Why Should Bestiality Be Against The Law?

[Saint Frankenstein]

A general approval for bestiality (actually beastiality it is) should never be given, no woman should allow an animal to mount her as it is insult to humanity. But a man having sex with a female dog or a female horse may be permitted as long as the animal is not subjected to force as these two animals have long been associated with human society and have been domesticated for ages.

Sounds like you have a very twisted view of sex. If a man can have sex with a female dog or horse, it's fine for a woman to have sex with a male dog or horse.

Maybe you're insecure? Are you afraid that she'll like the dog or horse better than human males? Lol.

 

[tatygirl90]

Because the animal can't give its consent. I mean what's hard to understand about that? The animal can't tell you if it wants it or not or if it's even enjoying it. Just no.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Because the animal can't give its consent. I mean what's hard to understand about that? The animal can't tell you if it wants it or not or if it's even enjoying it. Just no.

They are not able to give "legal consent" but they can give forms of personal consent by exhibiting mating behavior. They also will attack you if they're not in the mood. When an animal doesn't want to be bothered, they make it quite clear.

 

[Skwim]

A general approval for bestiality (actually beastiality it is) should never be given, no woman should allow an animal to mount her as it is insult to humanity. But a man having sex with a female dog or a female horse may be permitted as long as the animal is not subjected to force as these two animals have long been associated with human society and have been domesticated for ages.

Just an FYI.

"beastiality
A common way to incorrectly spell bestiality.

Sexual intercourse involving a human and a lower animal."
source
​

 

[Willamena]

They are not able to give "legal consent" but they can give forms of personal consent by exhibiting mating behavior.

It's not consent.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It's not consent.

Care to elaborate? How is a horny male animal that's not drugged or under any sort of duress mounting a human a lack of consent in the practical sense? They're not like humans with all of our vagaries. If they don't want to do something, they let you know and are equipped with fangs and claws (or hooves and horns, etc).

 

[Parsimony]

I imagine she means that it is not "proper" consent because animals are unable to completely understand the consequences of their actions relative to adult humans.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I imagine she means that it is not "proper" consent because animals are unable to completely understand the consequences of their actions relative to adult humans.

Well, that's a bad argument. Animals don't exactly show restraint in their sexual behaviors in the first place. They force themselves on each other and breed exponentially without a care in the world.

If a behavior can't be shown to be objectively harmful, there is no objective argument against it.

 

[McBell]

I imagine she means that it is not "proper" consent because animals are unable to completely understand the consequences of their actions relative to adult humans.

Wait, so "proper consent" is only obtained when people "completely understand the consequences"?

A rather interesting conundrum such a claim presents, don't you think?

 

[Parsimony]

Wait, so "proper consent" is only obtained when people "completely understand the consequences"?

A rather interesting conundrum such a claim presents, don't you think?

Or, at least, are capable of understanding the consequences. Or so that's what I figured Willamena was implying. I may have read too much into her statement, however.

 

[Valjean]

Aren't the degrading social implications of non-consensual sex a human cultural artifact? If the animal is not harmed and is unaware that the human "assault" is considered a massive insult by modern westerners, how much harm is actually done?

It's perfectly acceptable to kill an animal, to enslave it for labor, or to torture it in a medical laboratory. How is non-forced sex any different? How is even forced sex any different from forced riding, plowing, shearing or hunting, if no physical or psychic harm results?

And this is just pertaining to human on top sex. Male animals having their way with humans would seem even more ambiguous.

 

[McBell]

Aren't the degrading social implications of non-consensual sex a human cultural artifact? If the animal is not harmed and is unaware that the human "assault" is considered a massive insult by modern westerners, how much harm is actually done?

It's perfectly acceptable to kill an animal, to enslave it for labor, or to torture it in a medical laboratory. How is non-forced sex any different? How is even forced sex any different from forced riding, plowing, shearing or hunting, if no physical or psychic harm results?

And this is just pertaining to human on top sex. Male animals having their way with humans would seem even more ambiguous.

um...
because sex with animals activates the "gross" reflex, where as those you mention do not?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Aren't the degrading social implications of non-consensual sex a human cultural artifact? If the animal is not harmed and is unaware that the human "assault" is considered a massive insult by modern westerners, how much harm is actually done?

It's perfectly acceptable to kill an animal, to enslave it for labor, or to torture it in a medical laboratory. How is non-forced sex any different? How is even forced sex any different from forced riding, plowing, shearing or hunting, if no physical or psychic harm results?

And this is just pertaining to human on top sex. Male animals having their way with humans would seem even more ambiguous.

Yeah, it's one of those things that makes no sense. We torture millions and millions of animals to death every year in slaughterhouses, killing them in the most brutal and horrific ways, but we are disgusted by the notion of people having sex with animals and wish to ban it period. Humans are weird and messed up.

 

[Pegg]

can animals consent?

 

[Badran]

Animals can consent or not consent to sex with each other. They're selective in choosing their mates, and they are usually quite capable of showing unmistakable signs in regards to that consent. The only difference is that our mental capabilities allow us to weigh in certain considerations animals are not capable of considering.

So that is what the issue should be revolving around in my view; what consequences are there for the act on the animal, and on humans. Based on that, issues like morality and legality can be addressed. We can consider for example possible diseases, possible harm done to some animals due to disproportion in size between the human and the animal, and other possible harms and effects to the act.

On the other hand, appeals of rape and victimization claims towards the animals have little credibility in my eyes, considering the above and considering the double standards that are often accompanying such claims.

 

[Tiberius]

Damn this thread was fun.

 

[Skwim]

Damn this thread was fun.

It was fun to be part of. I certainly didn't think it would get anywhere near 500 posts.

.