Presentinng the 20 to 30 sub-title sectionas out of the total of 81; of my paper titled; PEDOPHILIA CRIMINAL OFFENCE BUILT ON MORALLY BANKRUPT WESTERN PSEDOSCEINCES.
By sharing the paper here, I hope to ensure that everyone can access and read it directly through this forum.
Another key reason for sharing it here is to preserve the full text of my work in case the blog is ever taken down for any reason.
IV. Historical Study of Incest in Humans
20. INESCAPABILITY OF INCEST IN RELIGIOUS TEXTS: ADAM, EVE
To explore the historical roots of incest from animals to humans, we begin with religious texts from the Book of Genesis. The story of Adam and Eve raises a fundamental logical question: if they were the first humans, how did humanity expand without incest? This same imperative reappears starkly after the Great Flood, when Noah's family - reduced to just eight members, bore the monumental task of repopulating the entire earth. These sacred narratives, central to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, implicitly acknowledge incest not as moral failing but as biological necessity in humanity's formative stages. This pattern mirrors what evolutionary science reveals about early Homo sapiens, that our species likely descended from a very small founder population where close-kin mating was inevitable. While these religious accounts provide theological frameworks, they simultaneously document a profound evolutionary truth: extreme population bottlenecks demand reproductive strategies that later civilizations would forbid. This paper bridges these ancient narratives with modern scientific understanding, demonstrating how both point to the same conclusion - that incest was once crucial for human survival before becoming culturally taboo.
21. THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF PEDOPHILIA AND INCEST IN HUMAN SURVIVAL
Let us revisit the opening statement of this paper: “Pedophilia and incest were often complicit.” This provocative claim requires careful examination. To explore this, we’ve already analysed the evolutionary history of both animals, primates particularly to apes, now let us apply this critical lens objectively to human relations. In doing so, it’s important to set aside contemporary moral prejudices on its modern analyses. Our goal is not to justify or condemn but to understand the evolutionary and historical significance of these practices. We must acknowledge that the social context in which incest and pedophilia were historically accepted was vastly different from today’s societal constructs. Understanding the evolutionary role of these behaviours in human civilizations in general can offer new perspectives on how these practices once contributed to human survival, even if contemporary society finds them repugnant. This shift in perception calls for deeper exploration of the sociocultural evolution of human norms.
22. SEXUAL RELATIONS WITHIN BLOODLINES AND SURVIVAL STRATEGIES
Sexual relations within bloodlines—between close relatives like siblings, cousins, or other kin—were not only common but necessary for human survival during antiquity. These practices, deeply rooted in the evolutionary survival mechanisms of early human societies, were driven by territorial instincts and the need to preserve resources. These dynamics are commonly observable in many human cultures and traditions today where the customs of marrying close cousins widely prevails to maintain integrity in their family future. Ancient civilizations, such as the Egyptians and various European royal families, openly engaged in direct bloodline incestuous practices to preserve royal genetical bond and to strengthen political alliances, and consolidate power. Similarly, in Eastern cultures, the practice of close-kin or cousins marriages was normalized as a strategy for safeguarding wealth, resources, and maintaining family cohesion. In India, caste systems and joint families often prioritized such unions as a way of ensuring the stability and prosperity of the family structure. These practices, viewed through the lens of survival and social strategy, highlight the functional role incest played in early human societies.
23. THE SHIFT FROM ACCEPTANCE TO CONDEMNATION
The practices of pedophilia and incest far from being taboo, were often seen as vital for the survival and cohesion of communities. They were strategic, designed to ensure the continuation of power, wealth, and family unity. The longstanding acceptance of these unions reveals a practical purpose—uniting bloodlines to preserve power, protect resources, and maintain stability. However, this once-accepted norm has undergone a significant transformation during the human civilization where incest was joined with adultery, prostitution, homosexuality became condemnable, seen as harmful or immoral along with rape. This shift from acceptance to vilification suggests that these behaviours were not inherently harmful but became increasingly problematic due to evolving cultural, legal, and moral standards. Understanding the reasons behind this transformation can shed light on how cultural norms evolve, often not in response to objective harm, but to changing societal values and perceptions.
