Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 279

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Animals *can* consent to sex

    One of the main attacks against bestiality/zoophilia is the issue of consent. These arguments take shape into something like this: "having sex with a dog is wrong because the dog can't say no". Through logic I will show that these arguments by anti-zoos hold no logical reasoning at all, and in fact the consent issue is generally a smoke screen for the icky factor. I will show here that animals can, and do show sexual consent with a human.

    Before I can effectively show that animals do have the ability to consent for sex, I need to define exactly how I am using consent:

    –verb (used without object)
    1. to permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield (often fol. by to or an infinitive): He consented to the proposal. We asked her permission, and she consented.
    2. Archaic. to agree in sentiment, opinion, etc.; be in harmony.


    Animals are sentient beings just like humans, that is they have the power of perception and a consciousness. An animal experiences pleasure and pain. A person who owns a dog knows if what they do causes pleasure or pain. When we scratch a dogs head we can tell the dog enjoys this, he may roll on his back and let you rub his stomach. Likewise, hitting the dog in the head with a shoe causes pain and the dog will shy away and be fearful in the future.

    Animals can not verbally say yes or no to sex in our human languages but they have other ways to show how they feel. Surely a dog who has mounted, say his human lover, experiences pleasure. This is evident because of his orgasm. Female dogs have orgasms too. Once a dog for example realizes you as a sexual being, they show sexual desire quite often: females will sway their tales revealing their swollen vagina's and dry hump the air in front of you, males will become erect and try to mount.

    Anyone who is zoo will be aware of when their animals want sex. More importantly, they will respect their animal partner when they do not want sex. Sometimes when you rub your partner down there they will pull away and sit elsewhere. That is how animals show they are either interested or not.

    If an animal does not enjoy what is happening to them they will show bodily signs of this: they will tense up, their eyes and ears will move, tails might jitter, and they will pull away. If you continue it could bring painful results: Dogs have powerful teeth and will bite you! Horses can break bones (or worse) with a single kick. Quite simply, it is obvious to see what causes pleasure and pain.

    As I said before, the consent issue is really a smoke screen for the icky factor. By and large people are disgusted about the idea so they claim consent is a big issue when in fact it is not. People do many awful things to animals who do not consent to what is being done:

    (1) Do animals consent to locking them in a cage?
    (2) Do animals consent to being slaughtered and killed in the millions every year for food?
    (3) Do animals consent to being tested on by chemicals?
    (4) Do animals consent to being 'fixed'?

    If you did any of those four things to a human you would be thrown in jail for life (possibly killed in many US states). Not so ironically though, doing those things to animals is okay. It is accepted and happens everyday.

    But as soon as you have loving sex with your dog who you care for more than anything in the world, somehow you are a sick and awful human being.

    Ironic?

  2. #2
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Underneath the mountains
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    So...am I right to assume you're a zoophiliac then.


    But you're right, most of the reason that I'm against sex with animals is because I find it nasty. Call me a specist or a zoophobe but I do believe sex should be done within the species.
    I love animals, I have a dog who I had to fight to get. I love horses and have a strong bond towards nature. But not that type of bond....ever. That an animal may find a sexual interaction as enjoyable isn't enough, for me, to agree with it. My dog has humped a number of objects not in the least sexual....he, like other animals, are oppurtunistic with sex. That their behavior isn't telling them to leave them be also doesn't mean much as well with this mindset.

    To me animals, despite my love and bond towards them, hold irrevocable differences that just scream don't do 'em. My dog is smart, curious, and a wonderful pet. But he's like my baby moreso than anything else. His mind is that of about a 3 year old....not a mind to give consent to a human. IN society, we have taboos and laws against many forms of sex with brains far more developed than that of an animals....yet it's wrong as well.



    With luv,
    BD
    We do not see things as they are, we see things as we are.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDreams View Post
    Call me a specist or a zoophobe but I do believe sex should be done within the species.
    That is fine if you accept this to be your personal opinion/belief so long as you don't accept that to be the 'natural way' of things.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDreams View Post
    he, like other animals, are oppurtunistic with sex.
    And human beings are not?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDreams View Post
    His mind is that of about a 3 year old....not a mind to give consent to a human.
    How did you come up with the idea your dog has a mind of a 3 year old?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDreams View Post
    IN society, we have taboos and laws against many forms of sex with brains far more developed than that of an animals....yet it's wrong as well.
    We also have many arbitrary laws.

