![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Can 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.
TMI Verbosity
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 08:40 pm (UTC)From:1. Zoophiles and pedophiles (who don't act on it), furries, vorephiles, necrophiliacs, those people who are only attracted to centaurs... any attraction that's strictly limited to fantasy. It's all very sad.
2. I used to agree with this, but I've changed my mind. I'm very big on consent and it's impossible to obtain real consent (as humans can understand it) from an animal. Time was, I'd say that as long as the animal wasn't hurt or upset, then I didn't see a problem with it... but now, I see it like this: The person performing the act is human, and must thereby act by human standards. Consent does not go to the lowest common denominator — ie, the animal can't say "yes" and so we somehow magically have permission to equate the absence of "no" with the presence of "yes". That's just not ok. If the being that a human wants to fuck cannot communicate consent as adult humans are capable of understanding it, then sex cannot ethically happen unless the human in question "justifies" it by lowering their standards for what is and is not consent.
Besides, the average human is terrible at judging what an animal is actually thinking or feeling. It's not only possible, but common to frighten, upset, or confuse an animal without even realizing it. Also, there are people who have committed rape and insisted afterwards (and often genuinely believed) that they never hurt or harmed the other person. So why even take that risk? It's purely selfish to do so.
3. People shouldn't be given the same pass as sharks because sharks are almost entirely instinct and have practically no higher brain function, and we do. We can apply our cognitive ability to ethics and sex, and therefore we are obligated to do so. This person's argument is like saying that because sharks eat their own young, it's okay for us to do it, too. It's just absurd.
4. That does sound like a music video.
I will say that Rufus (and in the past, other dogs or cats) have wanted to be present while I was having sex with someone. There's no interaction at all — Rufus just sleeps on the floor, and I knew a cat once who liked to just lie down on the far corner of the bed where I was having sex with (a human). They didn't even watch, just hung out nearby. It always seemed to calm them down. When my ex got a new cat, he hid under the bed for days, wouldn't even come out to eat. Then one day we were having sex on the bed, and we roll over and there's the cat, just curled up there on the edge of the bed with his eyes closed, purring. That was what finally got him to come out from hiding. He seemed fine after that (until that bitch started neglecting him, but that's another round of complaints).
Which makes me think of what Cynthia told us once, that in some nursing homes they put porn on the CCTV because it calms the residents down better than drugs.
Generally I'm okay with an animal just being in the room as long as they're not staring at me. This is one of the distinctions I draw between animals-and-sex and kids-and-sex. Kids should not see sex, because they have enough higher brain function that seeing it can fuck them up, and it is a form of abuse. Animals don't have quite that brain function, and seem to be pretty much okay when happy, vanilla sex just happens around them.
(Unless there's flogging involved. Then they become very concerned, and you have to stop everything to reassure them that Daddies aren't really hurting each other and everything is still right with the world. One mistake I'll never make again.)
Re: TMI Verbosity
Date: Thursday, December 8th, 2011 11:30 pm (UTC)From:When we talk again, I'll ask for the story about the mistake you won't make again.