We have all been to that uncomfortable chapter of psychology where the Freud's ideas seem to recklessly undress cigars into phallus, paint splatters into fertility calendars, and parents into sex icons. Many of these interpretations that would normally be pinned to the workings of a dirty mind would also succeed in the reproductive preservation of familial traits. To some extent, It makes sense that sex-laden symbolism and a preference for good parental tendencies would result in successful evolutionary selection. We can have sex to make babies, and we want good parents to care for babies, but something that we do not want to do is to sexualize our own babies. I thought that this was something most people could agree on, until further investigation of the cultural trends that surround modern relationships. Not only has incest created undertones in the human psyche, but in the language we use to approach romance, and it is growing in searches of online pornography. First, INCEST IS NOT COOL. Not only does it create a vulnerable position for young family members, but it is evolutionary crippling and dumb.
Let us throw it back to the telling tales of William Shakespeare. In his work, Oedipus, there was a prophecy about how incest will ruin your life. This moral is still very applicable today. At the end, when the protagonist, Oedipus, discovered that he had in fact married his mother, he blinded himself and went into hiding. Now, I suppose you could say Oedipus is hiding in the incestuous undertones of modern culture.
Every time I hear someone call their significant other "Daddy," I can't help but cringe. Freud would label a heterosexual relationship in which the woman is attracted to her father an "Electra" complex. Well, if someone is projecting the casual title for father on to a romantic partner, there is a rough demonstration of this situation. This is problematic because pinning a romantic partner into a parental role blurs lines between sexual interactions and parental ones (Which, say it with me, should NOT be sexual) This is also demonstrated in the titling of a significant other "baby". Now, I understand that the use of the term "Baby" has been reclaimed to be used in romantic relationships, but again, is this not sexualizing infants? Is that okay? And what is the difference linguistically between "baby" a child, and "baby" a boyfriend/girlfriend? The language sure appears to appropriate pedophilia, should it hold a standard interpretation.
And online porn searches for incest have increased 132 percent over the past year.
The romanticization/sexualization of incest is real. Freud and Shakespeare would agree. It is important to question this behavior because it really isn't OK to normalize people having sex with their family members. If you find yourself in disagreement with that last statement, please seek professional help.