    The central question is who is being hurt if your dog gives you oral sex? Nobody.

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Where every life is precious
    Posts
    2,157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by dogssup View Post
    How did you come up with the idea your dog has a mind of a 3 year old?
    Actually, dogs have the cognitive abilities of a 2-3 year old child.
    http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Featur...nddogsdogthink
    "As long as I have a voice, I will speak for those who have none".

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Underneath the mountains
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Actually, dogs have the cognitive abilities of a 2-3 year old child.
    http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Featur...nddogsdogthink
    Dang, and I just guessed. I figured since the average parrot has the mind a 1st grader, then a dog is a bit less. My dog can read my expressions and body language most of the time, learn basic behaviors that are considered acceptable, and communicate to an extent....all traits that my 3-yr-old brother has as well. He cannot do certain things that my other siblings and I can do, though. Such a sweetheart...but in human cognitive terms a perpetual youth.

    That is fine if you accept this to be your personal opinion/belief so long as you don't accept that to be the 'natural way' of things.
    Just because something is natural, or occurs in nature, doesn't mean I should condone or accept said behavior for people. Chimps can murder, certain birds can gang rape, and a variety of animals can have sex with a different species. None of these I accept as okay behavior in humans.
    And human beings are not?
    We can be, but sexual behavior that is largely oppurtunistic is more often looked down upon than condoned

    The central question is who is being hurt if your dog gives you oral sex? Nobody.
    whether someone/thing is hurt doesn't necessitate that something is right, wrong, or neutral. And your main question is whether animal can consent....not whether it harms them. My statement is if you put an animal on the level of human sexuality, than you should put the animal with a human cognitive age. Three year olds, in all societies, are not able to give consent (at least on a legal or social correct basis) and therefore a dog cannot as well.

    With luv,
    BD
    We do not see things as they are, we see things as we are.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueDreams View Post
    My statement is if you put an animal on the level of human sexuality, than you should put the animal with a human cognitive age. Three year olds, in all societies, are not able to give consent (at least on a legal or social correct basis) and therefore a dog cannot as well.

    With luv,
    BD
    That is indeed a big if you have there, BlueDreams.

    Quite simply dogs are not humans (let alone 3 year old humans). Apples and oranges? And we're talking about sexually mature dogs here so therefore they already have the capacity to have and enjoy sex.

  7. #7
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    It has not been proven that animals have sufficient intelligence to understand the situation enough to provide consent. If you want to argue for sex with animals this is not the proper way to go.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by YamiB. View Post
    It has not been proven that animals have sufficient intelligence to understand the situation enough to provide consent.
    You need intelligence to know what feels good? Dang! I guess since I'm not in mensa I can't enjoy an orgasm. What exactly is there to understand for a dog in these types of situations? So when dogs mate with other dogs, you're suggesting at least one of them isn't providing consent because they are not intelligent enough.

  9. #9
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by dogssup View Post
    You need intelligence to know what feels good? Dang! I guess since I'm not in mensa I can't enjoy an orgasm. What exactly is there to understand for a dog in these types of situations? So when dogs mate with other dogs, you're suggesting at least one of them isn't providing consent because they are not intelligent enough.
    No they are not providing consent when they mate, but since neither is taking advantage of the other it not really rape. Feeling good does not mean that you can consent a child can be made to feel good sexually by an adult but they do not have mental ability to provide consent, that's why it's molestation.

    And since we can not communicate with animals we are in even less of a position to obtain any form of consent from them.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    64
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Actually, dogs have the cognitive abilities of a 2-3 year old child.
    http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Featur...nddogsdogthink
    If this is the case, then a person having sex with a dog would be much the same as that person having sex with a three year old child.
    Sparkling angel I believe, you were my savior in my time of need. Blinded by faith I couldn't hear. All the whispers, the warnings so clear. I see the angels, I'll lead them to your door. There's no escape now, no mercy no more. No remorse cause I still remember

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by SarahConnor View Post
    If this is the case, then a person having sex with a dog would be much the same as that person having sex with a three year old child.
    That is just a relative number which absolutely gives no indication of the sexually maturity of the subjects involved. A 3 year old dog is able to have sex (read: physically and mentally able to) while a 3 year old child clearly does not have this ability. Again I have to ask, how did we come to the conclusion that intelligence is a requirement before consensual sex? Sex which produces pleasure is an inherent desire in animals.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    64
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by dogssup View Post
    Animals can not verbally say yes or no to sex in our human languages but they have other ways to show how they feel.

