Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 54 Posts

· Knowledge is the solution
Joined
·
7,484 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
As many of you may remember, some time ago (say, 2004-2006) I had a series of threads that appeared in a (not so) weekly basis, where I would pose a potentially controversial topic and let the forum wreak havoc... err... discuss about it. Since I had not much to do today, I decided on thinking on a topic, and reviving my little thread series.

So, this week's topic is:

Why is bestiality considered wrong?

Just because it's yucky, and you don't like yucky things? Because it does not poses any evolutionary advantage? The Bible says no? Does it possess a violation of some animal rights? Are we abusing our position as a "superior" species?

So people, remember to keep the discussion civil, but overall, remember to keep it intelligent. I know this is a controversial and delicate topic, so keeping it that way is of utmost importance.

I'll post my own opinion on this later. But for now, I want to hear your thoughts on The morality of bestiality.
 

· lazy shmupper
Joined
·
957 Posts
:rotflmao:

Dunno, ask Freud.

Ahem, err... let's say: it's wrong because it's raep. Animals aren't things, they have a mind and individuality to some extent. Even if most species are considered not being 'self conscious', it doesn't mean raep won't hurt'em.

PS: but eating them is ok.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
Why is bestiality considered wrong?
Because it involves 2 different species in an contre-nature attempt of 'mating'.

There's also the yuck factor generated from the earlier apprehension, as well as society-pushed view that it is indeed wrong (2 different species of animals dont repulse usas much, since were more likely to view it objectable when humans are into that picture -based on our opposition to that, we tend to view it as a morale derive, even if the actual arguments on how we explain why its immoral/wrongs might not be the best ones-)
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
I think it's mostly a matter of consent. Just like how we look down on people having sex with underaged girls, corpses, prostitutes (they only give consent because they're forced to for money), and all other people who had not properly consented. It's virtually impossible to get verifiable consent from a non-human animal for sex (and even if you could somehow get it it'd be impossible to know if they really understand what they're consenting to) so bestiality is considered wrong. Sexual activity is only seen to be proper if both parties knowingly and willingly consent to it (implied consent does not count, which is why date rape and marital rape are also wrong).

At least that's how I would rationalize it. I think for most people it's the yuck factor or seen as a violation of nature/natural law.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
because society said so.

no seriously now, it violates the sanctaty of nature, why should humans have the right to rape an animal? (yes i know this will be a common view and this is an uninspired way of stating it but there you go)

@LensLarque every meat eating animal hunts, or in our case goes to the supermarket for food, so that is not defilment in my views that is.

@Proto exelent thread idea btw.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
Is it really considered wrong ?? I thought it was just considered disgusting.
in most countrys its illegal. And its imbeded that it is wrong into most holy books (not trying to bring religion into the discussion)
 

· lazy shmupper
Joined
·
957 Posts
@LensLarque every meat eating animal hunts, or in our case goes to the supermarket for food, so that is not defilment in my views that is.
Yeah, as long as they're not mistreated or given hormones and antibiotics, no problem.

Back on topic I guess the real problem comes from the Japanese. It's all their fault. You know these guys (well gals mostly) do pr0n with frogs or eels ? There's worse, and these DVD's are pretty popular... not even illegal.
 

· Knowledge is the solution
Joined
·
7,484 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
For now I'll get the devil's advocate to get some discussion going :p

[devil advocate]
I think it's mostly a matter of consent
Even if it LensLarque mentioned it as a tongue in cheek comment, it is still an interesting point. Why is it OK to kill animals for food "without their consent", yet it is not OK to have intercourse with them without this consent.

The obvious reply here would be that killing for food is just the natural course of things, and that in one case we are doing and justifying it with our own survival, and in the other one we are just giving in to our desires.

The reply here is that it has been seen that we don't actually "need" to eat meat. We can live on a vegetarian diet supplemented with proteins and certain nutrients without ever having the need to kill an animal

Person A: But I like eating meat!
Person B: Well, I like raping meat :p

Because it involves 2 different species in an contre-nature attempt of 'mating'.
Nature? The same lady that kills countless species per day because of "natural disasters" creates genetic monsters, causes cyclic gigantic ecological catastrophes and such? Since when the natural way of doing things was the right way of doing things?

Because it just doesn't feel right. But for me it's the health issue that matters most. You don't really know what kind of disease can be transmitted through such activities.
For the sake of the argument let's say you take your "partner" to a vet and he assures you that everything is A-OK!

Wow.. Well.. It's disgusting anyway...
Oh yeah, the "YUCK!!" argument. Before we discuss anything, why do you think any yuck factor type of argument is any better than "mommy, I don't want to eat my carrots, yuck :("
[/devil advocate]

Back on topic I guess the real problem comes from the Japanese. It's all their fault. You know these guys (well gals mostly) do pr0n with frogs or eels ? There's worse, and these DVD's are pretty popular... not even illegal.
I assure you that the issue of bestialism goes back to the albors of human civilization, no need to point at a single group[/size]

@Proto exelent thread idea btw.
:)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
Yeah, as long as they're not mistreated or given hormones and antibiotics, no problem.
i understand your point on that, i was more refering to the cases without all these treatments (if they still even exist). But this is a different debate altogether.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
Nature? The same lady that kills countless species per day because of "natural disasters" creates genetic monsters, causes cyclic gigantic ecological catastrophes and such? Since when the natural way of doing things was the right way of doing things?

if we are reffering to nature as a living organisim or somehow posseses a conscious mind, wouldnt you think she would be a little mad about us dominating most speices on this planet, in context the saying you reap what you sow, is sort of substancial in the meaning that the destruction we have brought to this planets animals, is being thrown back at us. /bulls***

But since nature in my oppinion nature does not posses a consciousness, these effects can be put down with pure science.
 

· lazy shmupper
Joined
·
957 Posts
Well money, desire... or simply both. :innocent:

PS: ah I remember one of the most popular zoo pr0n: octopus ! (because of the tentacles I guess)

I wonder sometimes if sexual misery can put desperate people to turn to animals (or something else)... that's another factor. To what degree can it participate into 'perversion' ?
 
1 - 20 of 54 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top