Conclusion
Society's negative attitudes towards incest and anal sex must change with the times. It is still difficult to discuss such subjects in an atmosphere that is not charged with emotionalism and deep-rooted prejudice. Albert Ellis, in his Sex Without Guilt, has many forthright statements to make about ingrained and hypocritical attitudes towards sexual practices. But first, it is vital to understand the meaning of the word "attitude." How is an attitude formed? How is it changed?
According to The Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, an attitude is "a response, favorable or unfavorable, to a person, group, idea, or situation."
Society's attitude towards incest and anal sex is, of course, unfavorable. But why?
The encyclopedia goes on to state:
Attitudes cannot be sharply distinguished from beliefs and opinions, but the latter tend to be more consciously held and more fully expressed in words. In contrast, attitudes frequently stem from unrecognized sources, operate partially on an unconscious level, and in most cases cannot be readily verbalized. They are complex psychological processes involving emotional, intellectual, and motivational components in varying proportions. Emotions usually play a greater role than intellect in our prejudices and sympathies; intellect usually plays a greater part than emotion in determining our attitudes toward scientific theories and pursuits; and the two may contribute almost equally to our social and political views. The motivational, or dynamic, aspect of attitudes may also vary widely. Though all attitudes tend to have a drive quality, since they determine our positive and negative reactions to people and situations, their effect on actual behavior may be either great or small. Sympathy for the underprivileged may merely lead to kind words or righteous indignation, but it may also inspire a lifetime of service; prejudice may lead us to associate with "our kind," but it can also be expressed in active discrimination, scapegoating, and even lynching.
In brief, few can actually verbalize with any degree of intelligence their deep-rooted feelings or attitudes against incest and anal sex. Yet these attitudes, which are really without form or substance, largely determine the individual's behavior. Are attitudes inborn then?
The author of The Encyclopedia of Human Behavior doesn't think so. He states:
We are not born with attitudes; they are acquired in the course of experience, and once acquired they tend to resist modification ... First, we gradually assimilate the ideas and reactions of people with whom we are closely identified ... Second, our attitudes may stem from dramatic or traumatic experiences, which frequently spread or generalize, to related situations ... Third, a series of everyday experiences may shape and sharpen our attitudes toward specific objects or situations ... Fourth, we may adopt ready-made attitudes of others with whom we associate, as in automatically liking or disliking attitudes of the group to which we belong or aspire to belong ...
Attitudes, then, consist of an enduring deposit of personal experience and unique integration of feeling, thought, and drive. An individual's pattern of attitudes is considered one of the most characteristic expressions of his personality—in fact, one could go far in making a personality description of any individual by determining his attitudes towards significant persons, events, situations, and ideas. A number of psychological tools can be used for this purpose—notably, scales that measure attitudes toward such subjects as capital punishment, etc.
As the encyclopedia noted, once an attitude —and especially an attitude regarding sex— takes hold of the individual, that particular attitude is difficult to modify. Can such an attitude ever be modified?
The encyclopedia states:
In spite of the potency of parental influence, the effect of companions and acquaintances should not be underestimated. Peer influences are particularly effective during adolescence when young people feel socially and intellectually insecure and tend to rely heavily on other people for approval, acceptance, and support ... Research has shown that changes in social attitudes are far less likely to occur in traditional and parochial colleges than in the more unconventional colleges ...
Ingrained attitudes, therefore, can change. But can attitudes against incest and anal coitus ever change? To date, they have successfully resisted all efforts of modification. What precisely are these attitudes?
The general feeling about incest and anal sex is riddled with a sense of guilt and anxiety. The practitioners of such acts may eventually worry themselves to death. Dr. Albert Ellis has this to say about such attitudes:
Since premarital sex relations are no longer viewed as morally reprehensible or sinful ... there need be no intrinsic guilt attached to them. People who are anxious and guilty because of ... affairs are usually emotionally disturbed individuals who are also anxious and guilty about many of their non-sexual participations. On the other hand, many people today are tie-coming anxious and disturbed because they are not copulating ...
