• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Sexual Acceptance

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
A responsible owner would never let their dogs reproduce, none of my dogs (all intact) have breed without my permission and they are healthy and if I let them breed is with a healthy dog, when a female is in heat I just separate her from males till the heat pass, Is this so hard to do that is better to cut their genitals?

Population problems are caused by irresponsible humans. Neutering them is a cheap option to solve the problem (and is not working) Owners of pets should be studied before they can adopt a dog (just like is done with baby adoptions) to ensure responsible owners. (or harder punishment for irresponsible ones) those are more humane solutions to the problem.
So it's completely impossible for a responsible owner to have a dog escape? My parents have a rather large dog that was able to hop a four foot fence. It was later able to hop the electric fence that was put on top of the regular fence, all just to keep it in the yard. This particular dog had no problem with the slight shock that it received from the electric fence, and it became nearly impossible to keep the dog in the fenced in area (which was necessary for it's protection). This had nothing to with them being irresponsible.

That same dog, once kept in the house, if wanted to get out, would simply go through the screen on the window, which in turn allowed one of the cats to get out as well. This was not irresponsible of my parents, it was that that dog wanted to do what it wanted to do. The window being open was for it's comfort.

So there are exceptions, many of them.


Do you think the cat enjoys to be hit against a wall? Did you saw sings that the can't enjoy being throw against a wall? Did the cat asked you to throw him again?
No, it did not enjoy being thrown into the wall. However, the fact that it came back to me, right afterwards, was basically consenting to being thrown against another wall. The simple fact is, one can not fully know what an animal wants, or does not want. They are an animal. And body language is not 100% accurate.
Dog example: If a male dog mates with a human, do you think he enjoys it? If the dog jumps over the human and humps him, isn't that consent? And weeks later, why the dog ask for the human to go in 4 legs, to hump him again? Do you see the difference between rape and sex?
Do you think if I had sex with a minor (still rape), that they would not enjoy it? They may even fully consent; however, that is taking advantage of someone who can not make the actual choice to the best of an advantage.
Your dog example is not possible, a dog body language does not lie, the body language will show that he is in pain in fear and submissive to you by those means, how can you believe a "I don't like this" in body language means "I love it keep beating me" No animal consent to feel pain.
It can lie. Body language is not 100% on anything. And it is very easy to misunderstand body language. Nearly any psychologist will tell you this.


The fact is, a dog can not logically consent. They have animalistic tendencies that need to be satisfied. You're just an object that your dog chooses to use in order to full that need. It has nothing to do with caring or love. It has to do with an animalistic urge that they can't control. If one choose to, and they would have to be something very wrong with them, they could have a dog rape a human being. That shows in itself that it is simply an animalistic urge.

More so, animals can not consent. The way they are programmed makes it impossible to make a conscious decision on consenting to mate with a human.
 

Alusky

Dog lover
Trust me, I have had a dog in my life for 22 out of 24 years of my life. I know the difference between between fear and not liking something. And classical condition (Pavlov) is neither positive or negative conditioning (positive increasing desired behavior, negative decrease behavior).

You better than the rests should understands (since you have had pets) and you know they have ways to say they dislike or like something.

1) If a dog that likes a belly rub and later learns to ask to the human to repeat the action (by Pavlovian conditioning) by placing himself in position and been the only positive reward the pleasure from the rub, people think thats OK.

2) And if a dog that likes a rub in an erogenous zone and later learns to ask to the human to repeat the action (by Pavlovian conditioning) by placing himself in position and been the only positive reward the pleasure from the rub, people thinks thats rape.

In both the human enjoys to make the dog happy (both are taking advantage of the dog and gaining happiness), in both the dog enjoys it, in both the animal is not legally consenting to be pleasured by a human (the animal didn't know better the first time he was rub) still he gave consent as much as possible, and let the human pleasure him, when he could have not consented by attacking, moving away or show discomfort. (My only explanation why one is wrong is that people has double standards)

Do you agree theres nothing wrong with my second example and that people dislike it because of double standards?

I'm only trying to show that there's people that do play by the rules. Yet that people is often discriminated or targeted by biased laws.


So it's completely impossible for a responsible owner to have a dog escape? My parents have a rather large dog that was able to hop a four foot fence.

Training and appropriated containment is responsibility of the human, but yes accidents still happens. Now what are the odd for two humans having the same accident with one of the dogs been in heat? Also there's anticonseptive medicine for females dogs to stop the pregnancy and theres also tubal ligation and vasectomy that stops reproduction and leaves the animal in his natural healthy hormonal state.

PS: your dog was a good example of exceptions :D not all dogs are as agile or destructive as yours.

No, it did not enjoy being thrown into the wall. However, the fact that it came back to me, right afterwards, was basically consenting to being thrown against another wall. The simple fact is, one can not fully know what an animal wants, or does not want. They are an animal. And body language is not 100% accurate.

Do you believe he would come back to you over and over if you keep throwing him? See how you cat and dog examples where poorly chosen? You choose a situation that is almost imposible to find in the real world to prove your point. The fact that your cat may forgive you a couple of times, doesn't makes it "consent".

Do you think if I had sex with a minor (still rape), that they would not enjoy it? They may even fully consent; however, that is taking advantage of someone who can not make the actual choice to the best of an advantage.

Can you say what age is the minor and what age are you? Or give a range of ages?
I need a range of age because by law it can be illegal if hes 13 but in another country that can be legal. If I'm not wrong is even legal at age 9 in some places.

Assuming you are an adult and If the minor is not legal in age according with the local law, but he is mature enough to fully consent I don't have a problem with it (why punishing a victimless crime?) Would you punish 2 minors (one 11 and one 12) for having sex? Would you punish some one that steals his own money without knowing it was his money?

The important thing is avoiding harm, legal consent laws are made to avoid that harm, still, physical harm and diseases can be avoided, pregnancy can be avoided, but mental harm is very likely to happen under the current society (according to scientific studies). Which makes sex with immature humans wrongs almost everywhere, pleasure becomes irrelevant as a factor to make sex with minors acceptable.

PS: Zoophiles don't have sex with under aged animals. Adult animals are mentally and sexually mature and they don't get hurt in any way if the human is not abusive. (theres evidence that non-abusive sex with animals is harmless)

Something interesting: I have read that in some remote regions, some tribes have sex with minors, everyone sees it as normal and the minors grow up healthy, nobody has a problem with it and nobody is affected in a negative way by it. Thats why I say "under the current society" sex with minors is wrong (exception would be a mature minor or a society where that is seen as normal) It seems that in those places, where theres no moral stigma for sex with minors, the minor will not grow up thinking he did something wrong, dirty, sinful, shameful, so they grow up normally and healthy to have sex with minors when they become adults.

It can lie. Body language is not 100% on anything. And it is very easy to misunderstand body language. Nearly any psychologist will tell you this.

It doesn't lie, human just fail to understand it, I agree, is never 100% accurate, but if there is doubt the person can always stop, also you can't be 100% sure a dog will or is enjoying to be caressed in the head, yet people still do that without been 100% sure. So what percentage of certainest is acceptable for a human to do something to an animal? (sexual or not) 90%? 80%? not even humans gets 100% consent when they have sex with other humans, for example a girl may not consent if you fail to tell her that you are married, yet if you tell her and she still consent, maybe will not consent, if you tell her that you are pro abortion, maybe she will not consent if you hate the color blue, the guy would actually need to tell the girl 100% of his live to have 100% of the girl consent. So I ask again, what percentage of consent is acceptable? 90%? 80%? You know most humans probably consent to sex with a 5%...

The fact is, a dog can not logically consent. They have animalistic tendencies that need to be satisfied. You're just an object that your dog chooses to use in order to full that need.

You see, now you are been logic :bow:
Yes, dogs can't logically give consent, yet they do consent to things that they like (or are neutral) and withdraw consent when something is not right or don't give consent when they don't like something. And yes, to him I'm probably just an object that he uses to satisfy his sexual needs, I'm happy to satisfy all his needs, he is indeed under my care.

It has nothing to do with caring or love.
From the human side, yes it has to do with love and caring (also with lust for some people) I do love him and care alot for him, I would save him over my if I had some seconds to make a decisions, that much I love him.

It has nothing to do with caring or love. It has to do with an animalistic urge that they can't control. If one choose to, and they would have to be something very wrong with them, they could have a dog rape a human being. That shows in itself that it is simply an animalistic urge.

Well not always depends of the specie, with animals that only bond with one sexual partner for the rest of their life is about love, animals that are monogamous for the rest of their lives, are in a constant release of oxitosine and dopamine (the brain chemicals for the "in love" feeling) when they are with the chosen mate (studies have been done about this). Same with humans, a study made in couples that where in love for many years (like if it was the first day) show to have high amounts of oxitosine and dopamine when in company of the loved one, couples that where together but not in so much love had normal amounts of the chemicals.

PS: Dogs release dopamine and oxitosine when humans caress them, also during sex (theres also studies about this), it relax them, makes them happy and makes them bond with the human, on the other hand, a dog having sex with a human is more likely to be related to lust since humans don't smell like a b¡tch in heat (censorship? that's the actual word for a female dog...) on the other hand, wolfs are monogamous as long as their sexual partner is alive, I would say dogs have keep some of that behavior. So all I can say is that he seems to love me as much as his specie can demonstrate love and I love him as much as humans can love.


More so, animals can not consent. The way they are programmed makes it impossible to make a conscious decision on consenting to mate with a human.

They can make a unconscious decision to not mate with a human (in the presence of pain or discomfort) just as they can make a unconscious decision to mate with a human (in the presence of fun and pleasure).

By the dictionary definition of the word "consent" the dog is actually giving consent. If you want to look at a law dictionary, then yes they can't give legal consent. Hope you are using the right word, because I'm talking about consent, I don't know if you are using the word consent as "legal consent" (hope you read the first post I made in this thread where I explained the difference of legal consent and consent)
 
Last edited:

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
If a dog that likes a belly rub and later learns to ask to the human to repeat the action (by Pavlovian conditioning) by placing himself in position and been the only positive reward the pleasure from the rub, people think thats OK.
It's not classical/Pavlov conditioning (I gave a text book definition), but if a dog lies on their back to be rubbed, it's operant conditioning, and there is nothing wrong with that. And how do you know the dog is actually wanting through actual consent, or is just acting in the way it has been conditioned? Sex slaves are conditioned to consent. And my dog consents to beatings. A conditioning called learned helplessness.
 

Alusky

Dog lover
It's not classical/Pavlov conditioning (I gave a text book definition), but if a dog lies on their back to be rubbed, it's operant conditioning, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Do you mean if the dog learns to enjoy sex because is a positive thing, you don't have a problem with it? I'm not sure if you answer the question I made to you or you avoid it.

And how do you know the dog is actually wanting through actual consent, or is just acting in the way it has been conditioned?

Some times is consent, some times is the human conditioning the dog. But, does it matter? People train their dogs useless tricks all the time, people can also train dogs to do some sex acts.

And again if the dog is not abused or hurt, why training a dog for sex or to hunt foxes shouldn't be both acceptable? (I don't like double standard)
-Agree? Yes or No? Explain if you say NO.

my dog consents to beatings. A conditioning called learned helplessness.

Your dog not running is not equal to consenting to be battered, he is still gives signs (fear, dislike, submission) that he does not consent to be battered (hes saying with his body "I don't like this, I don't want this, some one help me" ) even if he doesn't run, even if he takes every hit, his body does not lie, hes not consenting to be beaten. Yes he has "learned helplessness" but he is still not consenting.
-Agree? Yes or No? Explain if you say NO.

PS: Yea I have read about that, the experiment was done with dog, they shock them (while they where tied unable to run) later remove the ties, and like all of them didn't run to the shock even if they could, they learned that there was no escape. But later more experiment where done because the initial experiment was not accurate to prove "learned helplessness" in the later experiment half the dogs actually run even that they where conditioned that there was no hope in running. The answer to why some run and some don't is that some dogs are more pessimistic and others are more optimistic. (same experiment is true for humans and same answer is true too)

I don't claim that people can't rape animal, they will let humans rape them out of fear or helplessness (still is rape, theres no consent there), is clear the animal don't like the behavior even if he doesn't run, the human is the one choosing to ignore the animal opinion (ignoring the animal consent). But not all people is like that.

-The zoophiles don't have to use force or abuse them, we just learn what they like and dislike and we give them what they like, the animals accept the acts of the human because it feels good or because it's neutral, we avoid hurting them, forcing them, discomforting them, raping them, some even avoid coercing them and training them.


I only wish that people should be tolerant to the zoophiles, and that they should see the difference between an animal rapist/abuser and a zoophile.
 
Last edited:

Rael

Musician
I only wish that people should be tolerant to the zoophiles, and that they should see the difference between an animal rapist/abuser and a zoophile.

I actually dont see a difference between an animal rapist/abuser and a zoophile! Why, because the animal has no way to consent or to say yes or no to whats happening. And that is rape.

I know im comming into this conversation late, but thats just messed up to have sex with an animal!

Why cant you just have sex with your own species. Is this a fetish, or your real sexual orientation. Are you also attracted to humans?
 
Last edited:

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
I actually dont see a difference between an animal rapist/abuser and a zoophile! Why, because the animal has no way to consent or to say yes or no to whats happening. And that is rape.

I know im comming into this conversation late, but thats just messed up to have sex with an animal!

Why cant you just have sex with your own species. Is this a fetish, or your real sexual orientation. Are you also attracted to humans?


Its just part of "responsible pet ownership" to have sex with your pets..(didnt you get the memo ?)

They "need sex" and you should provide that to them..

DUH!

Love

Dallas
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Do you mean if the dog learns to enjoy sex because is a positive thing, you don't have a problem with it? I'm not sure if you answer the question I made to you or you avoid it.
Who is to say it is a positive thing though? You can condition the animal to go through the motions, but it is simply impossible to know if it is pleasure, desire for attention, conditioning, or a number of other things.

Some times is consent, some times is the human conditioning the dog. But, does it matter? People train their dogs useless tricks all the time, people can also train dogs to do some sex acts.

And again if the dog is not abused or hurt, why training a dog for sex or to hunt foxes shouldn't be both acceptable? (I don't like double standard)
-Agree? Yes or No? Explain if you say NO.
It does matter. If it is conditioned, then it means the human was taking advantage of the dog. And because animals do not speak, there is no way of telling. But again it comes down to having your animal spayed or neutered. It is the responsible thing to do, and in some places it is mandatory. It prevents the spreading of disease, keeps the population in check and prevents the needless death of countless animals, and the animal will live a full and healthy life.
But I also believe that using dogs for police forces, guard dogs, and such is just as bad. My dog knows the simple sit, down, off the couch/bed, quit begging, come, and lay down.

Your dog not running is not equal to consenting to be battered, he is still gives signs (fear, dislike, submission) that he does not consent to be battered (hes saying with his body "I don't like this, I don't want this, some one help me" ) even if he doesn't run, even if he takes every hit, his body does not lie, hes not consenting to be beaten. Yes he has "learned helplessness" but he is still not consenting.
-Agree? Yes or No? Explain if you say NO.
Learned helplessness is when you have failed to escape an unpleasurable stimuli in the past enough times that in future instances you will not try to avoid it. You simple wait for it and let it happen. My dog lowers her head and trembles, but she could escape, but she has been conditioned to learn she can't escape. She doesn't want it, but she stands there and would just let it happen if it was comming. It is VERY possible that given that dogs were not designed to receive a human penis, it hurts them, and after so many times it becomes learned helplessness.

PS: Yea I have read about that, the experiment was done with dog, they shock them (while they where tied unable to run) later remove the ties, and like all of them didn't run to the shock even if they could, they learned that there was no escape. But later more experiment where done because the initial experiment was not accurate to prove "learned helplessness" in the later experiment half the dogs actually run even that they where conditioned that there was no hope in running. The answer to why some run and some don't is that some dogs are more pessimistic and others are more optimistic. (same experiment is true for humans and same answer is true too)
Actually this experiment, that is mentioned in any 101 textbook, was a group of dogs that where shocked, and had no way of escape. Later the gate was removed and it was possible to escape, but they didn't. Another group of dogs were put in these same cages, without the gates, and they did escape.
 

Aquitaine

Well-Known Member
You sure we can't tempt you back to the dark side (Humans)?

el080122917.jpg


OR, if you lick the other side of the postage stamp:

gerard_butler300.jpg


?
 
Last edited:

Alusky

Dog lover
I actually dont see a difference between an animal rapist/abuser and a zoophile! Why, because the animal has no way to consent or to say yes or no to whats happening. And that is rape. I know im comming into this conversation late, but thats just messed up to have sex with an animal!

Yes your late, hope you read my previous posts so you get an idea why I believe some day zoosexuals will be tolerated, just like homosexuals are been tolerated now. Most negative comments against zoosexuals are not objective or logic.

I will repeat myself anyway.

So Rael read this example and answer me:
1) If you try to caress a dog in the head and he lets you do it, and the dog shows NO signs of pain, fear, submission, or any trauma from your action, is he consenting to let you touch him? Yes or NO? If you say NO explain yourself.

2) And if you try to caress another dog, but this time he shows signs of fear and submission, hes uncomfortable with you action, he barks at you, tries to run and bites your hand when you try to touch him, is he consenting to be touched? Yes or NO? If you say NO explain yourself.

Do you still believe animal has no way to consent or to say yes or no to what's happening?

Why cant you just have sex with your own species. Is this a fetish, or your real sexual orientation. Are you also attracted to humans?

Under the definition of sexual orientation I'm zoosexual, I have no attraction for my own specie, only for dogs (both sexes). Asking me to do something with a human is like asking a gay to have sex with a lesbian. In my case humans don't turn my equipment on, other people are not strictly zoosexual and may have relationship with humans and animals.

Yes there's also people that have a sexual fetish for animal, they are not zoosexuals, they see animals as sex toys, and actually most abuse and trespassing cases involving sex with animals are committed by them as they only care about pleasuring themselves. Note: Not every person with an animal sexual fetish abuse animals, there are exceptions.
▬▬▬▬

Who is to say it is a positive thing though? You can condition the animal to go through the motions, but it is simply impossible to know if it is pleasure, desire for attention, conditioning, or a number of other things.

Are you against people teaching dog harmless tricks? Yes or NO? Explain if you answer Yes.

It does matter. If it is conditioned, then it means the human was taking advantage of the dog. And because animals do not speak, there is no way of telling.

So you are against a girl teaching his dog to lick her down there with peanut butter? Yes or NO?

But again it comes down to having your animal spayed or neutered. It is the responsible thing to do, and in some places it is mandatory. It prevents the spreading of disease, keeps the population in check and prevents the needless death of countless animals, and the animal will live a full and healthy life.

Did you read this link? http://www.neutering.org

Learned helplessness is when you have failed to escape an unpleasurable stimuli in the past enough times that in future instances you will not try to avoid it. You simple wait for it and let it happen. My dog lowers her head and trembles, but she could escape, but she has been conditioned to learn she can't escape. She doesn't want it, but she stands there and would just let it happen if it was comming.

My point is learned helplessness is not equal to consent, like you and fallingblood are trying to proof.

Learned helplessness is the dog failing to run from something he does not like, dogs still have other signs to show they don't consent to something other than running, they can: bite, growl, show fangs, raise the hairs of the back, bark, use the tail, the body, the ears, the eyes, even if the dog does not run he can show hes not consenting to be beaten. A human that does something to a dog ignoring those signs is indeed a rapist. Not all people Ignore those signs, some people respect the dog opinion.

It is VERY possible that given that dogs were not designed to receive a human penis, it hurts them, and after so many times it becomes learned helplessness.

Yes... Sadly dogs have learned helplessness from human rapist. (still they show other signs of not consenting to have sex with the human)

BTW an english mastiff penis is 11 inches long and 2.5 inches thick and have a knot about the size of an orange in the base of the penis (that also goes inside the b¡tch) and those numbers can go up and down by 2 inches (bell curve)

The average human penis is 4.5 to 7 inches long and 1 to 2.5 inches thick.

Breeds of 50 pounds or bigger have penises larger and thicker than the average human so b¡tches of those breed normally don't have problems accommodating humans.

PS: Seems that you only think in male humans inserting penis on holes, there're also zoosexual girls, and other acts that are not so likely to be abusive like giving or receiving oral sex, giving or receiving kisses, cuddling or hugging or masturbating the dog or letting the male dog be the active partner of the relationship.

You sure we can't tempt you back to the dark side (Humans)

I do find humans cute (girls more than guys) like I find a baby seal cute, but sexually attractive? Not really.
Maybe if the human is on 4 legs dressed with a furry dog suit and making doggy sounds and he smelling like a dog... it could fool my brain enough to make my equipment work.

Now this is my what I'm attracted too, from 1 to 10, this girl is an 11.
Siberian_Husky_by_kstill93.jpg
d119.jpg
 
Last edited:

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Are you against people teaching dog harmless tricks? Yes or NO? Explain if you answer Yes.
No. It is like teaching a child to speak, eat, talk, or whatever.

So you are against a girl teaching his dog to lick her down there with peanut butter? Yes or NO?
I am very much against such an action. The very thought of such an action has never even crossed my mind.

Now this is my what I'm attracted too, from 1 to 10, this girl is an 11.
Poor puppy.
 

Alusky

Dog lover
"Are you against people teaching dog harmless tricks? Yes or NO? Explain if you answer Yes."
No. It is like teaching a child to speak, eat, talk, or whatever.
▬▬▬▬
"So you are against a girl teaching his dog to lick her down there with peanut butter? Yes or NO?"
I am very much against such an action. The very thought of such an action has never even crossed my mind.

And you just proof that you have double standards.

You have no problem with a human teaching a harmless trick to a dog, but if the harmless trick is sexual, you are against it.

Answer me, do you think is OK to discriminate against something based on double standards? Yes or NO, explain if you say YES.


Poor puppy.

It is a sexually, mentally, physically mature adult dog, she is not a puppy.
Seriously... even a child can see the difference between a puppy and an adult dog, Fact: adults dogs are not puppies or human children.
Husky_Puppy.jpg
 
Last edited:

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
"Are you against people teaching dog harmless tricks? Yes or NO? Explain if you answer Yes."

▬▬▬▬
"So you are against a girl teaching his dog to lick her down there with peanut butter? Yes or NO?"


And you just proof that you have double standards.

You have no problem with a human teaching a harmless trick to a dog, but if the harmless trick is sexual, you are against it.

Answer me, do you think is OK to discriminate against something based on double standards? Yes or NO, explain if you say YES.
So it would be alright for me to teach a young girl how to do sexual tricks for my own pleasure then? Hey, it's completely harmless, and by what you just said, that is perfectly alright.
 

Alusky

Dog lover
So it would be alright for me to teach a young girl how to do sexual tricks for my own pleasure then? Hey, it's completely harmless, and by what you just said, that is perfectly alright.

And how is a young girl equal to an adult dog? I never mention puppies in my examples. Adults are sexually, mentally and physically mature, your young girl is not.

And harmless? Studies have proved there's a high chance of mental problems in minors, even if the sex was harmless.
 
Top