Implicating selfcest -> incest.

Reason: The art of fucking yourself is, visually, incest.

I would say yes, since people searching incest will benefit from seeing selfcest images too.

Nope. Take this for example:
post #176918
Spyro's fucking a newer version of himself, but they have many physical differences, such as skin colour, facial structure, horns, etc. that make it impossible to look like incest.

That's still incest, River. That's like if I went back in time 5 years and had sex with myself. I'd look different but it's still me.

Screwing yourself isn't the same as incest...

wouldn't it make more sense if it was called Selfsex, just saying

Furmillionaire said:
Screwing yourself isn't the same as incest...

Incest is the act of having sex with someone genetically related to you.

You're more closely related to yourself than anyone, right?

Ergo sex with yourself is incest.

Test-Subject_217601 said:
Incest is the act of having sex with someone genetically related to you.

You're more closely related to yourself than anyone, right?

Ergo sex with yourself is incest.

Oh come on. Besides, most people would define it as the more simple 'fucking a family member', and you're not your own family member.

null0010 said:
That's still incest, River. That's like if I went back in time 5 years and had sex with myself. I'd look different but it's still me.

Okay, try this:
Link, in human form, having sex with his wolf form from the Twilight Princess game.
Selfcest? Yes. Incest? No.

Riversyde said:
Okay, try this:
Link, in human form, having sex with his wolf form from the Twilight Princess game.
Selfcest? Yes. Incest? No.

It's incest. He's fucking himself. He's related to himself.

Furthermore, it's hot.

I agree it's hot but I would still say it's not incest. People who like incest are into a specific thing whereas people who like to imagine fucking themselves are into something different (namely either Narcissism or the opposite with self esteem so low they can't imagine anyone else doing it).

Furmillionaire said:
I agree it's hot but I would still say it's not incest. People who like incest are into a specific thing whereas people who like to imagine fucking themselves are into something different (namely either Narcissism or the opposite with self esteem so low they can't imagine anyone else doing it).

Selfcest is the same thing as twincest. Twincest is incest. Selfcest is incest. Syllogism, check it.

I like to think of it as masturbation.

Selfcest is not the same as twincest, that's dumb. They're completely different.

Furmillionaire said:
Selfcest is not the same as twincest, that's dumb. They're completely different.

Identical twins are essentially clones.

No.

How the hell are you related to yourself?

Also I agree that wolf link fucking link is indeed hot.

lulz said:
How the hell are you related to yourself?

By being genetically identical and born from myself. The body continually recycles its cells, you are not the same person you were 20 years ago (literally).

null0010 said:
By being genetically identical and born from myself. The body continually recycles its cells, you are not the same person you were 20 years ago (literally).

You have the same genetic code in all your cells and all your cells to come.

Aside from that, I refer you to the King of the Hill episode where Joseph falls in love with his half-sister and Peggy scrambles to stop it on the basis of incest.

Test-Subject_217601 said:
Incest is the act of having sex with someone genetically related to you.

New implication: sex -> incest

Snowy said:
New implication: sex -> incest

your partner is usually not genetically related to you. we're talking about CLOSE relations, probably nothing further from second or third cousins.

I would say selfcest is borderline. Since incest is sex with someone who is closely related to you genetically and family-wise, one could argue that selfcest is the ultimate in incest. However, unlike twincest in which the genetically identical people are still two different people, selfcest is also like the ultimate in masturbation, in which you're outside yourself as you do yourself. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Perhaps it should just be left in a category of its own.

hg3300 said:
your partner is usually not genetically related to you. we're talking about CLOSE relations, probably nothing further from second or third cousins.

The point I'm making is that defining incest as "having sex with someone genetically related to you" is silly, because everything on Earth is genetically related. If you mean "closely related", say "closely related".

It's not a matter or genetic or other... philosophical BS.
The point is : out of context, two versions of the same character having sex does look like siblings having sex.

Interesting side-fact:
Apparently, narcissists despise incest but still feel drawn towards it.

That might shed an interesting light onto this matter.

personally I'd think it's like masturbation...but that's just my view on the whole thing, I mean, it's still the same person.

ippiki_ookami said:
I would say yes, since people searching incest will benefit from seeing selfcest images too.

Not necessarily. People into incest are into things relating to sex with family. NOT necessarily "sex with genetically similar people." There could be many reasons for an incest fetish, some of which are not genetic closeness. Selfcest or selfsex has a totally different appeal. I think the tags should be kept separate.

Edit: This topic is about implication, not alias...ation. My bad. An implication, eh, would be ok, though in my opinion it shouldn't even be that.

RedOctober said:
Not necessarily. People into incest are into things relating to sex with family. NOT necessarily "sex with genetically similar people." There could be many reasons for an incest fetish, some of which are not genetic closeness. Selfcest or selfsex has a totally different appeal. I think the tags should be kept separate.

Edit: This topic is about implication, not alias...ation. My bad. An implication, eh, would be ok, though in my opinion it shouldn't even be that.

Thanks for wrapping up my opinion so that I don't have the chance to add a comment anymore. :P

Since discussion has dried up on this, I thought I'd add something.

The definition of relative (when being used as a noun, as it is in this context) is being connected to another person by blood or marriage.

So, scientifically speaking, if a character has sex with another incarnation (genderbent, same sex, different body shape/colours) of themselves, their basic identity is still the same. They can't be related to themselves, so it's not incest. It's a paradox, that's what that is.

I also do not feel making this implication will help people looking for pictures of incest. Characters in different forms can look very different to each other, like Link and his wolf form.

What about selfcest --> masturbation? If Link and Wolf-Link are in a pic, that's just sex with himself, right? That would also imply it isn't gay.

drearyrains said:
What about selfcest --> masturbation? If Link and Wolf-Link are in a pic, that's just sex with himself, right? That would also imply it isn't gay.

no. putting masturbation tags on pics that dont actually have masturbation in them isnt going to help anyone.

ippiki_ookami said:
no. putting masturbation tags on pics that dont actually have masturbation in them isnt going to help anyone.

But sex with yourself /is/ masturbation... though aside from Portal antics, I suppose it's reasonable to restrict that to "single-bodied" self-sex.

drearyrains said:
But sex with yourself /is/ masturbation...

No it's not.

Furmillionaire said:
No it's not.

Powerful counter-argument, but the definition is "to stimulate oneself sexually," so if one version of you is stimulating the other version of you sexually, that's masturbation, whether it's through time travel or universe hopping or whatever.

But like I already said, the exceptions make sense, so there's really no point in arguing it unless someone else thinks it's a good idea.

Okay, for example, auto-erotic asphyxiation is stimulating yourself sexually, but would most people call it masturbation? No, probably not. In fact there's plenty of examples like that, like sitting on a washing machine or giving yourself a sensual deep massage that could be called self sexual stimulation but not really masturbation. Screwing yourself is even less like that because at least with the former there's only one person involved (lets not get into a philosophical debate about the concept of the self and what is another person, this is just porn).

Furmillionaire said:
Okay, for example, auto-erotic asphyxiation is stimulating yourself sexually, but would most people call it masturbation? No, probably not. In fact there's plenty of examples like that, like sitting on a washing machine or giving yourself a sensual deep massage that could be called self sexual stimulation but not really masturbation. Screwing yourself is even less like that because at least with the former there's only one person involved (lets not get into a philosophical debate about the concept of the self and what is another person, this is just porn).

Of course those are all masturbation, and plenty of outlets refer to it that way. It is still stimulating oneself sexually. Just because people tend to refer to masturbation as any kind of handjob doesn't mean they're right. And again:

drearyrains said:
But like I already said, the exceptions make sense, so there's really no point in arguing it unless someone else thinks it's a good idea.

drearyrains said:
What about selfcest --> masturbation? If Link and Wolf-Link are in a pic, that's just sex with himself, right? That would also imply it isn't gay.

Nope. Even though they are technically the same character, they are still separate entities. Incarnations, if you will.
The gay tag would still apply to the situation you mentioned.

Riversyde said:
Nope. Even though they are technically the same character, they are still separate entities. Incarnations, if you will.
The gay tag would still apply to the situation you mentioned.

*nods* Bravo, then.

I still think the ambiguity is enough to leave selfcest as separate from either incest or masturbation. It's sort of like Schrodinger's fetish in that it's both incest/masturbation and not incest/masturbation at the same time, at least until it's let out of the box. I say leave it alone and not bother with the implications.

Clawstripe said:
I still think the ambiguity is enough to leave selfcest as separate from either incest or masturbation. It's sort of like Schrodinger's fetish in that it's both incest/masturbation and not incest/masturbation at the same time, at least until it's let out of the box. I say leave it alone and not bother with the implications.

I disagree. I think it's pretty much neither masturbation, nor incest.

I hate incest but don't mind selfcest at all, it is obvious what I would like to have.

What would post #86935 count as?They seem to be the same character,save for a palette swap

Clawstripe said:
I still think the ambiguity is enough to leave selfcest as separate from either incest or masturbation.

I say leave it alone and not bother with the implications.

How about a new tag that covers all versions,be it selfcest,penetrative masturbation or sex with an alternate persona then?

(I like schrödinger's_fetish )

It isn't a very intuitive tag.

It's times like this I wish the e621 search engine supported logical operators.

KloH0und said:
It isn't a very intuitive tag.

It's times like this I wish the e621 search engine supported logical operators.

Maybe as pool instead?

Full logical operator support sounds like it would do quite a number on the server,although it would be useful if implemented

Well I must say this has spiraled into a most indubitably befumbling conundrum that has had me in both shock and awe throughout the entirity of the debate thus far... Kudos to you all on a wonderful debate that I myself dare not step foot into... Id rather just drop my two centshere with my belief of keeping them separate so those not partial to the other side of the debate dont get barraged with pics of selfcest if they wanted incest and vice versa.

Seriously though good debate, I also lolled frequently

RedOctober said:
I disagree. I think it's pretty much neither masturbation, nor incest.

Arguably, that's because getting that particular combination when you open the box. Judging by this thread, it seems others are getting a different combination when they open the box.

That's where I'm seeing the ambiguity. If a consensus can't be reached on whether something is one thing or another, I think it means that it isn't purely that one thing or another and should be left as a separate term. Rather than saying one is right and the other isn't, I'd go for a middle ground.

In other words, we have three categories instead of only two: non-incest, incest, and the fuzzy gray area that's selfcest.

Clawstripe said:
In other words, we have three categories instead of only two: non-incest, incest, and the fuzzy gray area that's selfcest.

I think that's what I was saying earlier. Selfcest does not equal incest, and those who want to see selfcest may not want to see incest, thus the tags should not be made one.