24. INCEST PRACTICED BY ROYALS, PROHIBITED FOR THE PUBLIC
Historical records reveal that incest and inbreeding which is widespread among animals were also prevalent in human societies, particularly witnessed within royal families. Like their animal counterparts, royals engaged in these practices to safeguard resources and preserve their bloodlines, consolidating power within a single lineage. and maintain power within a closed bloodline. However, while royals engaged in incestuous unions, they strictly prohibited this practice for their subjects through legal restrictions. A deeper examination of this paradox raises a crucial question: why did royal families, who openly practiced incest, impose strict laws against it for their subjects. At the time, there was no scientific understanding of the genetic risks associated with inbreeding, such as deformities or hereditary disorders so it could not be the reason therefore the prohibition was not rooted in genetical damage or moral concerns but rather in the social dynamics of mating. The underlying reason for banning incest among commoners was evidently to control unpredictable social fluctuations in mating patterns, ensuring social order, stability, and a kind of sexual parity. The regulation on sexual behaviours of humans played a crucial role in maintaining societal cohesion and preventing disorder.
25. TERRITORIAL INSTINCTS AND UNEVEN SEX RATIO IN FAMILIES LEADS TO INCEST
The territorial instinct observed in animals—particularly in securing resources—is deeply ingrained in human behavior, most notably in the concept of private property, a trait as ancient as humanity itself. This possessiveness extends to familial structures, exacerbating issues like incest, especially when linked to imbalanced sex ratios among a father’s offspring. If incest were legally permitted, a father’s inherent territorial instincts would intensify his possessiveness over his daughters, reinforced by the normalization of such relations. This dynamic would also make the fathers to view their sons as allies in safeguarding family property, including their sisters, from external male competition. Furthermore, incest would provide sons with guaranteed access to mates (their sisters) and offspring, ensuring the perpetuation of the family’s genetic lineage within a unified, insular household. Thus, the legalization of incest could entrench patriarchal control, incentivizing fathers and sons to consolidate power, resources, and reproductive access within the family unit—ultimately reinforcing an oppressive, closed system under the guise of genetic and economic preservation.
26. FEMALE DISPERSAL: TO ENSURE SEXUAL PARITY THE PRIMARY REASON FOR INCEST PROHIBITION IN HUMANS UNDER RELIGION
Humans cannot control the sex of their offspring—some families have more sons, others more daughters which results in a natural imparity or imbalance in male and female sex ratio of children born in a family unit. However, through the practice of female dispersal (the movement of women between groups for marriage), a natural exchange occurs that maintains sexual equilibrium across communities. Families with more daughters will balance those with more sons, ensuring that nearly all individuals can find suitable mates. This systemic exchange prevents female shortages, stabilizes social structures, and promotes reproductive fairness.
However, when the female dispersal flow is obstructed due to territorial males with many daughters begin to practice incest and prevent them from the dissemination into the wider community—severe social consequences arise. Families with few or no daughters would face a scarcity of potential mates, leading to widespread discontent, rivalry, and social chaos. This perceived inequality could trigger unrest, including abductions, violent conflicts over women, and a surge in sexual crimes such as kidnappings and rape. To prevent such turmoil, society must ensure the broader dispersal of women for marriage, breaking the sexually possessive control of dominant territorial males over females within families. Therefore it is not the avoidance of inbreeding but rather about maintaining social stability through female dispersal must be the primary historical reason, why incest, was outlawed mainly within the close family unit of the commoners alongside adultery, prostitution, and homosexuality and rape all classified as sexual crime under the religious sanctions but not for the royal families who openly practiced incest and adultery were exempt from such restrictions, reinforcing that the ban was rooted in social necessity rather than genetic concerns.
V. Religious Morality Used to Authoritarian Control Over Human Sexuality
27. DIVINE DECREES TOOLS FOR RULERS TO CONTROL OVER SUBJECTS
Religion has long been a central pillar of unquestionable authority, often positioning God as the ultimate provider of truth and justice. Religious beliefs provide rulers a potent tool to enforce control over their subjects. People must revere God’s virtues as the source of truth and justice, enabling kings to govern as divine proxies. Codified in Articles of Faith—like the Ten Commandments, Quran, and Veda Shastras—these laws dictated daily life, especially on sexual behaviours. Historically, such texts shaped societal norms, widely followed even today, reflecting ancient lifestyles. Rulers leveraged these religious texts to impose legal, ethical, and moral codes, ensuring compliance through divine sanction. Rape, Incest, adultery, prostitution, homosexuality, masturbation, sodomy and perhaps Oral sex are condemned as abominations, sin against the divine. and serious offence under the law and grievous offences under the law.
28. FROM DIVINE LAW’S TO AUTHORITARIAN LEGAL CONTROL
This divine framework established sexual norms as non-negotiable edicts, as sin so the crime, by rulers wielding God’s authority to enforce obedience. Denying these sacred laws was unthinkable taboo’s, blasphemy or sacrilege marked the ultimate betrayal of both divine will and earthly order. Homosexuality, was condemned as the most abominable crimes against nature, rape stood as a violent robbing some one’s personal honour or others property often tied to husbands or fathers. Adultery, as cheating the husband or usurping the property of other men their wives. Prostitution although consensual yet forbidden sin breaches of sanctity reviled offenses. However, marriage and sexual relations with prepubescent or adolescents was not only accepted but endorsed by religion as the important to preserve sexual and social stability. The practices of prepubescent sexuality engagements thrived from the beginning, throughout centuries, untainted by the stigma, they carry today. Their eventual criminalization, emerging less than a century ago, reflects not a sudden moral awakening but a shift in power dynamics, where political and legal control of authorities once again redefined a historically acceptable behavior as a sexual crime taboo to consolidate control, exposing the malleability of taboos and their dependence on cultural and historical context rather than inherent truth.
29. THEAUTHORITARIAN ROOTS OF MODERN SEXUAL TABOOS
This interplay between divine authority and societal control reveals how taboos serve as instruments of domination. Rulers, past and present, demanded unwavering trust in their sanctified decrees, framing dissent as a moral failing punishable by exile or death. By merging their power with religion, nationalism, or binary ideologies of good versus evil, they suppressed questioning and enforced compliance. Today’s condemnation of pedophilia mirrors this pattern: its stigma is upheld not just by ethical consensus but by authoritarian mechanisms—legal, medical, and culture narratives echo the historical tactics. Under the moral grounds of protecting the women and children the Western societies, in particular, perpetuate this legacy, wielding punitive measures under draconian laws to silence any rational pedophilia debate and to reinforce subservience. Far from being rooted in universal harm, such taboos mostly based on subjective moral tales suggest a calculated effort to regulate behavior and preserve order, raising doubts about their scientific grounding and highlighting their role as tools to maintain the ruling class’s grip on power.
30. AUTHORITY, AND SEXUAL TABOOS
The ruling authorities have long shaped societal views on human sexual behaviours by intertwining governance with religious doctrine, these authorities imbued their decrees with an air of divine sanctity, a tactic still evident today. Modern society, for instance, widely tolerates and accept by decriminalizing adultery, prostitution, and homosexuality, yet fiercely condemns consensual sexual relationships between adults and prepubescent or adolescent individuals, basically on ethical or moral grounds with extremely punitive punishment labelling them as pedophiles. This stark contrast raises a provocative question: do contemporary sexual laws stem more from inherited religious authoritarianism than from any objective critical scientific foundation? The alignment of legal codes with faith-based traditions suggests a legacy of control rather than a reasoned, objective evidence-based scientific standards. Far from being universally grounded on biology, these prohibitions challenge us to reconsider their legitimacy and whether they truly reflect a rational approach to human behavior