    Once a dog for example realizes you as a sexual being, they show sexual desire quite often: females will sway their tales revealing their swollen vagina's and dry hump the air in front of you, males will become erect and try to mount.
    So...does this mean that if my male dog happens to come up to me and start humping my leg, I should take this as a sign said dog wants to 'get lucky' and therefore I may have sex with said dog?
    Sparkling angel I believe, you were my savior in my time of need. Blinded by faith I couldn't hear. All the whispers, the warnings so clear. I see the angels, I'll lead them to your door. There's no escape now, no mercy no more. No remorse cause I still remember

  13. #13
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    That is terribly disgusting and I sincerely urge you to get professional help if you are a zoophile. Unlike homosexuality, that is still recognized as a mental disorder.

    That said, whether or not screwing your dog is necessarily animal cruelty, the laws against it are mostly just to preserve general moral decency.

    As for the case law, Lawrence v. Texas struck down anti-homosexual sodomy laws, but other state sodomy laws still are held to apply, such as Muth v. Frank which held that Lawrence does not apply to anti-consensual incest laws.

    The current status seems to be that state anti-bestiality sodomy laws are constitutional. Hopefully the Supreme Court does not continue down its road of trampling the public ethical consensus and declare it a right to sodomize an animal in the name of the 14th Amendment. Such a supposed liberty could not be further from the founders' intentions.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning View Post
    That is terribly disgusting and I sincerely urge you to get professional help if you are a zoophile. Unlike homosexuality, that is still recognized as a mental disorder.
    Professional help? There is a lot of evidence by psychologists that zoophilia may indeed be another sexual orientation. Would you like a book list? Here we go:

    (1) Andrea Beetz Ph.D.: Bestiality and Zoophilia (2005)
    (2) Professors Colin J. Williams and Martin S. Weinberg: Zoophilia in Men: a study of sexual interest in animals in: Archives of sexual behavior, Vol. 32, No.6, December 2003, pp. 523-535
    (3) Hani Miletski Ph.D.: Bestiality - Zoophilia: An exploratory study, Diss., The Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality. - San Francisco, CA, October 1999
    (4) Hani Miletski Ph.D.: Understanding Bestiality and Zoophilia, 2002
    (5) Lindzey, A. "On Zoophilia". The Animals' Agenda, Westport: May/Jun 2000. Vol. 20, Iss. 3; p. 29.

    Also the DSM-IV (manual for how mental disorders are diagnosed) lists zoophilia as a paraphilia. I just wanted to clarify that because people often have the conception when they hear "mental disorder" to think schizophrenia or a sociopath which zoophilia is none of these things. In addition, the DSM-IV is not the most unbiased source to judge if something should be classified as a mental illness or not. Homosexuality was listed as a mental illness for the longest time. There is a lot of things going 'round that would suggest the DSM-IV is corrupt at best and therefore can't be really trusted. From personal experience, I have told a psychologist about my sexual attraction. They found it interesting and we eventually became friends years after the professional relationship had ended. The point I'm making here is there is NO clear consensus in the mental health community about zoophilia, you will find antis and supporters on both sides.

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning View Post
    That said, whether or not screwing your dog is necessarily animal cruelty, the laws against it are mostly just to preserve general moral decency.
    Oh because we know governments are not full of arbitrary laws. What exactly do you mean, and how to you judge, "moral decency"? I guess you're a Miller fan. I didn't think I needed to mention that just because something is illegal doesn't equate that thing with being right/wrong.

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by dogssup
    Professional help? There is a lot of evidence by psychologists that zoophilia may indeed be another sexual orientation. Would you like a book list? Here we go:

    (1) Andrea Beetz Ph.D.: Bestiality and Zoophilia (2005)
    (2) Professors Colin J. Williams and Martin S. Weinberg: Zoophilia in Men: a study of sexual interest in animals in: Archives of sexual behavior, Vol. 32, No.6, December 2003, pp. 523-535
    (3) Hani Miletski Ph.D.: Bestiality - Zoophilia: An exploratory study, Diss., The Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality. - San Francisco, CA, October 1999
    (4) Hani Miletski Ph.D.: Understanding Bestiality and Zoophilia, 2002
    (5) Lindzey, A. "On Zoophilia". The Animals' Agenda, Westport: May/Jun 2000. Vol. 20, Iss. 3; p. 29.
    Appeal to authority.

