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
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)
