It is in my book, but not Bill Clintons.twerpedbyjulie said:If you perform oral sex on a male relative that's not incestuous right?
I've looked it up, and no where do I find that it qualifies.
No pro-creation potential.
cumbox said:This is a rather vague question or statement so can not be answered clearly.
Does the poster ask about a male on male action or female on male?
I can only presume that he is asking about people that are of a legal age to decided their pleasures.
twerpedbyjulie said:I sucked my brother's cock so I'd be allowed to have sex with his wife.
twerpedbyjulie said:It was his wife who said she'd always wanted to see a little incestuous cock sucking action.
twerpedbyjulie said:We're all well past the age of consent.
twerpedbyjulie said:Having sex with your sister in law isn't incest. Right...?
twerpedbyjulie said:If you perform oral sex on a male relative that's not incestuous right?
I've looked it up, and no where do I find that it qualifies.
No pro-creation potential.
Custer Laststand said:Ron,
Almost anyone would agree that was a reasonable price...
Ah... so she's a woman who likes new experiences. If that's what she wanted, you and your brother should have given it to her... and, you did. So, you did the right thing.
I'm not sure what to say here. Congratulations, I guess, for surviving to your present ripe old age.
You have it right. It isn't called "incest-in-law," either. It isn't incest, period.
Not too long ago you said your sister-in-law told you she was going to fuck you, so get used to it. (You were wearing your chastity device at the time, so presumably your Mistress, as your keyholder, had agreed your sister-in-law should fuck you.)
How did it go...?
—Custer