Listen, dogs can't offer consent, so this is a ridiculous comparison. And shame on you for comparing victimization with a hypothetical consentual scenario
an erect penis is an erect penis
and sadly its not hypothetical.....
nationally syndicated sex column Savage Love (from seattle's strange news paper)
one week featured a woman who claimed that:
She was in a long term relationship with her first boy friend
but claimed to have repeatedly performed oral acts upon the family pets during her early teens
should she confess all?
note the followinfg states 23 were about WOMEN
....
The
Kinsey reports controversially rated the percentage of people who had sexual interaction with animals at some point in their lives as 8% for men and 3.6% for women, and claimed it was 40–50 percent in people living near farms,
[7] but some later writers dispute the figures, because the study lacked a random sample, and because the prison population was included, causing sampling bias.
Martin Duberman has written that it is difficult to get a random sample in sexual research, and that even when
Paul Gebhard, Kinsey's research successor, removed prison samples from the figures, he found the figures were not significantly changed.
[8]
By 1974, the farm population in the USA had declined by 80 percent compared to 1940, reducing the opportunity to live with animals; Hunt's 1974 study suggests that the demographic changes led to a significant change in reported occurrence. Males in 1974 were 4.9% (1948: 8.3%), and in females in 1974 were 1.9% (1953: 3.6%). Miletski believes this is not a reduction in interest but a reduction in opportunity.
[9]
Nancy Friday's 1973 book on
female sexuality,
My Secret Garden, comprised around 190 fantasies from different women; of these, 23 involve zoosexual activity.[10]
More recently, research has engaged three further directions - the speculation that at least some animals seem to enjoy a zoosexual relationship assuming
sadism is not present, and can form an affectionate bond.
[52] Similar findings are also reported by Kinsey (cited by Masters), and others earlier in history. Miletski (1999) notes that information on sex with animals on the internet is often very emphatic as to what the zoophile believes gives pleasure and how to identify what is perceived as
consent beforehand. Some researchers are seeking to ascertain whether zoosexuality is closer to a sexual orientation than a sexual fetish, and to assimilate scientific research on
emotion in animals and their ability to choose pleasure, as part of their beliefs about zoophilia. For instance, Jonathan Balcombe says animals do things for pleasure. But he himself says pet owners will be unimpressed by this statement, as this is not news to them.
[53] Jonathan Balcombe does not discuss or endorse zoophilia himself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia
