• Welcome to the Fable Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Fable series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Is This Actually Disgusting?

Naw, it's perfectly fine on a genetic level. The image of the inbreed hill-billy bumpkin that is the result of cousin marriage is just something of a boogerman used to scare people.

Darwin, as in Charles Darwin of evolution fame, was married to his first cousin.
 
I knew that bit of Darwin trivia, just didn't know the genetics behind it. Then I repeal my former statement, I only condemn prepubescent romance and inter-species relationships, however sexy they may be.
 
I knew that bit of Darwin trivia, just didn't know the genetics behind it. Then I repeal my former statement, I only condemn prepubescent romance and inter-species relationships, however sexy they may be.
''inter-species'? As in... human/human? Yeah, that's just disgusting. Bestiality ftw?

I think you mean something else :P
 
Luckily for us... the age of consent is 16... so... :D

In fairness, the age of consent may be in place to avoid teenage pregnancies.

That doesn't make any sense hobbe. It's there to protect pubescent teenagers from being used by significantly older individuals.
 
Well, social norms be damned, but you still have to obey the law.

'Cause, y'know, they'll send you to prison otherwise.

I disagree. When I say you shouldn't obey certain laws though (I believe I've said that several times over the years), I mean laws that prohibit victimless acts like prostitution, statutory rape, and the possession and selling of drugs. Obviously there are laws you should follow like ones against murder, theft, rape, etc.

About the jail time though...well...that's why you don't get caught. ;)

Luckily for us... the age of consent is 16... so... :D

In fairness, the age of consent may be in place to avoid teenage pregnancies.
That doesn't make any sense hobbe. It's there to protect pubescent teenagers from being used by significantly older individuals.
Indeed. Teenagers are going to be stupid and screw around within their own species no matter what the age of consent is.

Yea, what they said. :ermm:
 
I knew that bit of Darwin trivia, just didn't know the genetics behind it. Then I repeal my former statement, I only condemn prepubescent romance and inter-species relationships, however sexy they may be.

dude-wtf.jpg


As long as the older person hasn't groomed the younger one, then I don't think calling Chris Hansen is necessary. Still looks weird though.
 
They think it's wrong because they're told it is. But, there has to be a line, and I think the line being drawn at 16 is the best spot.
 
I'd just not worry about it if I were you, issues like these are on the "don't mention with friends if you want to stay friends with them list" along with politics, opposing football team support, and religious beliefs. I can understand that the issue frustrates you as you are actually being rational about it by giving reasons for your point of view whereas the people opposed to you are not. However people often think very emotionally about issues like these and unfortunately this prevents logical arguments and justifications from becoming triumphant. :/

Can't win 'em all Skotekal, best to just bury this one and leave it.
 
No, but pregnant teenagers are bad... yes? I wouldn't want to be a Dad now, you don't either, so age restrictions are partially in place because of that... right?
Well, if they already made their mind up about not wanting to have children already, they would use their own age restrictions, right? Why whould the law have to remind them ''You don't want to be pregnant yet!''? Seems odd.
 
This hits on the sexuality side of this debate a little bit, I heard in the news today about a couple in Canada who are raising their child without releasing it's gender to the public in an attempt to snuff out any social norms forced upon the child due to gender, but that could also lead to identity issues later. Thoughts?
 
This hits on the sexuality side of this debate a little bit, I heard in the news today about a couple in Canada who are raising their child without releasing it's gender to the public in an attempt to snuff out any social norms forced upon the child due to gender, but that could also lead to identity issues later. Thoughts?

I saw this the other day and I'm feeling grey about it, could be groundbreaking or it could be disastrous either way personally I think it'll end badly due to the child not fitting in due to a lack of identity. I know this isn't the same case but I'll mention it anyway to contribute to the discussion and perhaps expand it a little.

I remember reading an article on the BBC website about 6 months ago about a boy who was raised to think he was a girl, (he was accidently castrated during an operation to correct an abnormality with his genitals shortly after he was born.) At first it went okay but as soon as he hit puberty he became depressed and didn't 'feel' like a female anymore, plus he was ridiculed for the way he looked by his school peers. His sense of identity was completely fubar by the time he became an adult leading to his eventual suicide.

(Sorry for the double post.)
 
Well, if they already made their mind up about not wanting to have children already, they would use their own age restrictions, right? Why whould the law have to remind them ''You don't want to be pregnant yet!''? Seems odd.

This is true. I keep forgetting, some laws are only in place because of tradition, only unquestioned because everyone's so used to them.
 
If you ask me, laws having to do with the age of consent only increase teen pregnancy rates. Teenagers are just going to have sex anyway (which is not wrong by the way), and these laws just make it more difficult for teens to get their hands on contraception.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobbeBrain