Dog Sex Case (+ wider zoophile debate)

I'm curious, who's name means anal sex? Its certainly not mine, since anal, imho, isn't all that much better than vaginal, and I am most certainly not gay. My sn reflects my fondness for the little berry trees that grow in my yard that get you ripped to all shit when you munch them before they fully ripen.

As for the "zoos", I really don't, in the interest in "manners", have a whole lot of desire to explain very much now, since, after all, the truth can be very offensive, but I will say this: the ppl who are offended by these actions are NOT reacting out of ignorance. To think that is, well, ignorant and really just as umm.. dogmatic, perhaps, (not to mention elitist, but we really don't need to go there, do we?) as we may appear to be to some of you. ;)
 
^^^^ What do you really know about it, other than "you stick your wanger in a dog or horse, or it sticks its thing in your pussy or ass"? Not very much, I'm sure, and Googling at this juncture is cheating.

You, of course, are just talking shit at this point to get a reaction, which is trollish--so I'm just going to call you on it. :\
 
bravo-6: in response to your last point about where I am getting my statistics from, suffice to say I have had a chance to speak with someone who knows many zoophiles personally and my contention that zoos are more likely to commit suicide than non-zoos is probably correct.

And in response to my comments about CEP's mods, I was giving them a compliment for their level of patience and professionalism.

The majority of people agree with you that it is morally wrong to have sex with animals. I don't myself claim to know either way.

And if you generalize the "2 girls 1 cup" video to all females, you should probably know that the video is widely believed to be a hoax. I've seen worse than that on the Internet that I am reasonably sure was not a hoax. I'll spare the thread the links. :| The difference between Internet viral videos such as "2 girls, 1 cup" and reality is that 2 girls, 1 cup, is not reflective of reality; it is created solely for shock value. Consider yourself successfully trolled if you were shocked -- that was the creators' intent.

As for "bestiality" porn: harm reduction message for you, that kind of information is illegal to download, but yes, there is a market for it. I don't have any desire to view that content myself; you're a braver man than I to click on the links you Googled. I hope you have a couple firewalls up.

As for the issue as to whether zoophiles are mentally ill: the DSM-IV, although a flawed text in many ways, is the "go-to" book for most American mental health professionals, and it stands for the "Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders". "IV" refers to the Roman Numeral corresponding to its fourth full revision. Zoophilia was eliminated from that revision when that revision was published; as was homosexuality. A broader diagnosis could be made by labeling a psychiatric patient "paraphiliac - not otherwise specified" which basically encompasses any pathological sexual variant that, well, doesn't fall into another category. You can Google the references to "Paraphilia - NOS" if you require further verification. Your wife may have questions about what you're looking up, though. ;)

Mulberryman: the user name "Pooter Intruder" is the reference to anal sex you were seeking. The reference Tobala made was not directed at you. You can continue to enjoy horticulture in peace. :)
 
Last edited:
william1985 said:
This is so disgusting. They obviously has some sort of mental illness.
Click to expand...

Well mental illnesses in a lot of cases are basically deviations from social normality (by which I mean the personality traits, behaviours, opinions, etc held by the majority), so yea, maybe the fact that They engaged in such socially abnormal behaviour could be an indication that They might also have a tendency to deviate from social norms in terms of their mental state.

But the act itself is not a mental illness, or even necessarily the symptom of a mental illness.
 
PooterIntruder said:
^^why would they say that about me because I post on BL? It is nowhere the same as having sex with an animal. Not by a longshot. But I am curious, would you accept your child as a dog fucker?
Click to expand...
If my child is happy I am happy and of course I would accept her/him

If my child is living a relationship with a two legged human being that is a complete lie and they are so depressed that they want to kill themselves?--suicide is not acceptable :)

and
but which is worse..catching your daughter with a joint or learning she tried X..or finding her being fucked by a dog?
Click to expand...
none of the above
 
Last edited:
I don't think this topic is really about bestiality though. anyone who read the zoo thread would (should) realize that this is something entirely different. There was a terrific and enlightening distinction which was made between the two. Calling this bestiality zoophilia is like calling the sex in people porn "making love."
 
If my child is living a relationship with a two legged human being that is a complete lie and they are so depressed that they want to kill themselves?--suicide is not acceptable
Click to expand...

It is a truly sad place to be in in this situation, but the even more sadder thing is the sheer numbers of ppl, ime, who are living in such situations and will often go to any ends to keep the status quo in their relationships. Perhaps the saddest fact of all is that these ppl are not just surviving, but thriving, economically (and thus evolutionarily), and there's nothing anyone other than they themselves can do about it, and, ime, most of these deeply unsatisfied individuals just happen to also be the kind of ppl who download these types of strange porn and other shock value videos.

So maybe it isn't logical to assume that everyone who is interested in this kind of stuff is so deeply troubled, but deeply troubled ppl do seem to be interested in this kind of stuff, and I for one choose to be wary. Frankly, I don't want to live in a world where everybody is allowed to do whatever they want, because, ime, far to many ppl choose to be unhappy and unstable, and that's not good for anyone.

What do I know about it? I know that it is wrong, and that is enough.

