It really sucks when mods decide to interpret rules overbroadly

Leaving aside whether the rule was the right one to use, I will stress that, when it comes to incest, the power dynamics in play make consent dubious at best. This is doubly so for parent/child incest, such as the case you were talking about.

This is a weird hill. Are you sure you want to die on it?

PTB. Ban doesn’t fit the rule.

I don’t agree with OP’s position, but that isn’t the subject of this thread. The ban is. And I don’t think it’s justified.

I said this below, but i think it requires visibility.. you people are just missing the actual problem:

just so you fully understand...

everyone is consenting adults

incest cannot be about 'consenting adults' because those adults psychology are incredibly intertwined, and the decision to perform the incest cannot be held separately form those relationships.

its a power dynamic tangential to rape, and the only people 'pro-consenting-adult incest' are completely ignorant of the actual issue.

there is no such thing as a 'healthy' sexual relationship with regards to incest, hence its illegality.

You chose to die on the mums can fuck sons hill idk what to tell you man XD

7 day ban ain't shit quit being gross

YDM. Only a seven day ban, from a couple communities? Got off too lightly.

You're not considering the full picture, and looking at it in a vacuum. The vast majority of people are not ok with incest, so the probability of two people in the same family just happening to be into it is incredibly low. It's far more likely that something fucked up is happening, that there was grooming, that the child was taught it was normal, and it's very possible they were subject to sexual abuse as a child, which is often incredibly difficult to prove. Even in the best case, the power dynamics are very fucked.

You're assuming that the only opposition to it comes only from "puritanical" attitudes. In fact, there are very strong arguments against it from the perspective of consent, especially when it's considered not in some theoretical abstract, but in the practical, material reality of what those cases tend to look like.

Doubling down on it just looks worse. The seven day ban seems like it's just giving you a chance to realize that you're wrong, if that's not happening you should probably be permabanned.

It's only a 7 day ban.

I'm not sure how grooming could possibly be made illegal.

I agree that maybe siblings could consent to healthy sexual relationships as adults. It's gross to me but doesn't need to be illegal.

I don't agree that parents and children fucking eachother should be legal. Parents are the guardians and protectors of their own children. That role doesn't end when a child transitions to being an adult. I think it would be nearly impossible to micromanage a relationship in order to determine that grooming took place, better for society to just make it illegal for parents to ever fuck their children.

I think that it's appropriate that you're being muted for a week for repeatedly defending the right of a parent to fuck their child.

on hexbear? well yeah, fuck that

It's pushing the envelope towards PTB, but isn't for two reasons: first, it is a 7 day ban, so a timeout. Secondly, incest is strongly associated with pedophilia, and it typically comes across the same way arguing about age of consent does.

While it's not specifically in their rules, incest and pedophilia would reasonably fall within their lineup of bannable topics given what is on there.

If it was a permaban? Clear and flagrant PTB. But this is just a warning in function.

Is there a word for being fine with something controversial instead of pro or con? I'm with you, not in favor (pro) but also not seeing any reason to prohibit (con) as long as everyone is consenting adults and there wasn't any grooming, which should be prosecuted as grooming.

Social stigma against it because of the downsides and likelihood of being the result of grooming is enough.

PTB, especially due to the rule not matching.

Mods are people, and people are biased. Yeah, they'll ban you over sensitive-to-them subjects, and there's not much we can do about it but appeal. I happen to agree with you re: incest, but I knew better than to voice it directly to that same article posted in a different comm. You spoke your mind and someone with a bit of power shot you down. So it goes.

But, there's more to it than that.

Lemmy is a general interest, public forum and therefore full of people with opinions that fall in the middle of the bell-curve. Opinions of all types that fall at the edges get shouted down and trimmed off. Everyone is aware that MAGA opinions are in that group, as well they should be in, again, a general interest public forum. But, there are plenty of others, like permissive ideas around incest, and support for AI in there, too. You need to "read the room."

You can find other quite active forums outside of Lemmy that will be more sympathetic to such fringe positions of all sorts, if you feel the need to express support or discuss.

What a deeply weird post and thread. It seems like a lot of people somehow think the idea that incest is bad is only related to religious beliefs. I don't really care if it is even considered bad by religions (I'm not even certain it is), because it's bad for obvious reasons that have not a damn thing to do with religion. I had no idea so many people would argue in favor of incest.

What a divisive issue lol

I like how as soon as anyone sets foot in this thread to make a statement they are immediately sucked into a long winded argument.

Focusing on the mod action without delving much into the topic, I think your first comment could reasonably be perceived as reactionary (provoking reaction from others) by some mods which fits under rule 4, even if you were genuine in intent.

The other comm bans I think are half a step too far in the PTB direction, but the one comment removal and news comm ban are within the ballpark of reasonableness.

Idk Americans can be a bit puritanical and weird about stuff. A lot of them never remove their christian brainworms.

Some coms are on a hair trigger though because people that know the age of consent in ever jurisdiction often have a weird interest in bringing up all the ways that doing something something sexually transgressive that might involve grooming is actually cool and good.

Hexbear probably isn't the place to discuss this stuff because they're very defensive of the community vibes and safety of users, and also weirdly puritanical sometimes.

I think it's probably mod overreach your position seems clear that grooming is bad and you're discussing theoretical other scenarios but in the context of the article it's understandable that the timeout would happen.

fwiw I think incest is a crime because it's a blunt legal instrument to just easily protect people from a lot of extremely nasty scenarios.

People clutch their pearls. With certain topics, a lot of people are incapable of nuance.