

just a sec. Incest is still accepted custom in several cultures (including one in the worlds largest democracy) and wasn't it pretty common only a few hundred years ago in this country? Look at the Royal family for crying out loud.

I personally don't agree with it or believe it should be allowed but the complete and utter over-reaction on here is amazing.

If the kid was underage I could understand it more.

get a grip people (and not on a family member now:nono: )

LordSnooty

15-05-2005, 21:34

Surely in a civilised society the idea that gay sex is somehow by definition 'unnatural' is ridiculous (I am straight). Get over it, whichever bigot came out with that one...... Regarding Fareast's real freedom/conditional freedom argument. Well, my opinion is that freedom should be 'conditional' - no-one has the freedom to f**k someone else's life up using the justification of some 'lifestyle choice/psychological preference' or other. 'Real freedom' smacks of utopianism, which is a chilling prospect - the day everyone can do exactly what they like and bugger (no pun intended) the consequences is the day we should all pack up and leave the earth to plants and animals! And no, I don't think we should bring back National Service/everyone being addressed by their surnames either, there is such as thing as 'moderation' (right, Mods?). As for the case in point, yes, incest happens, and has done forever, as has murder, rape, war etc etc. Just because something has happened forever (OK, not 'forever', pedants) doesn't mean it is right, or acceptable. Incest, surely, is a form of abuse, and if it's between two consenting adults, they are abusing each other....I return to my point, that freedom should be conditional. Society needs rules to function. Family members not having sex with each other is a 'rule' of society, and I'm sorry, but if some societies allow it, they've got it wrong! (Such societies are invariably patriarchal anway - there is such a thing as progress! And NO! That doesn't mean I think we should have a McDonald's in the rain forest!). Above all, it is a breach of trust - a parent's role is to try and give their offspring as good a start in life as they can manage (and YES, I do know how hard it is and that lots of compromises with reality have to be made!). Having sex with them..............? Good grief! How can anyone just pass it off with a, 'oh well, there are worse things!'. Yeah right, they could have murdered/tortured someone, so, you know, in the grand scheme of things sleeping with your son isn't so bad. Ker-wrong! Family relationships are supposed to be based on love - and pragmatism, that is what drives it all. Just ask yourself what YOU would be if you'd had sex with your mum! Surely it's obvious! It's just not a good thing to do, is it? And branding people who think incest isn't acceptable as demonic tabloid-heads.............! We need rules! We don't live in caves! And, 'freedom' doesn't mean doing whatever you want to whoever, whenever you want 'because you want to'! And NO! I don't read The Sun/Mail/Sport etc etc!!!!

And relax...............................

dudu

15-05-2005, 22:51

Originally posted by robbie
just a sec. Incest is still accepted custom in several cultures (including one in the worlds largest democracy) and wasn't it pretty common only a few hundred years ago in this country? Look at the Royal family for crying out loud.

I personally don't agree with it or believe it should be allowed but the complete and utter over-reaction on here is amazing.

If the kid was underage I could understand it more.

get a grip people (and not on a family member now:nono: )

Not sure that it was that common in the Royal Family between siblings or Mother/Son, but often happened between cousins as to this day there is no law against this.

Personally I cannot understand how one would get turned on by one's own Mother; although I can understand it between siblings as you are likely to be fairly similar ages, and growing up together you could become curious in each others' bodies. Whereas the Mother/Son relationship is biological as the Mother has after all given birth to the son.

I do think it is misplaced to jail/criminalise the Mother thou. Surely they both need psychological help not incarceration; I mean what might they get up to with the other inmates?

mojoworking

15-05-2005, 23:27

Originally posted by Don_Kiddick
What if it had been a jobless father of 7 & his daughter?

Even more to the point what if it had been a jobless father of 7 & his SON!

The pro-gay, but anti-incest faction would be tearing themselves in two! ;)

redrobbo

16-05-2005, 02:01

Incest is a societal taboo, and for very good reasons. It runs the risk of genetically deformed children being born. That's why it is also illegal.

I cannot understand why only the mother was prosecuted. The son is 18, and therefore an adult in his own right.

I notice that sentence on the mother has been postponed to a later date. I presume this is for court reports to be prepared.
Although the maximum sentence is imprisonment, the judge will take into account the circumstances in which this offence arose
(including family dynamics), and public interest. These factors will determine whether the mother goes to prison or receives some alternative punishment.

crowefan

16-05-2005, 05:11

it is amazing that in this day and age
the thought og two men or women loving each other physically still threatens and sickens some people????????

the word that should be used is ABUSIVE.........all abusive relationships whether they be gay straight,insestous, etc should NOT be tolerated.............and when I mean ABUSIVE, I mean where one person in THAT relationship, is forced, or damaged, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

trever..............by comparing this damaged woman's behaviour with that of gay relationships is naive and dangerous....

venger

16-05-2005, 05:14

Originally posted by redrobbo
It runs the risk of genetically deformed children being born.

