Givin' the Dog a Bone: A New Meaning?

It makes you wonder...with a perfectly good human just inside...

Well, some people are just......something.

~Zoo

Well, some people are just......something.

Remember Zoo, whatever kind of person you could possibly imagine inside your mind, she/he is out there.

I suppose that's how the expression "sick puppy" got started.

I suppose that's how the expression "sick puppy" got started.

Im glad you said something to this effect Mason, as it got me to thinking.

Generally bestiality is considered a crime against nature. My guess is that is so because a human and a dog (in this case) cannot produce offspring. This seems to be a common thread between homosexuals and those that paractice beastiality. As odd as it seems, another common thread is both forms of sexual deviancy can form loving relationships with their partners. Also interesting to note that not all people practicing beastiality do so with partners of the same sex. In fact, this is often not the case.

As odd as it seems, another common thread is both forms of sexual deviancy can form loving relationships with their partners.

Riiight. Sex between two consenting human adults - who can communicate their intentions in a socially discernable way - is equal in your eyes to sex between a human and a dumb animal (and I'm using dumb in the 'unable to speak' sense).

This could only be true if you completely ignore the conclusions of vetinary science. You may think your dog is in love with you when you sodomise it, but amongst dogs sodomy is a sign of power, not love. The pack leader will sodomise other dogs to establish rank and power.

In human society such sexual relations are called rape.

If you're attracted to animals, go bugger a furry with your eyes closed. Don't take the NAMBLA line and assume something thinks the same way as you do about sex and love simply because they don't understand the question.

is equal in your eyes to sex between a human and a dumb animal

Never said a word about anything being equal to anything else, rather pointed out a couple of similarities.

If you're attracted to animals, go bugger a furry with your eyes closed. Don't take the NAMBLA line and assume something thinks the same way as you do about sex and love simply because they don't understand the question.

I'm not advocating sex with animals by any means anymore than I advocate homosexuality, but how can one tell what a dog is thinking? How does one know what a dog is knows, I have a hard enough time wondering what other people are thinking about. That leads me to wonder how we can tell what an animal understands.

But what do the experts say:

The common concept of animals as heterosexual and only interested in their own species, is seen as scientifically inaccurate by researchers into animal behavior. Animals are, in the main, considered as sexual opportunists by science, rather than sexually naïve. Ethologists such as Desmond Morris who study animal behavior, as well as formal studies, have consistently documented significant masturbation and homosexuality in a wide range of animals, apparently freely chosen or in the presence of the opposite gender, as well as homosexual animal couples, homosexual raising of young, and cross-species sexual advances. Haeberle (1978) states that sexual intercourse is "not so very unusual" between animals of different species as it is between humans and animals, a view with which Kinsey (1948, 1953) concurs. (Kinsey et al. (1948, p. 668) states "When one examines the observed cases of such crosses... one begins to suspect that the rules about intraspecific mating are not so universal as tradition would have it". Kinsey et al. (1953) further point out that genetic studies have shown the existence of a "large number" of inter-specific hybrids, that have occurred in the wild. (Cited: Miletski, 1999, p.51)(Wiki)

I do not judge people who partake in sodomizimg animals or homosexuality, nor do I claim to know the thoughts and feelings of any animal. However, in my opinion, both bestiality as well as homosexuality are un-natural.

As a side note, I wonder if Mrs McPhail is allowed to keep the pictures she took. Are they not unlawful to posess in the state of Washington?

Washington state is where they have that farm for fans of beastiality. You got to wonder about their laws. Or about people that think they know what an animal wants.

I do not judge people who partake in sodomizimg animals or homosexuality, nor do I claim to know the thoughts and feelings of any animal. However, in my opinion, both bestiality as well as homosexuality are un-natural.

In case you can't tell, that's a judgement. In one sentence you explain that homosexuality is actually natural, and then you go on to give your judgement that despite all evidence it's unnatural.

The key difference between bestiality and homosexuality for me - and perhaps you missed this in my post - is that animals have no capacity to consent to sex with a human and as such inter-racial sex is always rape. I don't think my opinion is rare, and it may even be a driving force behind anti-bestiality laws in your home country. If not perhaps it should be. Bestiality certainly isn't forbidden purely because no offspring is created.

These kinds of charges always intrigue me. How on earth does a person get charged with animal cruelty, whe the alleged victim cannot testify that the act was in itsef cruel. It seems to me a mature pitbull is more than equipped to "refuse" sex with a person, should the dog feel he/she is not being "pleased".

It says in the article that the dog "squealing and crying". So I imagine the poor thing wasn't having a good time. Not to mention the ratio in size of a human male penis to a dog's vagina. Ouch. Also, dogs do not have sex for pleasure, only procreation. Only humans, bonobos, and dolphins have sex for pleasure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_intercourse#Functions_of_sex_beyond_reproduction

http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/pleasure.htm


Also, there's nothing to say that the wife was jealous and had the dog taken away. The article simply states that Assistant Pierce County Prosecutor Karen Watson stated that the dog was taken by animal control. You seem to imply that it was the wife's bidding by stating it all in one sentence.

I find it interesting that you make fun of something like this.

Personally I couldn't care less if two adult men wan't to bugger each other; none of my business. I really don't see how one can equate that with bestiality.

If you're out buggering some poor innocent animal you're a sick shit.

Washington state is where they have that farm for fans of beastiality. You got to wonder about their laws. Or about people that think they know what an animal wants.

It does rain a lot in WA. I guess some residents can get pretty creative with their "bored" time.

In case you can't tell, that's a judgement. In one sentence you explain that homosexuality is actually natural, and then you go on to give your judgement that despite all evidence it's unnatural.

You have a good point here Cacto. Unfortunately whether something is natral or otherwise has little to do with my opinion. Just as I do not judge the rising and setting of the sun, the fact remains that it is a natural process. Is an opinion a judgement?

The key difference between bestiality and homosexuality for me - and perhaps you missed this in my post - is that animals have no capacity to consent to sex with a human and as such inter-racial sex is always rape.

The problem here is, how does one know what capacity animals have to consent? Perhaps they consent by means we can or cannot perceive. I do't know, perhaps there are ceertain people that can perceive this.

I don't think my opinion is rare, and it may even be a driving force behind anti-bestiality laws in your home country.

No, I don't think it's rare either. In fact I tend to share a portion of your argument, and it probably reflects the majority.

Bestiality certainly isn't forbidden purely because no offspring is created.

Well beastiality is not forbidden world-wide, nor in every US state. So what does this mean?

It says in the article that the dog "squealing and crying".

Yep, I saw that as well. However, they don't mention that the dog tried to get away either. I would think that if you were doing something to a pit bul that it did not like, this dog that has been bread for fighting would make some reasonable effort to get away.

Not to mention the ratio in size of a human male penis to a dog's vagina.

Im not so certain about the size of a dimentions of a dogs vagina vs that of a human vagina. Can you please show me somthing that compares the two?

Also, dogs do not have sex for pleasure, only procreation. Only humans, bonobos, and dolphins have sex for pleasure.

I'm not certain we are reading the same artcle. I'm looking at the link you posted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_intercourse#Functions_of_sex_beyond_reproduction) and I read this:

Humans, bonobos[1] and notably dolphins[2] are all species known to have non-reproductive sex, apparently for the sake of pleasure. All three engage in heterosexual behaviors even when the female is not in estrus, that is, at a point in her reproductive cycle suitable for successful impregnation. Likewise, all three sometimes engage in homosexual behaviors.[3] That is not to say that homosexuality and non-reproductive heterosexuality are limited to these three species; rather, they are unusual for female receptivity to sex independent of estrus.

Please note the underlined passages that contradict your statement.

http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/pleasure.htm

This link leads to statements that say dolphins, Bonobos, and Humans are the only 3 species that will coupulate strictly for pleasure. However, there is ony one source for the statement, a book written by a lamen who does not appear to have any valid credentials to make such statements.(Link) Perhaps they reside in his book bibliography. If you can find some, please let me know as I am always willing to accept credible arguments. On the other hand, the Wiki article has a fine list of expert opinions to support its article.

Also, there's nothing to say that the wife was jealous and had the dog taken away.

I never in fact said the article said anything like this. This is what I said, "I guess Mrs. McPhail might have been a little jealous of the sceen; the dog was taken by animal control."

It was my personal guess.

You seem to imply that it was the wife's bidding by stating it all in one sentence.

Your losing me here.

I find it interesting that you make fun of something like this.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I dont see any emoticons on any of my posts. Even if I did find any humor in all this, it would be like me to find at least a shread of humor in some of the wierd crap that goes down in our world today; helps keep me sane through all the madness.

Personally I couldn't care less if two adult men wan't to bugger each other; none of my business. I really don't see how one can equate that with bestiality.

I could care less about two men getting it on as little as I care that any person was doing so with an animal. However all sex between homosexuals is in fact sodomy, just as it is with people coupling with animals. Thats the common thread to these sexual deviants.

If you're out buggering some poor innocent animal you're a sick shit.

My opinion is not far off the mark of this statement. However, each to her/his own.

Washington state is where they have that farm for fans of beastiality. You got to wonder about their laws. Or about people that think they know what an animal wants. It does rain a lot in WA. I guess some residents can get pretty creative with their "bored" time.

Indeed! I gave up wondering as it was disturbing my sleep. They have not given up thinking of new perversions tho.

Personally I couldn't care less if two adult men wan't to bugger each other; none of my business. I really don't see how one can equate that with bestiality. If you're out buggering some poor innocent animal you're a sick shit.

Exactly Mason. There's really no common ground there.

The problem here is, how does one know what capacity animals have to consent? Perhaps they consent by means we can or cannot perceive. I do't know, perhaps there are ceertain people that can perceive this.

Yes, and perhaps preteen children are capable of consenting by means we can or cannot perceive. Society draws the line on sexual encounters between preteens and adults and animals and humans because it's impossible to establish consent.

You can say the dog wants it all you like, but you're no better than a pedophile if you go around raping animals.

Im not so certain about the size of a dimentions of a dogs vagina vs that of a human vagina. Can you please show me somthing that compares the two?

Jesus Christ! Are you serious? Are you actively seeking dog-human porn? That's it, I'm over this. You're a sicko, Xythe. I've got no time for people who advocate and indulge in the molestation of animals.

You can say the dog wants it all you like, but you're no better than a pedophile if you go around raping animals.

I'm saying I don't know what an animal thinks or otherwise as I am not qualified to do so. It's not what I'm saying Cacto, it's what the qualified experts are saying. I think it's un-natural as I have stated several times, as I feel homosexuality is un-natural.

I have read that society often looks at zoophilia in similar terms as pedophelia and I admit there are similar traits just as there are some very similar traits between zoophiles and homosexuals. It does not surprise me that many sexual deviants hold common threads.

Are you somehow emplying that I am a rapist based upon my writings on this topic? If so, you are well out of line.

Jesus Christ! Are you serious? Are you actively seeking dog-human porn?

Don't be silly Cacto. How on earth do you read that I'm looking for dog-porn by asking a person to substantiate their claims. Thats just plain absurd.

That's it, I'm over this. You're a sicko, Xythe. I've got no time for people who advocate and indulge in the molestation of animals.

It seems as this has struck a nerve with you Cacto, how so?

How do you get the impression that I advocate beastiality, pedophilia, or homosexuality when I have made it clear in several posts to this article that is quite the contrary.

Because you are emotionally disturbed by this topic, for whatever reason unbeknownst to me, you have rudely called me a "sicko". A cultured person would apologize for such rudeness.

I apologise for my rudeness, but when you asked for proof of how a human dick could fit in an animal vagina I apparently leapt to entirely the wrong conclusion.

How do you get the impression that I advocate beastiality, pedophilia, or homosexuality when I have made it clear in several posts to this article that is quite the contrary.

My beef is not that you oppose them, it's that you equate them. I see a very large difference between consensual sex between two or more adults (homosexuality) and non-consensual sex between different species or a child and an adult.

The key problem for me is that consent doesn't matter to you.

From what you've written you frown upon consensual sexual encounters in the same way as you do upon non-consensual encounters; you equate rape with consensual sex as if they're worthy of the same level of sexual deviancy.

That is my problem with your argument; is it accurate to say consent is irrelevent to your views?

EDIT: Oh, and your rejection of bestiality seems very shaky. You seem to want to know a lot more about it than I would consider healthy - physical details, you suggest animals might want it and that makes it okay in some cases etc.

I apologise for my rudeness, but when you asked for proof of how a human dick could fit in an animal vagina I apparently leapt to entirely the wrong conclusion.

Thank you very much Cacto, I appreciate your apology greatly. I understand this is a strange and touchy subject, and pretty much grotesque. Please understand I was not asking for proof as you mentioned, only that the poster show some weight for her emotional statement regarding "the" sizes of female "parts" with respect to animals/humans. Fair enough, and thank you kuindly again

My beef is not that you oppose them, it's that you equate them. I see a very large difference between consensual sex between two or more adults (homosexuality) and non-consensual sex between different species or a child and an adult.

Yep, I can see where your comming from. Understand, while there are some similarities between these groups, there are also differences as well. I know what many of them are, just as you do. Its also easy to compare the understanding of childeren vs adults, as we all have been a child at some point. However, we do not know the thoughts and feelings of animals through experience, but via observation. I really must question how much observation has really been done when it comes to people having sex with animals, and I can't imagine there would be very much (Im not sure I could stomach the observation myself). this leads me to beleive that little to nothing is really known about how many animals think and feel. In all fairness, its pretty unfair to judge a person as abusive, if you dont know the victim is actually a victim, no matter how vile it seems to both you and myself.

The key problem for me is that consent doesn't matter to you.

Look Cacto. I'm a middle-aged, white American male. I am more than aware of the importance of consent when it comes to a sexual union. I cannot speak about what animals consent to and what they do not, because I do not know how to understand them in that context. However, because you or I cannot understand, that does not mean some other person cannot. Its as repulsive to me as it is to you, or similarly I gather to imagine this thing. Trust me, when I have sex, its with human women and I definately have their consent. I have never been attracted to an animal, so I don't really know how to get consent from an animal. Perhaps those that have sex with animals can in fact understan whether consent is given or otherwise, but again, I am clueless to the entire affair of gaining consent from an animal.

From what you've written you frown upon consensual sexual encounters in the same way as you do upon non-consensual encounters; you equate rape with consensual sex as if they're worthy of the same level of sexual deviancy.

I cant see where I have done this, but Im certain you are going to show me. If I have in fact done this, it was not intentional. Certainly there are differences in consentual sexual deviance between people, but I am uncertain of how an animal could consent or not. Since I am unable to determine myself what animals think, feel, or understand, it's impossible for me to equate consentual sex with rape of animal; I simply do not know, nor am I qualified to guess.

That is my problem with your argument; is it accurate to say consent is irrelevent to your views?

Hardly. Please see above.

Oh, and your rejection of bestiality seems very shaky. You seem to want to know a lot more about it than I would consider healthy - physical details, you suggest animals might want it and that makes it okay in some cases etc.

This is a strange statement, but you are entitled to draw whatever conclusion your opinions may bring. In truth, if you look through my posts, I do not beleive I have asked one question concerning beastiality. On the other hand, even the knowledge of the profane brings enlightenment simply for the sake of knowledge. I have stated over and over again, that I believe beastiality is unhealthy, not as an argument, but simply as a fact. I'm not certain what "physical details" you are referring to, but again, I'm sure you will point them out to me, but is that so far-fetched?

Are you in fact claimimng that animals do not want sexual contact with other species, and in particular human beings? If so, how do you know this?

Thank you again cacto, for the apology

.

.

.

I got the impression from reading what you wrote, that you are not shocked by it but are instead amused by it and you are quite flippant about it.

Why should I be shocked? It's not like anything of this nature is original. Besides, I've witnessed some pretty gruesome things; I have a pretty tough tummy.

What I find amusing is your tone. Anyway, I hardly see beastiality as contraversial as homosexuality, and I condone neither.

implies for that you think having sex with your dog is love?

You have it wrong here Jen. It implies nothing of the sort. What it does imply is that a professional community does believe that some people have sex with animals do so out of love.

Personally I find this disgusting and horrific that you can say this in the manner you did

I'm sorry you feel that way. I suppose everybody feels differently, and your allowed to feel as you please. I know I'm not losing any sleep over it.

Animals cannot speak for themselves and using them as an object of sex is just wrong which ever way you look at it.

You are entitled to your opinion Jen, I personally don't think very highly of it either; sex with animals that is.

Do you actually think the dog wants to "be pleasured" (christ that makes me shudder) by its owner?

I don't really matter much what I think about it. I have mentioned several times, in case you have not read, that I do not know what animals think. I do think it's possible, or so say a some professionals. In any event, it's nothing Id care to try.

This is like saying a baby - 3 year old cannot testify that when it was molested

I'm sorry Jen, I simply cannot equate an animal with a human child. They are simply 2 different animals, in case you haven't noticed.

A total lack of understanding of suffering and pain inflicted against someone or something.

Well first off this was not about a someone, but rather a dog. I cant claim to know if the dog was suffering or otherwise. It seems to me though, that if a pitbull was annoyed or suffering, that it certainly could make an attempt to get away. However, the article never mentions so. The article mentions no sign of any struggle, nor did the guy have any damage to him.

I don't know if you have ever seen two dogs "going at it", but the sounds they make sound like crying. I don't know, ive never seen any tears running from a dogs eyes.

Have you ever been molested against your will? Have you ever been raped? Have you ever been forced to suck someone off against your will with a knife to your throat or tied up under anothers control in fear of your life? Have any sexual attacks happen to you as a child or an adult?

No I have not, and I fail to see the relevance. We are talking about a human being here, but an animal. I see them as 2 distinctly different things.

They have to me.

Im sorry to hear that Jen. You have my genuine sympathy.

I am pretty damn sure that animals cannot begin to understand it either when it happens to them, it is as traumatising and horrific for them as it is for us.

I guess I'll have to say it yet again: I DO NOT KNOW WHAT ANIMALS THINK OR FEEL.

Why the bleeding hell should they? Do you want to read all the gory details? ughhh.

They did not because it did not happen. There was no mention of gore, simply because there was none. Please dont be so niave as to think reporters dont want to report gorey things. I see them do it all the time.

I to found your article to be written in a manner that comes across as being amused, flippant and even amazed that the guy was charged.

You have partially repeted yourself here Jen. I was not amuzed that the guy was charged, I took that as a given.

I found your attitude to lean in favour of sex with dogs or bestiality in general?

I find the act of beastiality as distasteful, but thats just me. It seems the guy thought otherwise. I dont know all that much about beastiality other than the small amount of looking into it for this article. I have the feeling you are far more familiar with it though. Do you have some formal education in this respect?

Sadly that is what came across.

Sadly that is what came across.

Your allowed to see things the way you choose Jen. I believe I have made my feelings very clear. In fact I did so before you went on this little diatribe. You seem to have taken this a bit personal. Well, you have name-called me, and referred to me as some very untrue things recently. Perhaps you need a cold beer or something.

I am not the only one to see that you wrote it with flippancy and making fun of the situation) Words alone made it appear you were amused by this - emoticons were not needed.

Yes, and I adressed most of it then, though you seem to have chosen to ignore my replies. You have asked many of the same questions as others have needlessly.

I am more amused by this post than anything. After all, you equate the rape of a 3 year-old baby to sex with a dog.

Whilst you may state repeatedly you oppose bestiality and homosexuality you have come across as making light of it...

I feel far more strongly against homosexuality because to me, it has far greater impact on our society. It's certainly far more rampant.

...the feeling I got from the article was that you side with the man having sex with the dog and accuse his wife of being jealous of the dog.

Thats your perspective. I have mentions several times my feelings on the subject. Your repetitiveness is grueling.

Please show me where I accused anybody of anything. In fact you are the one doing all the accusing.

As far as the wife being jealous, well, you never know how some women think. I don't really know how any women think, me being a man and all. Do you know if she was jealous or not? If so, please enlighten me.


I think you may need to calm down Jen. When you do so, perhaps you can avoid the repetitive nature of your comments, and actually understand what you are reading.

It truly pains me to see you so worked up like this.

My first sentence is not an apology either for those that may think it is.

Ive never heard you give a genuine apology to me, though I do think you should have done so at times. Sadly, I get the feeling this is not in your nature though.

A pit bull dog - it amazes me that someone would want to harm any animal by abusing it and having sex with it.

Like I said Jen, and please stop repeating yourself over and over. It does nothing but exemplify your hysterics.

I simply am not convinced this man was in fact abusing his dog by having sex with IT. There are professionals that say it is not.

I will say again that it is something I do not care to participate in, and I do not condone it.