From the telly

Facts
A fading telly 'star' has written a 'tell al' book in which she said that as an adult, after a night of mutual consensual drugs she woke up in the morning to find she had sex with her more famous father.
From there the affair became consensual for 10 years. Now almost 20 years after she's claiming victim status but now forgives her father.
dad died in 2001 at 65.
Ignoring
The religiously motivated cultural revulsion against incest.(practiced many cultures in history and some today)
The cynical publishers timing.
The possible pecuniary and cathartic motives.
And plain Misogyny and feminism.

additional factors to consider.
a. Given that the father and daughter were both consenting adults. there were no children involved.
b. The relationship went on for 10 year consensually.
c. She had both a mother and was old enough to leave or prosecute.
d. We as a culture ignore even encourage 40+ men having relationships with young women (daughter type ages).despite power differences.

What do you think about the moral conflict between A&D?
Where do YOU draw the line and why?

I draw the line at writing an entire book just to tell Al.

I draw the line at the headline...

Mamas and Papas singer 'raped daughter'

Surely there's a posthumous defamation lawsuit in that. Even if you take the quotes (which are there as a poxy ass-cover), it doesn't make sense because of the word daughter inside them, the quote isn't from the dead guy.

At least the marginally better SMH had an 'accused' in there...

Mamas & Papas singer accused of rape by daughter

Dear Examinator,

You've given us a rather bad example with this case -
where the father was heavily into 'everything', had no
moral boundaries, and took sexual advantage of his
teenage daughter, who herself was heavily into
drugs as well as being a very 'troubled,'
young woman. I don't think either of them really
knew what they were doing.

Sociologist, Ian Robertson tell us:

"The incest taboo has developed over time because it is
vital to the survival of the family and thus of society
itself. Neither traditional nor modern societies
consciously appreciate the reasons for the taboo. We simply
accept it as natural and moral."

Kinglsey Davis points out:

"The incestuous child of a father-daughter union
would be a brother of his own mother, i.e. the son of
his own sister; a stepson of his own grandmother;
possibly a brother of his own uncle; and certainly a
grandson of his own father..."

Also, sexual rivalry among family members would disrupt the
normal roles and attitudes of the various relatives.
The father for example, might experience role conflict as
both the disciplinarian and the lover of his daughter,
the mother might be jealous of both, and the child, of
course would be caught in the middle. Faced with constant
conflict and tension, the family insitution might simply
disintegrate.

Hence the incest taboo. But, in the case you cited - I guess
none of this applied - those two were off with the faeries,
until now, that is - with the need to publish the 'tell-all
book.' She must either need the money - or her psychologist
told her to write it.

Where do I draw the line?
Very firmly between father and daughter!

Parents are supposed to protect their children -
not abuse them. How can a daughter with a drug
problem realise just what she's consenting to?
She's not rational. The father had all the power
and control, and he used it to his advantage.

Nice argument Foxy.
I have always felt that, although rare, if it was consensual and didnt involve offspring then it is none of societies business but your argument has swayed me. The conflict and potential for jealousy in parent child sexual relations is very good reason for society to restrict them.

This case seems like a good illustration of what happens to people who abuse drugs and a rather sad example of someone trying to cash in on it. If it really happened.

Foxy and others,
I didn't mention names because they are irrelevant to the questions I'm raising.

I did say religious/cultural mores aside.

I'm trying to examine the actual differences between two sets of adults with similar age differences choosing who they have sex with (no children as a result). Hence the question difference between A&D

I see the issue of focus as both potentially abuses of power.
And where does one draw the line and why.

The roles of father/daughter differs greatly depending on circumstances and particularly once we're talking about adults.

Suppose I was divorced and started an affair (sex fling) with my younger secretary who ten years later turns out to be my estranged daughter. Did our not knowing really change anything? What father/daughter role was interrupted.

Homosexuality tends to interrupt family roles too.
Aren't we talking about two individuals really.

Knowledge doesn't change realities just our attitudes towards them?