    Having a Ph.D. does not mean what these individuals say is correct or that their opinion is at all supported by the consensus of the field. You can find Ph.D.s in Biology who adamantly deny evolution and that is an issue considered resolved amongst Biologists.
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  16. #16
    Morality Games
    Guest

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    It is logically flawed because they are two different issues and have no correlation between each other. Children are not sexually mature (physically/emotionally) and I am talking about dogs that are sexually mature.
    Sexual maturity does not confer the capacity for consent on animals. Brainpower does that. The cognitive abilities of a human baby and a dog are about equivalent. You seem to think any indication given by a being that they want something passes for consent. Consent, psychologically and legally, is more sophisticated process than that. Consent entails the agent comprehend the situation effectively enough to make an informed decision -- that is why it is illegal to have sex with children even if they say, "Yes." They don't really comprehend the whole concept of sex. An eleven-year old, even if they indicate they want sexual release, isn't aware of the risks involved in sex (pregnancy, disease, emotional attatchment, etc). So it goes with animals. They may indicate they want sexual release, but we know from their cognitive abilities they don't really comprehend the concept well enough for their indications to pass for consent.

    So, don't say animals can consent to anything -- that power is chemically (and thus psychologically) impossible for them. Consent encompasses indication, but indication does not encompass consent.

    However, if you want to argue sex with animals is acceptable by some other criteria, I will give you a fair hearing.
    Last edited by Morality Games; April 8th, 2008 at 10:00 AM.

  17. #17
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,896
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Sexual maturity does not confer the capacity for consent on animals. Brainpower does that. The cognitive abilities of a human baby and a dog are about equivalent. You seem to think any indication given by a being that they want something passes for consent. Consent, psychologically and legally, is more sophisticated process than that. Consent entails the agent comprehend the situation effectively enough to make an informed decision -- that is why it is illegal to have sex with children even if they say, "Yes." They don't really comprehend the whole concept of sex. An eleven-year old, even if they indicate they want sexual release, isn't aware of the risks involved in sex (pregnancy, disease, emotional attatchment, etc). So it goes with animals. They may indicate they want sexual release, but we know from their cognitive abilities they don't really comprehend the concept well enough for their indications to pass for consent.
    You are confusing the idea of consent with legal consent. Consent basically means to agree, comply, or yield to something. Animals can and do consent to sex - they consent to have sex with each other all the time.

    Legal consent, especially where it comes to entering contracts and things like that, entails the concept of adequate knowledge of consequences, maturity, etc. The concept of legal consent is irrelevant when it comes to animals since legal consent only applies to humans.

    Furthermore, as dogssup argued in the OP, we do not even seek basic consent for many other things we do to animals, such as killing them for their meat, let alone legal consent.
    Trendem

  18. #18
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,225
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Chad
    Appeal to authority.

    Having a Ph.D. does not mean what these individuals say is correct or that their opinion is at all supported by the consensus of the field.
    It's not an appeal to authority. KevinBrowning claimed that zoophilia was a mental disorder, dogssup provided evidence (or at least the names of books of evidence) to the contrary. Rather, your argument is a strawman, as she never stated that those individuals were correct because they had Ph.Ds.
    "Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do"
    -Isaac Asimov

  19. #19
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Where every life is precious
    Posts
    2,157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by dogssup View Post
    One of the main attacks against bestiality/zoophilia is the issue of consent.
    animals do have the ability to consent for sex

    As I said before, the consent issue is really a smoke screen for the icky factor.

    (1) Do animals consent to locking them in a cage?
    (2) Do animals consent to being slaughtered and killed in the millions every year for food?
    (3) Do animals consent to being tested on by chemicals?
    (4) Do animals consent to being 'fixed'?
    This subject has been discussed before, at great length, in a previous thread.

    Before I go any further, I will inform you that I am a vegetarian, AND I am also opposed to animal testing.
    So, #2, and #3 would not apply to me personally.
    I am also a Certified Veterinary Technician, and pet groomer, with 20 years experience.

    This post, from the other thread, pretty much sums up my argument against zoosexuality:
    http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/s...=12573&page=24
    (POST #116)

    I am not using "lack of consent", as my primary argument, but consent is a secondary factor.

