My point is that you can't compare using sex toys to having sex with animals. Sex toys are not organisms. Animals are. So by having sex with an animal, its not masturbation like the things you had stated above.


Yes, but you also cannot claim with certainty that an animal does want it in the first place. And just because they don't fully involve themselves doesn't mean they want it.

----------

Zoophile isn't the only fetish community that requires a higher degree of anonymity. And they don't have to be anonymous, many aren't. She wasn't saying the fetish communities don't exist, but that many of them are very secretive. Like dominatrix communities. They have very strict policies about client information and how it is used.



It's kind of hard to associate homosexuality with this (however I understand where you're coming from), because you would be able to express your consent to having sex, but in the case of bestiality you couldn't necessarily. And you could argue that having sex outside of species is wrong because offspring can't be produced, or if so it would be infertile... let's not forget that the main reason organisms have sex is to reproduce and have fertile offspring.



Also, I just remembered something. Why would a pet want to have sex with a human because not many species (other than humans, dolphins, whales, elephants etc...) have sex for pleasure? Like I said before, the reason we have sex in the first place, and this is going back to primal aspects, is to reproduce fertile offspring. So how can you argue that a dog wants to have sex with you if dogs don't have sex for pleasure and they have it for reproducing?







I'm not sure what you mean here? How is it hypocritical and how is morality not open to interpretation, seeing that it is interpreted differently? Do you claim that everyone's understanding of morality is wrong except for the people that believe the same things you do or what a certain special systems dictates?[/QUOTE]

You're completely misunderstanding me. Let me make the analogy again.

Humans pleasure themselves with dildos.
Dogs pleasure themselves with legs and couches.

Obviously neither action is used for reproduction, so both are logically assumed to be done for pleasure's sake. This would prove that animals do sexual things for pleasure and not just reproduction. Since some humans (a type of animal) can be pleasured by having sex with animals. Why then can't animals be able to pleasure themselves with humans? The only reason why you think it is icky is because you have been brainwashed by education for however many years. If animals didn't crossbreed then we wouldn't have elephants mating with rhinos, or dolphins mating with killer whales. We wouldn't even have horses mating with donkeys for that matter. So obviously interspecies sex does indeed exist, why should we exclude ourselves? After all, like inertia said, mangling and killing animals is much more cruel than doing something both the human and animal would enjoy, referring to sexual actions.

Also, Like I said above, I believe that if an animal wishes to refuse sexual advances it will do so with teeth and claws. In fact, my grandma has 4 German shepherds, and when the female ones are in heat the males get all horny. If the males touch them at all before their ready the females not only growl, but viciously bite at the males basically indicating to keep away. I am pretty sure the same would occur with animals if humans advanced on them and the animals are not willing.

nvm, wrong post.

I'm not saying they are, I'm only saying that they particularly require anonymity to avoid authorities getting hold of their details, something a company would have to give-up if the client was breaking the law.

The concept that we have sex mainly for reproduction is heavily relied upon in the homosexuality debate. If this were entirely true, then we wouldn't have homosexuality among animals at all nor other rather peculiar sexual behavior, such as prostitution among penguins.

The idea that animals do not feel pleasure or only have sex for reproduction is a myth.

I wonder if animals truly feel pleasure. I have always thought they do it by instinct? I know that Dolphins have always been the ones to have sex for fun... are you positive about the other animals?

If/when it becomes legal, I agree they should. :yes:
Also I thought you were saying it was the only desecrate fetish group, sorry about that.




I support gay rights (and marriage) because it is a matter of love, and I hate people who are so narrow minded that they are ageists homosexuality or are homophobic. However, I was just referring to between separate species.
Also, and I know you were only saying the penguin thing to make a point, but penguins wouldn't have the intelligence to prostitute ^^;
I'm not saying all animals, I'm saying some animals do have sex for pleasure and other don't.


Also, @Tutela de Xaoc....

I was kind of unclear. I should of said you cant produce offspring by mating separate geniuses. Evolution, by natural breeding not natural selection, occurs within the same geniuses or between similar species. And, most of the time, cross-bread species are found to be infertile.

@Ciao: Yes, but animals do not have sex just to reproduce. So any arguments about offspring not being able to be created is irrelevant to the argument.

One argument I have to make about that: The animals, I believe, understand by instinct what they are doing when with a human in that way... but how is it certain it is enjoyable and not just by instinct. Human females, as all animals, also give off a certain scent when in heat and the male animals seem to react off of that. (I would know, I have a male dog 0.0) But who is to say it is enjoyable to the animal and not just by instinct? Please explain, if you havn't already. I havn't read all the posts yet.

Female penguins often give sexual favors to strange males in return for pebbles to build their home. That's pretty much prostitution right there...

I understand that you're referring to sex outside of one's species, but I ask why that is an issue?

The idea that animals do not feel pleasure is a myth, this does not mean that all animals feel pleasure or that some animals do, only that we don't know what they ARE feeling exactly. The word we use in animal psychology is "reward" instead of "pleasure". So I bring to you the question; If they aren't being rewarded somehow for sexuality, they what would be the use of animal homosexuality (situational and actual), animal masturbation and cross species sex?

I do know cross species exists, but my question is how is it CERTAIN they are being given a "reward" instead of doing it out of pure instinct? The only animal I know of that does it out of pleasure is the Dolphin, and... (I think) the ape/monkey? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Survival by any means necessary xD

Some argue that it is an animal's instinct to reproduce, which is why there is sex in the first place, it continue the line of ones genetics. That's also a leading factor behind why some people have affairs, but you can't just go say "Oh its to continue my genetic line." Its ONE of the reasons. All organisms want to keep their species going which is why we have sex. It's not just for the pleasure, although I'm not saying they feel nothing. Also there is homosexual animals. Must I bring up the penguin story (its so good yet so sad ;_;)

Alixiness, the problem is that it is impossible to say that any animal feels what you may believe it feels. Even dolphins... The only thing we can build off of here is facts. We have, so far, several reasons to believe that many animals have sex for some form of reward, because they engage in:

• Masturbation
• Homosexuality
• Cross Species Sex
• Oral Sex
  and
• Prostitution

What evidences suggest that they do not get any reward from any of the above?

But wouldn't that mean we still wouldn't know if an animal wants sex with a human? And I'm not talking about any other animal here, but a human? Or even if it didn't want it, how would we know that if they have no way to fight back even if some have claws, teeth, and things? ._.

It's not so much the female that's the concern here, but the male, what does he get from this? Remember, females will do this even if they're in committed relationships.

But yes, that also applies to humans as you made clear.

@alixness: Why do you say out of instinct like it is different with animals then it is with humans? Do you truly believe that humans act on anything else other than instinct? Everything is instinct when it comes to living organisms. Every experience you go through, every choice you make, they are all molded through the environment and society in a way to form your own specific instincts in specific situations. Humans are not exempt from the Animal Kingdom as much as we like to think we are. If all other animals rely on instinct to live, why then wouldn't humans do the same?

Oh no I was just joking about that ._.


Yes... now I'm a little confused. What do you mean by that?

I guess none. Don't different species of animals engage in these activities but not ALL ? This topic has quickly interested me. Please, explain to me further... do you have any information, like and article of some sort that can provide me with this information so I'm not wasting your time asking questions?, lol (:

BUT WAIT! Besides your Wikepedia article. Maybe a video would be more helpful to me? I have known Wikepedia to be a website not very trustworthy through experience.

Not particularly.... Once it's beyond reasonable doubt.

You're looking at possibilities instead of probabilities, which is the wrong way to go. It could be possible that I was a state of the art artificially intelligent machine configured to make posts like this and expand my knowledge of human opinions, but concurrently it is beyond reasonable doubt that that is true.

You need to give me evidences that suggest that the animals wouldn't want it, not possibilities.

Yes, but you said yourself that we don't know what they want or don't want. And I would agree with bestiality if it was beyond reasonable doubt (as I said before) but it wouldn't be for an overall case, but each specific case.

Just like with humans.

Not every male will want to have sex with every female at any given moment (and vice versa), when that is the case, it is clearly discernible by each party.

Exactly. But until we have some way to know beyond reasonable doubt, and that means not just relying on what we think some movement, pose, etc means.

I believe the term is Innocent until Proven Guilty. Shouldn't it be proven that the animal doesn't like it rather than trying to prove if the animal likes it? If we're gonna go all legal....we should at least be consistent with our practices.

This whole argument is hinged animals wanting sex, not so long ago you were talking about a hypothetical situation where an animal was displaying signs of wanting sex which I would not recognize. That sexual wanting is lust. If an animal is incapable of lust then all these hidden signals and looks become meaningless.

But dogs are not humans- as I've already said and you've already said. I'm not interested in what zoophiles interpret as animal sexual behaviour given the circumstances. What I've read of animal behaviourists they seem to think it an issue of dominance opposed to masturbation, so would you kindly provide your sources...

Where did I say they were omniscient? Let's not take what I said out of context. I simply said that animal behaviourists exist.


No. What I am saying is that what people sexual preferences are in the bedroom is not a topic of conversation at the dinner table. So why would they go into hiding for something that is not overtly done or questioned about.



Because this is a moral debate- the whole purpose of this thread is discuss if bestiality is wrong. Right and wrong are moral concepts. So how can you expect me to give you a clear deduction of logic that leads to conclusion that bestiality is wrong without the use of any moral reasoning.

That doesn't make it culturally acceptable. Some guys enjoy dressing up as babies and pooping in their nappies- it's perfectly legal but just because it is legal doesn't mean everyone does it and everyone approves.

Animals have sex, they masturbate... what are you wanting sources for exactly?

Do you not believe they have sex?
Do you not believe that they masturbate?
Do you believe that they have sex but they don't want to do it?
Do you believe that they masturbate and not want to do it?

I'm a little lost here.

If you want sources on the Masturbation/Dominance issue, here you go!

Do Animals Masturbate? - Masturbation is linked to intelligence! - Softpedia
Do animals masturbate? - By Daniel Engber - Slate Magazine
Animal sexual behaviour - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I didn't say that you said they were omniscient just as I didn't claim that animal behaviorists did not exist, not that they were like unicorns. Let's not take me out of context either ;).


Not a topic for YOU at the dinner table. This is irrelevant, I know tons of people that like to talk about their sexual preferences anywhere. I find it distasteful, but it's illegal to shoot people, so...



Please provide moral reasoning then, all I've heard so far from you is motions of what is "socially virtuous" in some cultures that could simply be killing/hurting someone that isn't "one of us". If that's the kind of reasoning you're using to regard bestiality as wrong then so be it, but I'm just telling you that I don't adhere to this volatile understanding of morals.

I'm not saying that everyone does bestiality either, nor that everyone approves of it. This is besides the point entirely. I'm asking whether it's wrong, or better put; What is wrong with it?

Just because animals have sex and masturbate doesn't mean that they want to have sex with humans. In fact, it has nothing to do with it. One sexual act is different from another, so you can't argue that, just because they masturbate, it means they want to have sex with humans.


Shooting people and sexual acts are two entirely different things. You can't compare the two.


I have a question for you... you said you were ageist it, however you're arguing strongly in favor of it...