Is that not enough ?

Kthebean

16-05-2005, 05:20

Originally posted by redrobbo
Incest is a societal taboo, and for very good reasons. It runs the risk of genetically deformed children being born. That's why it is also illegal.

I cannot understand why only the mother was prosecuted. The son is 18, and therefore an adult in his own right.

I notice that sentence on the mother has been postponed to a later date. I presume this is for court reports to be prepared.
Although the maximum sentence is imprisonment, the judge will take into account the circumstances in which this offence arose
(including family dynamics), and public interest. These factors will determine whether the mother goes to prison or receives some alternative punishment.

What do you think the 'public interest' is in a case like this? Weird, isn't it!

The sun make me sick. They just like to put the oddest stuff they can in their stupid rag so that their readers can sit round patting themselves on the back going 'oh well, at least we're not like THEM'

Sony

16-05-2005, 05:22

Originally posted by Aaarrrggghhh
You see, what a load of rubbish, even starting / allowing a thread which is copy from a tabloid with prevy stories in it everyday? OK so lets all scan the shelves tomorrow morning and ask here what everyone else thinks of random gutter press articles....ahhh sheffield...home of the intelligencia...

It's the general chat section. So why don't we scan the shelves and talk about random articles?

foo_fighter

16-05-2005, 07:06

Originally posted by rubydazzler
...As to foofighter's comment. Has there actually ever been a case where someone was gaoled for merely exceeding the speed limit?...
Yes, empty dual carriageway, early Sunday morning, well over 100mph tho' (and no, it wasn't me),
Originally posted by rubydazzler
...There must have been considerable danger to life and limb, surely?...
not sure about "considerable", but there would have been "a" risk involved, and presumably that's why he got a custodial sentence, but no actual damage was done to anyone / anything.

Originally posted by rubydazzler
AFAICS, there was no danger to anyone else here, except the two people involved?
There was a danger of and therefore to a third person.

As I eluded to, and Red' has since expanded on, this woman hasn't actually been sent to jail, it's merely a possibility at this point, people are over-reacting about this prospect as if they were tabloid journalists themselves...

...and no, I don't know why the son hasn't been brought to book either, they both committed the offence, and they're both over 18, seems like he should be in the same boat...

...but then, none of us have all the facts here do we?

:)

Oh and, applejuice, look at the link (p1), theres a photo.

rubydazzler

16-05-2005, 07:40

Foo-fighter note the quote from my earlier posting "We don't even have the full details to base our opinions on - just a newspaper report"

I did also concede to you the point that when a law has been broken punishment should follow. Presumably you intended that to apply to any broken law, including speeding?

At the risk of once again being accused of "copping-out" we've established that some of us are shocked, disgusted and incensed by this case and others of us are taking the attitude that sometimes bad things happen and understanding more than punishment is needed. There seems to be no more to say. We could go on forever talking round in circles. It won't alter the outcome of the case anyway - which will be decided by the Court.

foo_fighter

16-05-2005, 07:46

Originally posted by rubydazzler
We could go on forever talking round in circles. It won't alter the outcome of the case anyway - which will be decided by the Court.
This one always puzzles me...

...we're on a forum, that's what they are for...

...discussion...

...and it'll rarely if ever actually alter anything...

...if you feel this way, why bother posting on here at all?

:confused:

rubydazzler

16-05-2005, 08:02

Originally posted by foo_fighter
This one always puzzles me...
...we're on a forum, that's what they are for...
...discussion...
...and it'll rarely if ever actually alter anything...
...if you feel this way, why bother posting on here at all?
:confused:

gone off topic again, so I've pmd you :)

MobileB

16-05-2005, 08:02

Good job this is not on the Barnsley forum .............

craigmason

16-05-2005, 09:27

it depends on what she looks like is she is a right dog like the woman in the photo then no but if she's like a page 3 stunner then i would have no problems with it :heyhey:

Belle

16-05-2005, 12:03

Lots of people are very upset with the mother.

How do we know it wasn't the son that instigated it?

There are acres of pornography dedicated to young men fancying their mothers and spying on them in the shower etc.

It must be a common fantasy to sell the numbers involved.

I dont see why the woman has to take the blame, it might have been all down to him, in fact it makes more sense that way round - she would not have been able to arouse him if he didnt want to be aroused.

Perhaps those who blame the mother, dont see 18 year old lads as being permanently randy in the way that I do.

I think the point I am trying to make is that I dont know whose fault it was, if either in particular, so am surprised at the woman getting the blame.

I agree that incest is illegal partly because of the threat of genetically damaged children, but what if the woman is over the age of the menopause, or they both use contraception? Then what? What other arguments do we offer against it?

If both parties were, say, over 21 and in full posession of their sanity and their reasoning and neither was being compelled, where might our argument then lie?

Perhaps other Christians can explain how Adam and Eve populated the world if they or their children did not commit incest.

I am not condoning it, before anyone asks.

But I am not jumping to condemn either.

- although I do think the courts would be mad if they both got sent to prison, what good would that do?

nick2

16-05-2005, 12:10

Originally posted by Belle
There are acres of pornography dedicated to young men fancying their mothers and spying on them in the shower etc.

I know there is a fair bit of porn on the net about "moms", and there is a fair amount of gay porn concerning "daddies", but I think (hope) it's more of a mother/father "figure" kind of thing which I think is fairly harmless, not literally your mum/dad which I think is just weird.

Aaarrrggghhh

16-05-2005, 15:21

Originally posted by craigmason
it depends on what she looks like is she is a right dog like the woman in the photo then no but if she's like a page 3 stunner then i would have no problems with it :heyhey:

You are agreeing to have sex with your Mother.
What a wonderful forum! How long was your ban for?
Oh a JOKE!

OK after you mate.... ?
:D

Wooh I could get into this!

Don_Kiddick

16-05-2005, 15:25

Originally posted by redrobbo
Incest is a societal taboo, and for very good reasons. It runs the risk of genetically deformed children being born. That's why it is also illegal.

I cannot understand why only the mother was prosecuted. The son is 18, and therefore an adult in his own right.

I notice that sentence on the mother has been postponed to a later date. I presume this is for court reports to be prepared.
Although the maximum sentence is imprisonment, the judge will take into account the circumstances in which this offence arose
(including family dynamics), and public interest. These factors will determine whether the mother goes to prison or receives some alternative punishment.

Redrobbo, I picked out your post which asks "why only the mother was prosecuted" although others have asked similar.

I wonder if anyone has thought this boy might have a mental health issue in the guize of Oedipus Complex
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=oedipus+complex&meta=
And that the mother has taken advantage of this? :suspect:

LordSnooty

16-05-2005, 16:21

'Oedipus, schmoedipus - so long as he loves his mother.....'

Don_Kiddick

16-05-2005, 16:24

Originally posted by LordSnooty
'Oedipus, schmoedipus - so long as he loves his mother.....'
ROFL!
Does it make him an official MF?

LordSnooty

16-05-2005, 16:29

I'm afraid it does!

max

16-05-2005, 16:52

A couple of things about Oedipus which puzzle me:

Did he have an oedipus complex before or after he slept with his mother?

If he, and history, had never found out that it was his mother would he still have had an oedipus complex?

Similarly, in this case, can this youth be described as someone who has an oedipus complex?

Another puzzler, what is the name of the complex which the mother must surely be suffering? If there isn't one, then that's really not fair.

saxon51

16-05-2005, 17:04

Scene from a Simpsons episode:-

Cletus and Darlene are 'canoodling' behind a pick up truck.

Darlene: Careful Cletus, my ma might catch us.

Cletus: Shucks Darlene. She's my ma too!

Don_Kiddick

16-05-2005, 17:18

Originally posted by max
A couple of things about Oedipus which puzzle me:

Did he have an oedipus complex before or after he slept with his mother?

If he, and history, had never found out that it was his mother would he still have had an oedipus complex?

Similarly, in this case, can this youth be described as someone who has an oedipus complex?

Another puzzler, what is the name of the complex which the mother must surely be suffering? If there isn't one, then that's really not fair.
Dunno Max but I just stumbled upon Narcissism...
I can feel a whole new thread coming on...

Gordie OS1

16-05-2005, 20:59

GazB

17-05-2005, 06:57

To him, she is a M.I.L.F :|

Yes, I know that's pretty sick :)

hazel

17-05-2005, 07:33

I presume the laws the land were laid out for the continuation of the species and to form some sort of civilisation.
These laws were made to prevent interbreeding for genetic purposes. And so is instilled into us as the rules of civilisation.
In the same way as our parents teach us standards of bahaviiour. As some-one said if you believe in Adam and Eve what else would they do. And if a calamity happened to the world and few females were left the same thing would happen again, because I think that the most compelling urge is to procreate. It's programmed into us.
hazel