    I am, and have, argued, that zoophilia poses a risk of HARM to the animal, while having no benefits for the animal whatsoever.
    Go my post in the previous thread to read my full response about how this poses a real risk of harm to the animal.

    If you ask me how sex IS NOT a benefit, I will tell you that sex is NEVER a benefit, IF IT IS NOT DESIRED.
    And, I can tell you from 20 years of experience working with animals, THAT HUMANS CAN NEVER TELL, WITH 100% CERTAINTY, what an animal is thinking or feeling.
    You don't want to go there with me.

    As for your #1 question above, I will reply that being confined in cage can be beneficial to an animal, because it can provide a sense of security.
    And, it definitely provides protection for the animal, and prevents the animal from doing something, or ingesting something, that may harm it.

    As for your #4 question, I will reply that sterilization has many benefits for an animal, including a lowered risk of certain cancers, and health conditions.
    Sterilization also eliminates the animals desire to roam around, become lost, and possibly be injured or killed.

    Your theory about the "ick factor" doesn't hold water.
    There are many sexual activities that I personally find disgusting, such as fetishes for fecal matter, and golden showers, but I have no objections to other human beings participating in said activities.
    Human beings know, or SHOULD know, about the risks involved in such activity.

    Animals do not have the cognitive ability to realize the risks entailed in sexual activity with humans.

    And that is why humans should not be using animals for their own selfish gratification.
    Last edited by Scarlett44; April 8th, 2008 at 11:37 AM.
    "As long as I have a voice, I will speak for those who have none".

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Animals *can* consent to sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    This post, from the other thread, pretty much sums up my argument against zoosexuality:
    http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/s...=12573&page=24
    (POST #116)
    Alright, thank you for this link. I will be quoting you here in this post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    See my previous post that I am quoting below.
    I KNOW it causes harm, because I am a Veterinary Technician, and I HAVE PERSONALLY seen animals that it caused injury to.
    And, just for your information, it is a known fact that a human being can transmit the HIV virus to chimps and gorillas.
    As for human beings transmitting the AIDS virus to other humans, may I again remind you that WE ARE NOT DEBATING HARM TO HUMANS.
    WE ARE DEBATING HARM TO ANIMALS!!!!
    I know a few doctors who have seen the harm caused to human rape victims, sometimes even requiring stitches in places you'd never want to have a needle go. Humans having sex with other humans can do it in basically two ways: (1) One that doesn't cause physical harm (2) a way that does cause physical harm. Having sex with an animal there are these two possibilities as well. Just as sexual activity with humans can be abusive or not, so can the sexual contact with animals. If I may quote for a minute: "Andrea M. Beetz, PhD. in her book "Love, Violence, and Sexuality in Relationships between Humans and Animals" (2002) reports: "In most [popular] references to bestiality, violence towards the animal is automatically implied. That sexual approaches to animals may not need force or violence but rather, sensitivity, or knowledge of animal behavior, is rarely taken into consideration."

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    They are aware, or should be aware, of the risks of disease, from taking part in these activities.
    Animals are not aware that they could possibly contract a disease, as a result of sex with a human being.
    That is why with any proper sexual relationship (human-human/human animal) the human should be aware of their own STD status. But I was joking just thereHIV transmission is possible in primates but not canines. Human STDs are not carried or transfered commonly in animals, though it is possible but rare. In fact having sex with animals is far safer in terms of STDs than having sex with a human (1/4 girls has an STD now). Now as you are a vet tech you should be aware that the chance of contracting a disease from having sex with the family dog is very rare. In addition, the few baddies that you might catch with sexual contact with an animal (such as Q fever) are easily treated with antibiotics; or you can go a step further and even get an intradermal vaccination. Now if we're talking about the real nasties like brucellosis the CDC clearly reports it is extremely rare in Northern America, and only about ~475,000-525,000 cases worldwide. I'd much rather take my chances with bruc. than HIV. Humans are vastly more infected with sexual diseases than your typical healthy K9.

    We don't make sure our dogs know the risks about swimming in lakes either (a place for all kinds of nasties which could infect them). Somehow sexual contact seems relevant however.

    I also have to go to your quote directly: What possible diseases can an animal CONTRACT from a human? What if this human did not have any diseases that an animal could contract?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    A dog, or any other animal, does not seek out sex with a human being of it's own accord.
    Is this always true? I don't think so. My dog seeks sex on its own accord all the time. And before you talk about behavioral conditioning I have to explain to you that he actually initiated it the first time...