In brief, individuals with a healthy and secure mental outlook need not suffer from guilt or anxiety. They realize that any expression of sex if mutually agreeable to the couple is healthy.
But isn't sex between an uncle and his niece more or less an exercise in masturbation? There could scarcely be any great feeling of romantic love between such a couple. And isn't sex without love harmful?
Dr. Ellis states, "This is sheer nonsense: since most of the great love affairs of human history, such as Heloise and Abelard, appear to have been fornicative ones. Sex, no matter how it is indulged, normally creates and enhances love ... "
That last sentence is most important and is the crux of this book. SEX, NO MATTER HOW IT IS INDULGED, NORMALLY CREATES AND ENHANCES LOVE.
Dr. Ellis further states, "Virginity, especially when it is prolonged and taken to extremes, seems to be the true enemy of love (and often engenders deep-seated hostility to others). Sex without love, moreover, is hardly a heinous crime, and appears to be quite delightful and to add immeasurably to the lives of literally millions of individuals."
Will the young girl who enters into an incestuous affair with her uncle become promiscuous? Dr. Ellis states:
... exceptionally few people in our society are ever really promiscuous—since promiscuity means indiscriminateness in one's choice of sex partners, and it is the rare person who is really indiscriminate in this regard.
When promiscuity does exist it may be a symptom of (a) unusually high sex desires and capacities or (b) emotional disturbances. These symptoms are hardly likely to result from premarital sex relations but may be a cause of such relations.
Does a grown and seemingly mature man take advantage of a teenage girl when he has intercourse with her? Is the uncle doubly guilty of this offense by first seducing the girl and then coaxing her into practicing anal sex with him?
Dr. Ellis has this to say about the exploitation of one's sex partner:
Exploitation of one's sex partner generally takes place when one individual (usually the male) has sex relations with another under false pretences—pretending that he loves her, will marry her, or something on that order. Such exploitation doubtless occurs often in premarital affairs: not because of the affairs themselves but of the dishonesty of the people engaging in them.
Where both partners, moreover, frankly have sex relations for the sexual (as well as other) satisfactions they thereby derive, such exploitation is reduced to a minimum. Consequently, the more open, honest, and frequent premarital intercourse tends to become, the less does it remain potentially exploitative.
In brief, if uncle and niece both acknowledge that they are engaging in sex for the pure joy of it, there is no exploitation, no delusion. Under these conditions, can a man related to a young girl and engaging coitus with her be sexually happy?
In his The Ability to Love, Allan Fromme poses these questions: "Who is sexually happy? What is a sexually happy person, or as psychologists put it, a sexually well-adjusted individual?
"To begin with, he or she is a person who does not feel sex is dirty, who does not have fears about it, who accepts it as part of nature and of human nature and a natural source of pleasure. It is a person who is interested in sex, appreciates it, enjoys it ... "
But aren't incestuous couples abnormal? The psychological definition of the word is given in The Ability to Love. Fromme states:
In clinical psychology we use the term much as engineers use it. A structure is adjusted when it can meet all the stresses of its function and still stand, still perform. By a well-adjusted person, a normal person, we mean one who has achieved a reasonable relationship between his needs and abilities on the one hand and his social opportunities ... on the other.
The normal person is free to propose and pursue rational goals. By "rational" in this context we mean goals that are the product of thought ...
In each of the five case histories presented in this book, the case subject entered into an incestuous relationship with his niece only after much thought and soul searching. But finally, he decided that under the conditions, his goal was a rational one. Each case subject realized that he was performing sexual acts which were in variance with the role society expected of him. Yet in each case, the case subject was strong-minded enough to realize that his needs and the needs of society could not always coincide. And as long as the act was performed in the privacy of his own home, and the girl was in no way harmed, he felt justified in pursuing his own goals which he deemed as rational.
Anal sex, or any other kind of sex, can occur between a mature male and his niece without harm to either party. This can happen when both are healthy-minded and openly admit they are performing the act for the sheer pleasure of the contact.
When society in general is willing to admit to this fact then a giant step forward will be taken to the eradication of centuries-old prejudices and distorted attitudes.