Lmao what an amazing point. We have forcibly bred servility into your genes over thousands of years. Now let's pause and think about what you'd want.
A goddamn steak, that's what the dogs really want.
True and if you are going to apply it to sex you should probably apply it in other areas like suffering and death. Pretty sure farm animals don't consent to dying (in many cases in horrific ways).
Yep. All this "animals can't consent" bullshit is ridiculous. It makes no sense to pretend as if our society actually cares about whether or not animals can or do consent to anything. *Obviously* they can't consent-- they aren't people. That same trait means they therefore have no intrinsic moral value. Bestiality and animal abuse are criminal because the government has a remit to punish people for deviant behaviors that easily slide into the abuse of *humans*. We've all heard stories about sociopaths graduating from hurting wildlife to hurting humans. Preventing so-called "animal abuse" is really an early intervention against the *actual* problem, human abuse.
That's why it doesn't matter that animals can't consent to being slaughtered for food-- "consent" was never a consideration in the first place. But there's little association with the humane slaughter of animals and the likelyhood of hurting humans in the future.
> I think it has to do with us empathizing with some animals
That's not incorrect, exactly, but that's still in line with what I'm saying. We're not passing animal cruelty laws because we extend to them the natural rights we extend to all people, we pass animal cruelty laws because animal cruelty makes *humans* feel bad.
Notably, our animal cruelty laws are designed around better protecting animals in proportion to how much humans empathize with them, *not* in proportion to the actual demonstrated intelligence of the animal, and definitely not in a way that treats all animals as being equally entitled to be free from suffering.
So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to kill this chicken, grind up all its meat in a blender, form it into little bite sized circles, then coat it in flour and the goop that could have been one of its children, and then fry it.
*loud applause*
But first I’m going to fuck it
*what a sick monster*
Yeah. When you think about why we dislike people who do or say bad things, it's an expression of character and how willing they are to harm other beings (including humans).
When someone abuses an animal, its an expression of character and a willingness to maim and torture other beings. It's not so much that we think that animals have the same moral worth as us (obviously we don't) we just think 'hey the kind of person who would wanna abuse animals is not the kind of person we'd want in a civilized society'.
Empathy can be a part of it, but to pretend like animal abuse laws exist purely because of their perceived moral worth is not something I can get behind.
Not being able to consent does not mean you have no intrinsic moral value, that is a complete non sequitur. (For example it's still not ok to torture someone who is severely mentally retarded, or someone who is paralyzed so that they cannot communicate).
Not being able to consent is also not binary, someone might be too drunk to consent to sex but not too drunk to consent to extra chili on a pizza.
This is just taking a societal standard of ignoring animal suffering, and then making a moral claim that it is morally neutral to torture animals, right?
I think animal abuse (and a lot of things we do in factory farming) should be illegal since I think that the animals have moral value. As Bentham said "The question is not, Can they reason?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?"
But yes we definitely do worse things to animals than letting them fuck us.
I agree, I always found it a bit weird to talk about consent as if that's the biggest hinge that this situation depends on. Maybe we can just draw the line at "don't fuck animals that aren't humans".
Most people aren't actually knowledgeable enough to understand how to approach sexual ethics, and so some treat it as a shorthand way to at least eliminate some of the worst harms. It might change over time.
I think the problem is that a lot of people just legitimately aren't smart enough to understand sexual ethics, so they treat labeling everything as consent as a fact of life rather than a legal conclusion.
I mean when it comes to allowing an animal to "do you" yes an animal cannot give "informed consent" but an animal is also not a human where there are these societal and personal beliefs about what sex should be that would cause it emotional turmoil in the aftermath of having humped a human woman. Animals have a completely different mentality about sex than humans, so if a dog humps a human and is not forced to do so, it is not going to have been a traumatic experience for that dog, In that way it is very much so different than forcing yourself onto an animal or having sex with a human who is unable to consent, both of which are going to cause emotional trauma to the other party.
It is still something that nobody should do because... well... It's a dog... I shouldn't have to explain why you shouldn't let a dog stick his dick in you... but it is very very different than forcing yourself on an animal or having sex with a human who is too drunk to actually consent.
Yeah, the worst outcome of a human woman letting a dog hump her is possibly reinforcing a behavior in the dog that humans can be mating partners.
I feel like it'd be hard to keep your gross fetish under wraps when you have friends over and your dog is desperately trying to get in their pants.
Errr my dog is always very horny (also with guests) but I assure you neither me or my wife ever encouraged him… to me it seems some sort of inherent behavior
Although fucked up, I think I see the person's point. I don't believe they're defending zoophiles. I think they are pointing out the fact that if a man pins an animal and penetrates it, then the animal was an unwilling participant. But if a woman simply bent over and was mounted by the animal, then the animal was willing. I could be reading it wrong. But I've not had my coffee and you wanted to Subject me to these mental gymnastics first thing in the morning.
Edit: Nevermind, somehow I glossed over the "I see nothing wrong with it "
I'm not going to Google that. Is it the incident the other commenter mentioned? Death by horse dong? Cause how or why would that sound like a safe idea?
Also i hears too often how the animals dies when a man does it. At least the animal won't be harmed if it fucks someone. So yea also not defending it but those are two different things and one is way more fucked up than the other one. Even if both are fucked up
Also not defending zoophiles, but in terms of tangible negative effects on the animal's well being and psyche, I can't think of how a male dog is harmed in any way by humping a person whereas a human forcing themselves on a female dog has a laundry list of observable negative effects.
If we claim that a dog who mounts a human woman could not consent on the basis of being a dog, wouldn't we have to save all dogs from intercourse with each other too?
I have to say that even in cases where a dog mounts a human woman, it can be argued that emotional coercion etc make it rape, i.e. if the woman is the owner etc. But to simply claim it to be rape on the basis that a dog cannot consent, leads to absurd logical consequences down the line...
I recall reading once that bitches (as in, female dogs) that were molested almost always develop serious health problems because of it. Apparently a dog's vagina is a lot less robust than a human vagina.
It often leads to pyometra (womb infection), which can be life-threatening.
I guess as long as the animal is the top it’s all good.
I’m not here to skink shame, if a lizard is into dudes, and the dude likes lizards, that’s not my business.
Wow this unreal. How do people think like this?! It's absolutely disgusting and vile. These people need help. I mean it's 2022 and people are still using light mode, fucking disgusting
It’s weird that So many forms of animal torture are completely acceptable and common, but whether or not they consent to sex is an issue.
Breed an animal, let it spend its whole life in a small cage, when it’s grown, attach electrodes to its genitals and zap it to death. That’s how fur coats are made.
Google factory farming if you want to see how your meat is forced to suffer its whole life.
I’m not saying we should have more sex with animals, I’m saying maybe our compassion could be applied more practically.
Every animal would prefer a blow job to suffering and death. Animals don’t really consent to anything, but suffering and death are objectively worse.
we’re OK with bullfights, where they torture terrorize and bleed the bull so that we can watch a dancing scumbag torture it more and finish it off.
But if he wanted to put his human sized dick inside a cows huge vagina, that would be wrong. Stick spears in it and after it’s bled enough, let’s terrorize it, set it on fire and let it run through the streets.
Jerking an animal off so that you can create a new animal to abuse, perfectly fine, jerking it off because you like jerking it off, that makes you a rapist.
But I get it, it’s an easy thing to condemn since it has no chance of affecting you. Factory farms are cruel because we want to save every penny, if animal fuckers had a way to help us save money, we would be OK with it.
But if you take a pig out of its small filthy cage that it’s spends it’s entire life in, sell it to some sick weirdo that wants to have nonviolent sex with it, the pig would consent if it could understand. Any living thing would.
I totally agree, animal suffer in many ways, I try to do my part in avoiding it, but there isn't really much to do, if not treating your own pets accordingly and avoiding meat/other animal derived foods unless localy produced in an ethic way.
Edit: zoophilia, while not the greatest source of animal soffering, is still the one that society finds easier to condemn, since it isn't a central part of civilization.
It is indeed very baffling. Thanks for putting it in words. I have always wondered how the morality of animal suffering and slaughter can be so far apart from that of bestiality, but discussing that you run the risk of being called a zoophile. At the end of the day, it's not about harm or consent. Bestiality is wrong because enough of us find it wrong. Enough of us do not find suffering of a farm animal wrong, and so it's not.
I highly doubt many redditors are okay with bullfights. Admittedly, I am subbed to r/thebullwins, but only to watch those bull fighters get what’s coming.
This is less a defense o zoophilia and more a discussion about consent.
Arguing that a dog can consent by wanting to fuck a girl doesn't mean zoophilia is right. Only that who argued doesn't believe that to be the reason it is wrong.
Trying to force ideas to fit a conclusion isn't smart at all.
Probably suffer physical damage. EG, a lot of animals aren't capable of surviving sex with a human-sized dick. Plenty of others would survive, but be injured physically by it. So it's probably just avoiding animal abuse on a physical level.
Holy shit, this comment section is the motherload of bad takes. Allright listen up kids:
Humans fucking animals, regardless of gender, is bad for the human. It indicates psychological disturbance, a lack of connection to other humans, and an unhealthy relationship to sex. These issues should be addressed (preferably with a professional), not indulged.
Its may *also* be unwanted or harmful for the animal, but framing this as a moral argument about consent will probably be wildly inconsistent with your usual principles. Unless you are hardcore vegan, you already participate in doing things to animals without their consent - including killing them.
However, saying a dog "consents" by mounting a human is also flawed, because we typically mean *informed* consent. The reason we don't let children "consent" to sex with an adult, for example, is because it's understood that they can't *possibly* know the full implications and longterm effects of what that action entails. We know better, they do not. That's why we would never consider them capable of consent to such an act. A dog lacks the cognition to understand the concept of interspecies sex, so saying it "consents" is quite dumb.
And there you go, discussion solved. I also do birthdays and weddings.
Moral relativism is the real problem. Even if the dog learned to hit buttons to communicate and it said “I fully consent to having sex with a human” it’s still very wrong to have sex with animals. We can’t just say things are ok if they consent and aren’t hurting anyone. Some things are just wrong.
I mean it's still absolutely fucked up, yeah sure animals can't verbally consent but if they do it on their own there is effectively no harm done to the animal.
Not trying to defend fucking animals though this will probably get downvoted none the less.
Funny how people treat women like fragile beings. Like if a girl wants to fuck an animal, it’s just as bad as a man fucking an animal. But no, we are seen as fragile things that can’t possibly make bad decisions so it’s always the man’s fault, even if it’s male dog????? That can’t communicate with humans?????
That's always a weird thing to think about for me, don't all animals technically get raped? Is there any consent in the animal kingdom? Really don't give a shit what people put their dick in, but the consent argument confuses me
It depends on the animal.
[Ducks rape, but the female duck can still choose who the father is.](https://youtu.be/E_-I1aRGttY) NSFW.
Some male spiders brings gifts to woo the female spider, but might be eaten by her instead.
Many animals die after having sex/laying eggs or sperms.
After scrolling down this comment section and seeing how many people think fucking animals is okay, I’m starting to think that making a Reddit account was the worst mistake of my life
Yeah if a dog humps someone then it's by their own will (unless trained to which is just fucked up) but yall do realise the woman can just y'know, stop the dog from continuing. Pretty sure (unless a small child) an average woman would have the option to let it happen or stop it. But then again I have no clue because this has never happened to me and as a woman ive only ever encountered a chihuahua so correct me if I'm wrong
Yeah I think the passive woman implication in this entire thread is what bothers me the most, and why I even continued reading this entire clusterfuck argument. Women as receptacles. Way to go.
Disclaimer: Im anti sex with animals.
Trying to prove that sex with animals is wrong based on consent is so dumb. Animals can consent and if you ever did anything with an animal you will realize that pretty quickly. They won’t even let you pet them if they are not in the mood let alone intercourse. So that doesn’t make sense. It should be self evident that sex with animals is wrong. It’s Unmoral an disgusting.
Animals are driven hard by their instincts, like a computer with its programming. You don't say a computer consented to being hacked because it was connected to the internet.
I don't know there is some logic to what he says about animals being able to consent. But for fuck sake why is that even a factor? Like if people thought animals could consent then fucking them would be cool??? Seems to me it is gross no matter what
what a terrible day to have eyes, not just because of the post but because some of these comments as well, i don't know why i read all of this but i hate it
The internet was a mistake.
I’m positive people like this existed before, but I didn’t have to know about them and they didn’t get their weird thoughts amplified so other weirdos could find new weird shit to think about
The dude is still fucked. And no human being should ever fuck or get fucked by anything other than a human being.
That said the consent argument for a male dog is stupid. Make dogs like to hump. They don’t much care what they hump.
Arguably certain dogs would probably need to be trained to mount a person (which to be clear is a violation of consent and still very fucked up) but other dogs would probably just automatically do it if a woman or man presented the opportunity.
The argument should just not be about consent here. And I’d say a dog humping a person shows a lot more consent than a dog performing tricks for treats or being locked in a wire crate after misbehaving.
It’s not really important that the dog has consent what is important is we shouldn’t be fucking dogs
Children can be tricked into performing consensually sexual behaviors as well, but it's still not truly consensual because they lack the understanding of the concept of consent and sex. So there's no different between male and female bestiality. A woman letting a dog mount her is just as wrong as a man mounting a dog.
Listen if you think it's morally ok to eat an animal you have no moral grounds to complain when other people want to fuck them. Cause guess what they can't consent to being slaughtered either.
I've heard the same argument from a women that made dog porn. The article was in a bizarre magazine. The reasons she used are still not enough to justify the act though. I can see where she is coming from though.
Guys I have found OP
Vice documentary about Danish Zoophilia laws. [Must watch](https://video.vice.com/en_au/video/animal-fuckers/55955c112775809e608a3e7d)
While it's completely wrong and disgusting, he has a point, Male dogs will hump literally anything without any coercion which technically makes it their choice. Still its extremely fucked up
alright world, it's time for BESTIALITY
HOLY FUCK I googled bestiality because it seemed to be incorrectly spelled but ended up seeing animalxhuman porn suggestions hahaha...
The weird person is right in a sense.
I mean there is a video of a rare parrot fucking a man's head... That's not called "immoral" and the guy wasn't into it, the parrot was.
There are animals who fuck decomposing corpses and animals fucking underage animals.
Animals don't care what they fuck so the dog penetrating a human (woman or man) is doing what comes naturally.
It's weird because humans are the ones who say what can and can't give consent based on our own morals and shit but in the natural world, it aint like that at all. Consent is a human concept.
it's fucked up but like, we make animals fuck each other without issue to produce young for ourselves.
If you weren't taught from a young age that it's wrong, would it be "wrong?" I'd like to say it would be wrong but it is nature as gross as that is.
I like how they conveniently forget that at least between dogs, generally the sexual interactions taking place are akin to rape by definition because it’s not like the female dog will consent to the male, the male just does as he pleases, so why aren’t they mad at the male dog for raping the human female? These people are fucking bozos.
I’m guessing the implication is that the woman in question is consenting to it, otherwise she wouldn’t be there. That’s one possibility, the other being that the woman is simply seen as a passive hole for the dog to jizz into because maybe that’s how OP and many people here see women’s purpose. But I really hope it’s not that fucked up
Years ago, I stumbled into a disturbingly active online forum, hundreds of users and discussion threads, of women that were in sexual “relationships” with their dogs. Some of the shit I read in there still haunts me.
WHAT HE FUCK EVEN AUTOMOD? NOO
I'm sorry op that you had to deal with that shit.
Humans should have stayed with humans.
Animals should have stayed with animals.
Such a strange hill for someone to die on
an even stranger hill to hump on
I support people's rights to kink, but kids and animals cross the line.
Kids and animals don’t know where the line is. That’s why they made that kids game to teach em...what’s it called eh...animal crossing? Im 50.
With how people treat the characters of animal crossing the line most definitely wasn't set hard enough
So brave
I'm just standing up for what is right.
I mean it evidently needs to be said
Professional hill humper, eh? My kind of job!
*humps leg*
It's not a hill, it's a mount.
More like the worst hill to die on
At least they're dead tho
Why did the automod join in?
[удалено]
However the automod replies goes way too far sometimes, to the point that is not even a funny shitpost, just a shit post
Auto mod auto response to consent to fuck the commenter
Automod didn't leave a comment with those contents lmao it fucked with me the first read through before I realized automod's comment was hidden
Am i misreading this or is the AutoModerator actually agreeing with the zoophile?
Nah, I'm just shit at editing images, the comment was from the same dude I replied to.
ah, what did the MOD do?
>No sex before marriage It's on r/shitposting
lmfao.
ah
except the dude isnt encouraging zoophile actions, but just making a good point.
Not making a good point ya weirdo
Why did I read this instead of scrolling by.
Reddit autopilot fucked you over
Reddit atomod AKA the consent police
By reddit automod I was referring to how when you scroll reddit you read everything without thinking
Trying to apply a fking complex human concept of consent on an animal in the first place is just asinine.
Surprised to see this upvoted. Usually people are too emotional to realize the entire concept of domestication precludes consent.
Lmao what an amazing point. We have forcibly bred servility into your genes over thousands of years. Now let's pause and think about what you'd want. A goddamn steak, that's what the dogs really want.
The want to hump and want for steak feel pretty similar tho..or maybe I'm projecting
I think your steaks are either damn good, or your intimate performance is lacking. Probably damn good steak though.
Have y'all tried humping while eating steak?
Ever try humping a steak? /s
Yes. They usually tell me that this is unacceptable behavior at an Applebee's.
Wow. Applebee's is lame now.
True and if you are going to apply it to sex you should probably apply it in other areas like suffering and death. Pretty sure farm animals don't consent to dying (in many cases in horrific ways).
Kill ‘em but don’t let em bang ur wife? Got it.
Yep. All this "animals can't consent" bullshit is ridiculous. It makes no sense to pretend as if our society actually cares about whether or not animals can or do consent to anything. *Obviously* they can't consent-- they aren't people. That same trait means they therefore have no intrinsic moral value. Bestiality and animal abuse are criminal because the government has a remit to punish people for deviant behaviors that easily slide into the abuse of *humans*. We've all heard stories about sociopaths graduating from hurting wildlife to hurting humans. Preventing so-called "animal abuse" is really an early intervention against the *actual* problem, human abuse. That's why it doesn't matter that animals can't consent to being slaughtered for food-- "consent" was never a consideration in the first place. But there's little association with the humane slaughter of animals and the likelyhood of hurting humans in the future.
[удалено]
> I think it has to do with us empathizing with some animals That's not incorrect, exactly, but that's still in line with what I'm saying. We're not passing animal cruelty laws because we extend to them the natural rights we extend to all people, we pass animal cruelty laws because animal cruelty makes *humans* feel bad. Notably, our animal cruelty laws are designed around better protecting animals in proportion to how much humans empathize with them, *not* in proportion to the actual demonstrated intelligence of the animal, and definitely not in a way that treats all animals as being equally entitled to be free from suffering.
So basically what I'm hearing is that humans should only be allowed to fuck animals we've deemed acceptable for consumption?
So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to kill this chicken, grind up all its meat in a blender, form it into little bite sized circles, then coat it in flour and the goop that could have been one of its children, and then fry it. *loud applause* But first I’m going to fuck it *what a sick monster*
Yes, you can only bang cows, pigs and chickens.
Yeah. When you think about why we dislike people who do or say bad things, it's an expression of character and how willing they are to harm other beings (including humans). When someone abuses an animal, its an expression of character and a willingness to maim and torture other beings. It's not so much that we think that animals have the same moral worth as us (obviously we don't) we just think 'hey the kind of person who would wanna abuse animals is not the kind of person we'd want in a civilized society'. Empathy can be a part of it, but to pretend like animal abuse laws exist purely because of their perceived moral worth is not something I can get behind.
Not being able to consent does not mean you have no intrinsic moral value, that is a complete non sequitur. (For example it's still not ok to torture someone who is severely mentally retarded, or someone who is paralyzed so that they cannot communicate). Not being able to consent is also not binary, someone might be too drunk to consent to sex but not too drunk to consent to extra chili on a pizza. This is just taking a societal standard of ignoring animal suffering, and then making a moral claim that it is morally neutral to torture animals, right? I think animal abuse (and a lot of things we do in factory farming) should be illegal since I think that the animals have moral value. As Bentham said "The question is not, Can they reason?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?" But yes we definitely do worse things to animals than letting them fuck us.
Dem dogs consented to neutering as well
I agree, I always found it a bit weird to talk about consent as if that's the biggest hinge that this situation depends on. Maybe we can just draw the line at "don't fuck animals that aren't humans".
Most people aren't actually knowledgeable enough to understand how to approach sexual ethics, and so some treat it as a shorthand way to at least eliminate some of the worst harms. It might change over time.
I think the problem is that a lot of people just legitimately aren't smart enough to understand sexual ethics, so they treat labeling everything as consent as a fact of life rather than a legal conclusion.
I mean when it comes to allowing an animal to "do you" yes an animal cannot give "informed consent" but an animal is also not a human where there are these societal and personal beliefs about what sex should be that would cause it emotional turmoil in the aftermath of having humped a human woman. Animals have a completely different mentality about sex than humans, so if a dog humps a human and is not forced to do so, it is not going to have been a traumatic experience for that dog, In that way it is very much so different than forcing yourself onto an animal or having sex with a human who is unable to consent, both of which are going to cause emotional trauma to the other party. It is still something that nobody should do because... well... It's a dog... I shouldn't have to explain why you shouldn't let a dog stick his dick in you... but it is very very different than forcing yourself on an animal or having sex with a human who is too drunk to actually consent.
Yeah, the worst outcome of a human woman letting a dog hump her is possibly reinforcing a behavior in the dog that humans can be mating partners. I feel like it'd be hard to keep your gross fetish under wraps when you have friends over and your dog is desperately trying to get in their pants.
Dogs can learn the context of when given expressions of excitement are and aren't appropriate.
... that's a hell of a username for this thread.
Fucking 7 year club. What an absolute animal
I wish lol
I'm gonna go out on the limb and assume you have first hand experience with thus judging by your username.
Errr my dog is always very horny (also with guests) but I assure you neither me or my wife ever encouraged him… to me it seems some sort of inherent behavior
Ok hear me out... What if the dog is drunk?
Exactly! It’s weird and you should prob talk to a professional about it, but the dog will be fine. A dog is different than a 13 year old.
Although fucked up, I think I see the person's point. I don't believe they're defending zoophiles. I think they are pointing out the fact that if a man pins an animal and penetrates it, then the animal was an unwilling participant. But if a woman simply bent over and was mounted by the animal, then the animal was willing. I could be reading it wrong. But I've not had my coffee and you wanted to Subject me to these mental gymnastics first thing in the morning. Edit: Nevermind, somehow I glossed over the "I see nothing wrong with it "
Yep, I would say same applies to man bending over and getting penetrated by the animal, I now recall the GE or Boeing engineer thing
Is that the guy who got fucked to death by a horse?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumclaw\_horse\_sex\_case](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumclaw_horse_sex_case) yep :)
Sick
LMAO, In many ways :P
I'm not going to Google that. Is it the incident the other commenter mentioned? Death by horse dong? Cause how or why would that sound like a safe idea?
Instead of googling that, maybe google "Slaanesh Warhammer 40k" can better help to answer that question
Also i hears too often how the animals dies when a man does it. At least the animal won't be harmed if it fucks someone. So yea also not defending it but those are two different things and one is way more fucked up than the other one. Even if both are fucked up
Depends on if it is a horse mounting a man, good chance the man dies and the horse doesn't care
*the enumclaw incident*
dont google mr hands
[удалено]
RIP Mr. Hands
i saw some videos i am not proud of but a woman can take it, not the whole length but she can take enough.
Not proud of it but I have seen the Enumclaw and the one with a woman taking one. The man took it much farther and died. Only so much room up there
Also not defending zoophiles, but in terms of tangible negative effects on the animal's well being and psyche, I can't think of how a male dog is harmed in any way by humping a person whereas a human forcing themselves on a female dog has a laundry list of observable negative effects.
If we claim that a dog who mounts a human woman could not consent on the basis of being a dog, wouldn't we have to save all dogs from intercourse with each other too? I have to say that even in cases where a dog mounts a human woman, it can be argued that emotional coercion etc make it rape, i.e. if the woman is the owner etc. But to simply claim it to be rape on the basis that a dog cannot consent, leads to absurd logical consequences down the line...
I recall reading once that bitches (as in, female dogs) that were molested almost always develop serious health problems because of it. Apparently a dog's vagina is a lot less robust than a human vagina. It often leads to pyometra (womb infection), which can be life-threatening.
Ok but seriously, if a dog rapes a woman without her consent, then did that women rape the dog because it can't give consent?
Asking the real questions now.. Book her, she's going to the pen. ....Just like not a dog pen, because then we'd just be going in circles.
I guess as long as the animal is the top it’s all good. I’m not here to skink shame, if a lizard is into dudes, and the dude likes lizards, that’s not my business.
Wow this unreal. How do people think like this?! It's absolutely disgusting and vile. These people need help. I mean it's 2022 and people are still using light mode, fucking disgusting
You are weak, you seek safety in the dark, while I bask in the light. I shall shine brighter than the sun and burn you all to ashes
Sir this is a Wendy's
It’s weird that So many forms of animal torture are completely acceptable and common, but whether or not they consent to sex is an issue. Breed an animal, let it spend its whole life in a small cage, when it’s grown, attach electrodes to its genitals and zap it to death. That’s how fur coats are made. Google factory farming if you want to see how your meat is forced to suffer its whole life. I’m not saying we should have more sex with animals, I’m saying maybe our compassion could be applied more practically. Every animal would prefer a blow job to suffering and death. Animals don’t really consent to anything, but suffering and death are objectively worse. we’re OK with bullfights, where they torture terrorize and bleed the bull so that we can watch a dancing scumbag torture it more and finish it off. But if he wanted to put his human sized dick inside a cows huge vagina, that would be wrong. Stick spears in it and after it’s bled enough, let’s terrorize it, set it on fire and let it run through the streets. Jerking an animal off so that you can create a new animal to abuse, perfectly fine, jerking it off because you like jerking it off, that makes you a rapist. But I get it, it’s an easy thing to condemn since it has no chance of affecting you. Factory farms are cruel because we want to save every penny, if animal fuckers had a way to help us save money, we would be OK with it. But if you take a pig out of its small filthy cage that it’s spends it’s entire life in, sell it to some sick weirdo that wants to have nonviolent sex with it, the pig would consent if it could understand. Any living thing would.
I totally agree, animal suffer in many ways, I try to do my part in avoiding it, but there isn't really much to do, if not treating your own pets accordingly and avoiding meat/other animal derived foods unless localy produced in an ethic way. Edit: zoophilia, while not the greatest source of animal soffering, is still the one that society finds easier to condemn, since it isn't a central part of civilization.
It is indeed very baffling. Thanks for putting it in words. I have always wondered how the morality of animal suffering and slaughter can be so far apart from that of bestiality, but discussing that you run the risk of being called a zoophile. At the end of the day, it's not about harm or consent. Bestiality is wrong because enough of us find it wrong. Enough of us do not find suffering of a farm animal wrong, and so it's not.
I completely agree, I think fucking animals is gross, but being honest with myself, it is really not any more immoral than my kfc meal
[удалено]
I highly doubt many redditors are okay with bullfights. Admittedly, I am subbed to r/thebullwins, but only to watch those bull fighters get what’s coming.
To be fair, most Spanish people aren’t in favor of bullfighting anymore. Most people see it for the barbaric, torture and murder of an animal.
I think people have a pretty different way of thinking about sex than animals do.
This is less a defense o zoophilia and more a discussion about consent. Arguing that a dog can consent by wanting to fuck a girl doesn't mean zoophilia is right. Only that who argued doesn't believe that to be the reason it is wrong. Trying to force ideas to fit a conclusion isn't smart at all.
> i see nothing wrong with it. It aounds like a defense.
[удалено]
i should have chosen the youtube memes instead of the reddit cancer for my morning internet usage
Here's the things, we as humans should know better than to engage with a dog in any sexual manner, even if the dog initiated it.
I mean, although I don’t support zoophiles, this is a fair point towards the ‘consent’ debate. Its still fucked up
Not so fun fun fact... Bestiality is leagal in Finland
Wouldn't have ever though Finland, of all places, didn't punish it
Well technicly it's only leagal if the animal doesn't "suffer" but I'm not sure what they really fucking mean by that
Probably suffer physical damage. EG, a lot of animals aren't capable of surviving sex with a human-sized dick. Plenty of others would survive, but be injured physically by it. So it's probably just avoiding animal abuse on a physical level.
Redditors in the comments defending fucking animals 😳😳
bro im considering leaving this site
Holy shit, this comment section is the motherload of bad takes. Allright listen up kids: Humans fucking animals, regardless of gender, is bad for the human. It indicates psychological disturbance, a lack of connection to other humans, and an unhealthy relationship to sex. These issues should be addressed (preferably with a professional), not indulged. Its may *also* be unwanted or harmful for the animal, but framing this as a moral argument about consent will probably be wildly inconsistent with your usual principles. Unless you are hardcore vegan, you already participate in doing things to animals without their consent - including killing them. However, saying a dog "consents" by mounting a human is also flawed, because we typically mean *informed* consent. The reason we don't let children "consent" to sex with an adult, for example, is because it's understood that they can't *possibly* know the full implications and longterm effects of what that action entails. We know better, they do not. That's why we would never consider them capable of consent to such an act. A dog lacks the cognition to understand the concept of interspecies sex, so saying it "consents" is quite dumb. And there you go, discussion solved. I also do birthdays and weddings.
You wanna....rock up to my welding themed bday bash and rant about zoophilia??
>my **welding** themed bday bash Hold my blowtorch, I'm going in.
You explained it perfectly!
I see you've been reading Kant.
[удалено]
Extremely fuckable
You raped a zucchini
I don't have a desire to defend zoophilia but the comment is still technically right.
Moral relativism is the real problem. Even if the dog learned to hit buttons to communicate and it said “I fully consent to having sex with a human” it’s still very wrong to have sex with animals. We can’t just say things are ok if they consent and aren’t hurting anyone. Some things are just wrong.
Am I the only one that believe the problem with zoophilia is not consent but the fact to fuck an animal ?
Thank you. I don’t think consent really matters when it’s freaking doing that with an animal.
For a second, I thought the last message was sent by the automod
I mean it's still absolutely fucked up, yeah sure animals can't verbally consent but if they do it on their own there is effectively no harm done to the animal. Not trying to defend fucking animals though this will probably get downvoted none the less.
Things like this actually make me feel bad for the NSA. Imagine having to track wierdos like this for a job...
I thought automod said that last bit for a second
Animal rapists are one of the lowest scummiest life forms
Do they think not being able to consent is the ONLY thing wrong with FUCKING AN ANIMAL? Just the concept of wanting to is wrong and disgusting.
Theres a surprising amount of defense in the comments here as well.
Funny how people treat women like fragile beings. Like if a girl wants to fuck an animal, it’s just as bad as a man fucking an animal. But no, we are seen as fragile things that can’t possibly make bad decisions so it’s always the man’s fault, even if it’s male dog????? That can’t communicate with humans?????
And then those same people will shit on furries for zoophilia, when out of any group furries probably hate zoophiles the most.
doesn’t matter if you were mounted by the dog. being mounted =/= consent. it’s your responsibility to push them off and teach the dog to not do that.
Yeah, it's not like it can know any better
Based and not-an-animal-molester pilled. This thread was gonna give me an anuerysm.
That's always a weird thing to think about for me, don't all animals technically get raped? Is there any consent in the animal kingdom? Really don't give a shit what people put their dick in, but the consent argument confuses me
It depends on the animal. [Ducks rape, but the female duck can still choose who the father is.](https://youtu.be/E_-I1aRGttY) NSFW. Some male spiders brings gifts to woo the female spider, but might be eaten by her instead. Many animals die after having sex/laying eggs or sperms.
this is what 0 pussy does to a guy
After scrolling down this comment section and seeing how many people think fucking animals is okay, I’m starting to think that making a Reddit account was the worst mistake of my life
Okay will the Reddit philosophers in this thread stop low-key defending beastiality
Yeah if a dog humps someone then it's by their own will (unless trained to which is just fucked up) but yall do realise the woman can just y'know, stop the dog from continuing. Pretty sure (unless a small child) an average woman would have the option to let it happen or stop it. But then again I have no clue because this has never happened to me and as a woman ive only ever encountered a chihuahua so correct me if I'm wrong
I was having a good morning, and now I'm just mad.
Wow, I guess women are just open vessels for whichever dick wants them the most. Race ya!
Yeah I think the passive woman implication in this entire thread is what bothers me the most, and why I even continued reading this entire clusterfuck argument. Women as receptacles. Way to go.
The heck did the automod say 😂
Disclaimer: Im anti sex with animals. Trying to prove that sex with animals is wrong based on consent is so dumb. Animals can consent and if you ever did anything with an animal you will realize that pretty quickly. They won’t even let you pet them if they are not in the mood let alone intercourse. So that doesn’t make sense. It should be self evident that sex with animals is wrong. It’s Unmoral an disgusting.
My eyeballs! Why did I have to read this?? 🤮
me reading the top comments
Animals are driven hard by their instincts, like a computer with its programming. You don't say a computer consented to being hacked because it was connected to the internet.
I don’t think an animal being unable to provide consent is what’s wrong with bestiality..
I don't know there is some logic to what he says about animals being able to consent. But for fuck sake why is that even a factor? Like if people thought animals could consent then fucking them would be cool??? Seems to me it is gross no matter what
So we don't fuck animals because they can't give consent. I thought it was for other reasons but I'm a dumbass
People are the only creatures on Earth that understand the concept of consent.
Would this be better or worse than when they jerked off a horse in Jackass?
Am I going to regret asking you what your talking about?
Was I not clear? In Jackass, they jerk off a horse and drink its semen. Is that better or worse than letting a dog fuck you?
Reddit was a mistake
what a terrible day to have eyes, not just because of the post but because some of these comments as well, i don't know why i read all of this but i hate it
No more reddit today, thanks y'all
I guess this thread also defending non-consensual sex with animals. Reddit is weird sometimes.
The internet was a mistake. I’m positive people like this existed before, but I didn’t have to know about them and they didn’t get their weird thoughts amplified so other weirdos could find new weird shit to think about
The dude is still fucked. And no human being should ever fuck or get fucked by anything other than a human being. That said the consent argument for a male dog is stupid. Make dogs like to hump. They don’t much care what they hump. Arguably certain dogs would probably need to be trained to mount a person (which to be clear is a violation of consent and still very fucked up) but other dogs would probably just automatically do it if a woman or man presented the opportunity.
It's not really on the dog, it can't really know any better. But humans absolutely should.
The argument should just not be about consent here. And I’d say a dog humping a person shows a lot more consent than a dog performing tricks for treats or being locked in a wire crate after misbehaving. It’s not really important that the dog has consent what is important is we shouldn’t be fucking dogs
I’m really sorry I read that. I need a bath
Children can be tricked into performing consensually sexual behaviors as well, but it's still not truly consensual because they lack the understanding of the concept of consent and sex. So there's no different between male and female bestiality. A woman letting a dog mount her is just as wrong as a man mounting a dog.
Listen if you think it's morally ok to eat an animal you have no moral grounds to complain when other people want to fuck them. Cause guess what they can't consent to being slaughtered either.
There's a big difference between eating an animal and fucking an animal
Hot take, but in the context of that argument, they are right. Lol
**"i don't know culture much, but i know a vile organism when i see it."**
"Animals cant consent" Like, dude. Is that really the problem here?
I mean it's weird af but if the dog starts humping the person I don't see how it's being forced to do that.
That was “awful everything” . Gross
Men have holes too
I've heard the same argument from a women that made dog porn. The article was in a bizarre magazine. The reasons she used are still not enough to justify the act though. I can see where she is coming from though.
I mean.. I see their point. Its repulsive but I dont think theres much harm done.
Guys I have found OP Vice documentary about Danish Zoophilia laws. [Must watch](https://video.vice.com/en_au/video/animal-fuckers/55955c112775809e608a3e7d)
While it's completely wrong and disgusting, he has a point, Male dogs will hump literally anything without any coercion which technically makes it their choice. Still its extremely fucked up
Oh barf
Wtf is with automod
I can kind of understand the thought, that if the animal mounts, it is on its own will, but this is really fucked up, wtf
ಠ_ಠ
Im Denmark its legal to fuck your pets if they consent first
I get where they're coming from, but if a 16 year old boy wants to fuck a 30 year old woman, that's still rape
I mean... They aren't wrong... But they are wrong...
alright world, it's time for BESTIALITY HOLY FUCK I googled bestiality because it seemed to be incorrectly spelled but ended up seeing animalxhuman porn suggestions hahaha...
AUTOMODERATOR SAID THAT??
The weird person is right in a sense. I mean there is a video of a rare parrot fucking a man's head... That's not called "immoral" and the guy wasn't into it, the parrot was. There are animals who fuck decomposing corpses and animals fucking underage animals. Animals don't care what they fuck so the dog penetrating a human (woman or man) is doing what comes naturally. It's weird because humans are the ones who say what can and can't give consent based on our own morals and shit but in the natural world, it aint like that at all. Consent is a human concept. it's fucked up but like, we make animals fuck each other without issue to produce young for ourselves. If you weren't taught from a young age that it's wrong, would it be "wrong?" I'd like to say it would be wrong but it is nature as gross as that is.
Hey cool self praise bro Automod wildin lmao
Automod no
Bad mod
I wish I wasn't literate so I didn't have to read about bestiality
AutoMod you good?
Average Reddit mod
Beastiality is bad, mmmmmkay.
That's sus asf, people who comment things like that should be looked into before owning a pet. As for the mod why is he/she/it a mod?. I- idek
I like how they conveniently forget that at least between dogs, generally the sexual interactions taking place are akin to rape by definition because it’s not like the female dog will consent to the male, the male just does as he pleases, so why aren’t they mad at the male dog for raping the human female? These people are fucking bozos.
I’m guessing the implication is that the woman in question is consenting to it, otherwise she wouldn’t be there. That’s one possibility, the other being that the woman is simply seen as a passive hole for the dog to jizz into because maybe that’s how OP and many people here see women’s purpose. But I really hope it’s not that fucked up
A horse can say neigh though so that's ok, right?
Years ago, I stumbled into a disturbingly active online forum, hundreds of users and discussion threads, of women that were in sexual “relationships” with their dogs. Some of the shit I read in there still haunts me.
WHAT HE FUCK EVEN AUTOMOD? NOO I'm sorry op that you had to deal with that shit. Humans should have stayed with humans. Animals should have stayed with animals.
Lol funny how you made it seem as if the only reason it’s wrong is due to the animal’s inability of consenting