    PS: I'm not impressed that you're a vet tech, a pet groomer, with 20 years of experience. It is just that: your experience. I know two vets (and a vet tech) who do have K9 sexual partners. Does that matter either? Not really --- but goes to show that two sides (anti and pro zoo) exist on the SAME educational spectrum you are coming from. I find that important to point out because I don't want others to be misled into thinking that because you come from a vet background that ALL vets are inherently against zoophilia, that simply is not the case.

    I argue that animals can give informed consent but animals are not recognized in being able to give informed consent in the legal sense; more for the morality and potential of abuse over the actual ability for the animal to strongly agree and even solicit such activity. Again, morality is often subjective (and really in the US judged by that idiot Miller) and the potential of abuse exists in every single possible sexual relationship: humans-humans/humans-animals. Zoophilia does not imply force, restraint, rape, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    If you ask me how sex IS NOT a benefit, I will tell you that sex is NEVER a benefit, IF IT IS NOT DESIRED.
    What if the animal does desire sex? Plenty of animals do. Orgasm is a benefit for the animal, both for males and females. In fact sex is such a benefit to animals that is why they have sex in the first place (1) for pleasure and (2) to spread the genes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    And, I can tell you from 20 years of experience working with animals, THAT HUMANS CAN NEVER TELL, WITH 100% CERTAINTY, what an animal is thinking or feeling.
    You don't want to go there with me.
    I do know one thing: An orgasm feels good for humans and animals. And I don't care if you had 50 years of experience: You can't even be sure 100% what human beings are thinking or feeling either!

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Animals do not have the cognitive ability to realize the risks entailed in sexual activity with humans.
    This is little if any risk to the animal if the sexual interaction is done with care. The animal contracting some disease is pretty much null.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    And that is why humans should not be using animals for their own selfish gratification.
    The problem here is that you believe all sexual interaction between a human and their animal partner is selfish in nature. Let's look at what selfish means exactly:

    –adjective
    1. devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.
    2. characterized by or manifesting concern or care only for oneself: selfish motives.

    Someone who has sex with their dog would be selfish if they (1) do not satisfy the dogs sexual needs (2) satisfies their own sexual needs while restraining the animal or otherwise causing some bodily harm. Like any sexual relationship (lets use human-human as an example) there is the potential to be selfish: the guy who demands oral from his wife without ever giving it in return, and on and on. It would be highly incorrect to suggest that ALL sexual activity between humans and animals is selfish. Plenty of zoos' enjoy giving their animals oral sex for example without anything in return because pleasuring their partner brings them joy. If we look at the definition above we can see that not everyone involved in a human-animal relationship is only seeking their own self (sexual) interests. You'd be a fool to suggest I don't care for my dog.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    An eleven-year old, even if they indicate they want sexual release, isn't aware of the risks involved in sex (pregnancy, disease, emotional attatchment, etc). So it goes with animals.
    You're absolutely right: an 11 year old isn't aware of the risks involved with sex (pregnancy, disease, emotional attachment, and so on). Animals however don't have to worry about becoming pregnant (or getting us pregnant), worry about disease anywhere near what human-human sexual encounters would involve. Quite simply there are no risks to the animal if s/he is with a human being who is compassionate, understanding, and takes their needs into consideration as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    [Animals] may indicate they want sexual release, but we know from their cognitive abilities they don't really comprehend the concept well enough for their indications to pass for consent.
    So animals when they mate are not consenting because they don't have the cognitive ability to comprehend the concept well enough. I have to ask you: how difficult do we need to make sex? How intelligent do you have to be exactly to have these cognitive abilities?

    Quote Originally Posted by SarahConnor View Post
    Does it really matter? You are speaking of having sex with animals here, can you not see anything wrong with that?
    I see nothing wrong with it. Apparently you do without any particular reason other than "it just is". And this:

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning View Post
    That is terribly disgusting and I sincerely urge you to get professional help if you are a zoophile.
    So I need professional help because you believe something I do is disgusting? A lot of things are disgusting. I never liked meat but that doesn't mean I need professional help over it. The DSM-IV is corrupt anywhoo and is heavily influenced by pharmaceutical companies, like I'd trust them to say who is mentally stable or not!
    Last edited by dogssup; April 8th, 2008 at 04:10 PM.

 

 
Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •