I'm sensing a young pedo evolving

I think this FML is based more on incest then pedophilia... Anyway, my parents are 4 years apart in age, so by your logic, they're consenting to pedophilic acts?

14, how is it incest? He said it's his fiance's daughter so obviously it's not the boy's sister. Op must be divorced so that would make his fiance's daughter The boy's step sister

Don't think it's about being a pedo or having incest at all. Just having two typical idiotic kids in "love" at that age.

Aw, but it's so similar to Romeo and Juliet, and everything worked out great for them in the end, right?

Who is to say what age can a person feel love for another? I mean it's possible, but unlikely since im guessing they haven't been together long.

#14, how the hell would your parents being 4 years apart be pedophilia? And you cannot "consent" to pedophilic acts. Because pedophilia is inflicted on a child from an older adult.

just let everyone bang!

#14. "sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object" the definition of pedofilia, so technically speaking this would be pedofilia. But in common thinking it's not. And a 4 year difference honestly isn't that bad. And incest, no, there's no blood relation. OP just let the kids be kids but make sure to explain to the the "abnormal" view in society on this. Normally kids that young are not able to feel "true" love, but it does happen. And as strange as it may seem to you and others, if it really is true love, who's to judge them? Just let them be happy, i'm sure they'll get over it, and if they don't and it becomes a long term thing, let it be.

I didn't think true love happens at their age. Isn't it just puppy love? ^

Usually yes, but i've known people that have dated at that age, and ended up staying together and getting married in their 20s. So who's to say if people can actually feel true love at that age or not.

#65 - The definition for "Pedohebephilic Disorder" requires the person experiencing these urges to be at least 16 years old and at least 5 years older than the victim. Pedophilia requires the victim to be 11 or younger whereas Hebephilia requires the victim to be between 11 and 14.

Plot Twist - 10 years from now they're still together, and you're divorced but still having to see each other as grandparents.

As i read it, #14 didn't claim that it was incest, he was just commenting on #11. My concern about this is the possibility that the relationship doeant doesn't work, then they will be stuck together in the same family and possibly making it hard to live together. I don't say its smart, but if they really want to be together I dont see anything stopping them, except a not well thought out plan about this. But then again, they are 15 and 12.

#28 you can consent to pedophillia. If I walked up to an 11 year old and asked if she wanted sex and she said yes it's pedophillia

It is incest... Well in Australia it is. Once they're married (the parents), the siblings are considered brother and sister, so it is considered incestuous under the law. Lucky for OP most kids relationships don't work out but that's going to make things exceptionally awkward in the household!

I failed to catch the FML factor on this one. Is it their young age or because they are step siblings? if its age, who's to say how old or young a person can fall in love? if its "incest", how is it incest if the parents are not related by blood?

112: In most countries, an 11 yeast old cannot consent.

The kids could be in love, who are we to judge their feelings? My parents started dating then my mom was 13 and dad was 14, and they just celebrated their 38th weeding anniversery a few days ago. And for those that say it is incest and it is disgusting here's something to think about: a couple named Jack and Jill get married. At the wedding are their parents, Jack's divorced dad and Jill's widowed mother. Jack's dad and Jill's mom fall in love and a few years later they marry. Jack and Jill are now brother and sister, so should their marriage now be annulled and they move apart? Even though they got married first?

148, you know nothing about human biology then.

I'm quite surprised at how many people are convinced it's an FML on OPs part, and how many assume that because they are kids, they don't understand love and it won't work out. Seeing as OP and her soon to be husband are both divorced, with children, OP is in no place to be judging the validity or seriousness of her kids "love" on comparison to her own. I started dating my fiancé when I was 12 and he was 17. It was not a popular decision by any means. Maybe it runs in the fam as my mother was 19 and my father 39 when they met. Point is, our society condemns relationships like this although they've been happening naturally for 30 000 god damn years. Grow up. Its pretty clear when an underage kid is being taken advantage of by someone much older. This isn't the same thing. As far as the incest claim goes; they are not blood related, they will be step siblings, and step siblings have intimate relationships all the time.

I think everyone is failing to realize the other big issue here: if OP and the fiance get married, they will all be living under the same roof and inappropriate activity will be harder to curtail.

Let's hope no one's parents are related by blood.

I totally agree with you lol

That's some high quality parenting advice right there.

Wincest!!

Shutup, he-man.

well at least they'll keep the lineage pure

Lanaster Style

.

its not wrong. they not blood related

They're about to be related by law. It is wrong. They will be living together as step-siblings, and since they're apparently "deeply in love", who's to say they will not have sex? It's going down the road to incest, which I'll always view as wrong.

Seriously, it isn't incest. They aren't related by blood at all. That doesn't mean it's not wrong though, but everyone really needs to learn the definition of incest.

just have an orgy with everyone problem solved

According to Wikipedia - "Incest is sexual activity between family members or close relatives.This typically includes sexual activity between people in a consanguineousrelationship (blood relations), and sometimes those related by affinity, such as members of the samehousehold, step relatives, those related by adoptionor marriage, or members of the same clan orlineage." Do you see "step relatives"? It's considered incest.

Should've just ignored the rest of your post after "according to wikipedia". Apparently there really are people out there who take everything posted on wikipedia as fact.

I don't rely on Wikipedia for facts, but I needed an immediate response. I checked several websites afterwards, and for the most part, they were the same.

That particular "law" is dependent on jurisdiction. It's completely legal in Russia for step-siblings to be involved with one another. You're naturally going to be attracted to someone you're not blood-related to. While perhaps a difficult situation, it's not entirely strange either.

I suppose it depends on who is involved in a situation like that. I personally cannot imagine shagging my step-brother, therefore this almost makes me a bit sick. But apparently OP's kids are fine with that. I'm just concerned about their future when/if they realize their choices.

You could have simply checked the definition of incest on an online dictionary. "sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry; also : the statutory crime of such a relationship" -Merriam Webster It is legal for step siblings to marry each other in the US, therefore it is not incest.

I can't try to do an informative search because I'm on my phone, and not all search results show. I still stand by my opinion of thinking it's wrong. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's completely okay. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

This debate doesn't seem to be about whether it's okay or not, it's about whether it's incest. I didn't fact check personally, but so far it seems that by the American definition, it's not. I feel like many countries following the same rule. All speculation though, sorry to butt in.

The definition of incest (according to the DSM-V) is: "... sexual relations between people too closely related to marry legally."

What does your phone have to do with it? If you're able to surf the Web at all you're able to limit the search to a dictionary definition. You were only searching for sites to prove you right which is why you chose Wikipedia of all places.

Don't get your panties in a twist when you don't know the full story. A lot of websites do not load, and too many ads pop up. It's too frustrating for me. Not to mention my satellite WiFi tends to not load all things, no matter what I try. And I searched the definition of incest, Wikipedia was one of the few sites that appeared for once and loaded.

I don't think I'm the one with my panties twisted after that last responce. When you type in "definition of incest" in the search bar the first thing that comes up is the same thing someone posted earlier. You don't even have to click on a website.

No, the definition didn't come up. That's not how I searched it. That box didn't show up. You can believe whatever you would like, because this topic is rather irrelevant now. I'd rather drop this than argue about my lousy WiFi.

of course you want to drop the argument , your argument has flaws . yes you are entitled to your opinion , just like everyone else that commented . if your not happy about what people say back , then why continue to comment ?

In the end and in Lehman's ******* terms, no its not wrong for non-related persons to develop feelings for each other. No, its not wrong for them to marry each other depending on whatever LEGAL STRUCTURE or CONSTITUTION they're under. All you are arguing is your opinion, which everyone has but its pretty pessimistic hence the backlash. Court adjourned, sentence will be refraining from commenting before thinking for at least 3 days.

The Lanestars send their regards

I think the only thing that's wrong about this is the age...it wouldn't be as bad if they were older with the same age gap because then she'd be more matured, also, it really doesn't matter with the family situation because they're not blood related.

But what if the kids got married first, then the parents? Is it still incest? No.

oh baby

Like father like son!

That doesn't make sense because the OP is a woman not a man.

I want to give this comment the 'thumbs up', but I don't want to make it an uneven number. :(

At that age it IS a major age difference. 1/4th hers and 1/5th of his. Not so bad in 6 years or so, but at 12 she isn't even fully developed mentally or physically and neither is he at 15

but neither is someone at 17

Your math skills need work.

Not related by blood.... Not incest. Just awkward.

Age is one of the main reasons. Think of a 6-year age difference between a 33-year-old and a 39-year-old. Not so bad, right? Normal, in fact. Now, think of the same 6-year-age difference between a 13-year-old and a 19-year-old. That's not only forbidden by law, it's wrong, because the 13 year old has barely started maturing and is still a child, while the 19 year old is a legal adult and is almost completely done with maturing. Now I know 3 years isn't 6 years, but the problem isn't the literal gap, it's the relation to the age of the two. And it's wrong. OP, just tell your son to find someone his own age.

#38 what is wrong with his math

its not incest unless they're blood related. if they're only step siblings, which they probably are since OP said "my fiance's daughter" and not "my daughter", then a relationship between the two is fine...when they're older.

It's not incest...unless OP's fiancé is her brother or other bood relative.