I'm Listening
Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 06:05 pmCan someone explain to me how the heck I got from Humon's DeviantArt page to Vivid Random Existence only by following links?
It's always tempting to read those kinds of things with your mind already made up, "Eeeew!"ing all the way through, but I figured that I have all sorts of strange and different friends that only seem strange and scary from a distance. As Lovecraft said, the oldest type of fear is fear of the unknown. So I went reading that because really, none of us (at least nobody I know) knows exactly what those people feel like.
It really doesn't make a difference what I think about it, but here are my thoughts:
1. Firstly, I feel honestly and profoundly sorry for Zoophiliacs. It must suck to be sexually attracted to something that everyone else says is bad/wrong/disgusting automatically. We really should consider how good we have it if we're sexually attracted to something that most people would say "yeah, so what? No1Curr" about.
I often think about how lucky I am to not have a body/mind that produces feelings of being sexually attracted to anything. Especially after looking at how much of a hassle it is for other people!
2. My only issue with people performing the actual act is, of course, for the safety of the animal. If the animal is being hurt, confused, distressed, stressed, or unhappy about it, then that's totes not ok. After reading a few articles, it looks like it's the same deal with any sex act that's done out of genuine attraction- the (whatever)lover loves (whatever) and doesn't want to hurt them.
Makes sense. With rapists and child abusers, it's about an easy target. What they do doesn't speak of any kind of attraction.
3.The author talks about, quote "tonic immobility, a condition in which an animal is in a natural state of paralysis. However, this alone does not equate to being “unethical”[. Y]es, the human possesses more knowledge than the gator he’s having sex with, but whose to say that makes it any more or less ethical? After all, sharks in the wild have sex all the time with each other while they’re under tonic immobility.
That's not really fair. When sharks do that, it's probably more to do with reproduction, so people shouldn't be allowed to get the same pass.
4. From the Blog:
"I also understand (and agree with) the argument that intercourse with a python is unethical. So I went on the Internet to see if I could find alternatives. Sure enough, I did. What I found was information about zoophiles who “ethically love” pythons — for example, they will let the Burmese python slither around on their naked bodies. From a utilitarian point of view, this is a perfectly acceptable activity because neither the human nor the python is being harmed.
Upon further reading, I also discovered that people ethically love pythons by using masturbation; zoophiles who are attracted to small animals often use masturbation techniques in order to avoid what would be cruel intercourse. Again, from a utilitarian point of view, a person who lets a python slither around their naked body and masturbates is not causing either of them (the human or python) harm; however, whether one would count this as “bestiality” is questionable since intercourse never occurs."
I would not be one bit surprised if I found out that most of my friends were into this. Or if I found out that any of my friends was. In fact, I don't think that anyone would be surprised by this. "Oh, you like it when a snake slithers around on you while you get off? Sounds like a music video."
If when these situations came up, or the word "Zoophile" came up, people would take the time to ask "what exactly do you mean by that?" instead of shutting down completely, we might have a bit more peace in the world. But I can't even fault them for getting skeeved out just from hearing the word. It's textbook psychology. The only time people ever hear that word, it's in the context of a joke involving horrendous animal abuse. Schemas get formed. They can't help it.
If only people would realize that they'e working under the influences of schemas, they could decide "is this a time when it could harm me to follow my schematic instincts?" If someone has informed you that you've just left your pet with a person who practices bestiality, then yes, you ought to go running just to make sure. If you're presented with a book or article written on the subject of zoophilia and you have some spare time, then no, that's the time to realize that a little education might be interesting.
It's always tempting to read those kinds of things with your mind already made up, "Eeeew!"ing all the way through, but I figured that I have all sorts of strange and different friends that only seem strange and scary from a distance. As Lovecraft said, the oldest type of fear is fear of the unknown. So I went reading that because really, none of us (at least nobody I know) knows exactly what those people feel like.
It really doesn't make a difference what I think about it, but here are my thoughts:
1. Firstly, I feel honestly and profoundly sorry for Zoophiliacs. It must suck to be sexually attracted to something that everyone else says is bad/wrong/disgusting automatically. We really should consider how good we have it if we're sexually attracted to something that most people would say "yeah, so what? No1Curr" about.
I often think about how lucky I am to not have a body/mind that produces feelings of being sexually attracted to anything. Especially after looking at how much of a hassle it is for other people!
2. My only issue with people performing the actual act is, of course, for the safety of the animal. If the animal is being hurt, confused, distressed, stressed, or unhappy about it, then that's totes not ok. After reading a few articles, it looks like it's the same deal with any sex act that's done out of genuine attraction- the (whatever)lover loves (whatever) and doesn't want to hurt them.
Makes sense. With rapists and child abusers, it's about an easy target. What they do doesn't speak of any kind of attraction.
3.The author talks about, quote "tonic immobility, a condition in which an animal is in a natural state of paralysis. However, this alone does not equate to being “unethical”[. Y]es, the human possesses more knowledge than the gator he’s having sex with, but whose to say that makes it any more or less ethical? After all, sharks in the wild have sex all the time with each other while they’re under tonic immobility.
That's not really fair. When sharks do that, it's probably more to do with reproduction, so people shouldn't be allowed to get the same pass.
4. From the Blog:
"I also understand (and agree with) the argument that intercourse with a python is unethical. So I went on the Internet to see if I could find alternatives. Sure enough, I did. What I found was information about zoophiles who “ethically love” pythons — for example, they will let the Burmese python slither around on their naked bodies. From a utilitarian point of view, this is a perfectly acceptable activity because neither the human nor the python is being harmed.
Upon further reading, I also discovered that people ethically love pythons by using masturbation; zoophiles who are attracted to small animals often use masturbation techniques in order to avoid what would be cruel intercourse. Again, from a utilitarian point of view, a person who lets a python slither around their naked body and masturbates is not causing either of them (the human or python) harm; however, whether one would count this as “bestiality” is questionable since intercourse never occurs."
I would not be one bit surprised if I found out that most of my friends were into this. Or if I found out that any of my friends was. In fact, I don't think that anyone would be surprised by this. "Oh, you like it when a snake slithers around on you while you get off? Sounds like a music video."
If when these situations came up, or the word "Zoophile" came up, people would take the time to ask "what exactly do you mean by that?" instead of shutting down completely, we might have a bit more peace in the world. But I can't even fault them for getting skeeved out just from hearing the word. It's textbook psychology. The only time people ever hear that word, it's in the context of a joke involving horrendous animal abuse. Schemas get formed. They can't help it.
If only people would realize that they'e working under the influences of schemas, they could decide "is this a time when it could harm me to follow my schematic instincts?" If someone has informed you that you've just left your pet with a person who practices bestiality, then yes, you ought to go running just to make sure. If you're presented with a book or article written on the subject of zoophilia and you have some spare time, then no, that's the time to realize that a little education might be interesting.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}