...BTW, I didn't watch the 2 girls video. I did start to, just to see what ppl were talking about, but as soon as I saw someone crapping in a cup, that was enough for me to know it was complete garbage that has no place in our decent ociety.
 
Last edited:
No one seems to have thought about the son in this situation... Who finds a video case with their mom in panties on the cover, then proceeds to watch, not just a minute but a full eight minutes of the thing. Then he proceeds to rat her out for it. I'm really surprised he went to the cops actually. The social stigma from having something like that in your family (whether deserved or not) would probably destroy a lot of people.
 
Rated E said:
Well mental illnesses in a lot of cases are basically deviations from social normality (by which I mean the personality traits, behaviours, opinions, etc held by the majority), so yea, maybe the fact that They engaged in such socially abnormal behaviour could be an indication that They might also have a tendency to deviate from social norms in terms of their mental state.

But the act itself is not a mental illness, or even necessarily the symptom of a mental illness.
Click to expand...

Well, true, more or less. It is possible to have more than one psychiatric diagnosis. Many people with paraphilias (even one that is relatively benign, such as a foot fetish) have a high level of anxiety due to such behavior being widely perceived as "abnormal".

powdakilla: see my post at the top of the page where I addressed the issue of the son finding the porn. I agree with you that it was probably not the best thing to rat the mom out; I wouldn't rat out a parent for such a thing. I would probably not even indicate I knew and keep the secret for the rest of my life, but I don't expect that I would be able to have a healthy relationship with the parent going forward. I imagine the same would be true to a lesser degree if I found a video of one of my parents engaged in any sort of porn... yikes. 8o
 
Hell, if I had walked in on my parents in the fucking missionary position, the relationship would have changed forever... ;)
 
Well, shoot, I guess poor Mr. Giggles will be taking in up the bung-tongue tonight, since, hey, everybody's doing it. :p

As for the DSM, I wouldn't worry, I'm sure the that whole section of paraphilia and sexual disorders will be history pretty soon, so y'all can feel free to boink all the squirrels, toasters, sea slugs, mailboxes, tree branches, stop signs, high school mascots, trash cans, spider monkeys, medical cadavers, hood ornaments, whatever floats yer boat, I guess. The world's going to hell anyway, so its all gravy. ...butt-gravy, hehe..
 
I really could care less if someone has sex with a loaf of bread as long as no one else is getting hurt in the process. It continually amazes me at the level of derision assigned to those who choose to step out of the norm. Many of which tend to be treated in much the same way as drug users to be honest. And no, you don't necessarily have to agree with the lifestyle, rather not choose to hinder those who choose to seek it.

Specifically, the zoo lifestyle, I have several very close associates who are practicing Zoos they also happen to be Vets however don't assume that these people are practicing with other people's pets, they treat that relationship the same as a regular MD should. They care enough about animals to care for them in this manner as well as love them enough to carry on what they consider a relationship. Frankly, if the animal isn't being hurt, I'm unsure how this is an issue.
 
Zoophilia is an illness, i could give two shits what some politicized medical organization has to say about it.

While I might be "creeped out" to the point I would discriminate against people having desires, desires are desires and people desire all sorts of things. So i can't harp on that.

What i can harp on is actions. And one must wonder the two different approaches people take to having sex with other less evolved mammals.

One is of coercion where the human takes a submissive or passive role. Basically convincing an animal to perform that action on you. The other approach would be more aggressive, and actually forcefully raping the animal. (beastiality/zoophilia difference).

Basically you're looking at the difference of the coercion of a species who lacks the mental facilities to do understand truly what you're doing (same as pedophilia) vs a rape of a species (same as raping a person). The only difference is the animal doesn't get the negative consequences of said rape (at least not emotional) because of those same lack of human emotion, intellect, spirtuality, morality, and culture.

At the very least you are not recognizing that animal's right to just be, and don't recognize the value of that being's life and are using them as a toy, like you would a dildo.

So it's either sociopathic or predatory in nature. When a grown adult is attempting to convince, not force, but convince a child to perform sexual acts through various forms of manipulation, we see that as predatory. Why? Because is deem children in our social context as not having the ability to make an informed consent to what they're doing. Neither does a non-human animal.

What's the difference in a girl smearing peanut butter on her pussy for a dog (lesser being, non-developed mind compared to a human adult) and me covering my penis in chocolate syrup and getting a child to do it? The consequences of the action may be different, but the approach, the intent and the mental process to perform that action are the same. If all we're worried about is the effects of the action in able to deem it wrong, purely on consequences, then it should be ok if I liked to lick the pussies of infants who would be far too young to ever remember me doing such a thing, shouldn't it? I mean, no one's harmed.

Most people who practice zoophilia, still see their animals as pets and as subordinate. No, not role play subordinate, not mere personality differences, but we treat pets like we do children as well. We consider them our family, or at least many of us do. So what members of our family that we love, cherish and take care of.. also happen to be subordinate to us? That's right, our kids. Our pets are basically perpetual children to us to some extent. So not only is it predatory, but in some cases I would almost consider it incestuous as well.

Are we worried about the effects of the action of coercing, manipulating, or raping? Or are we worried about the mental health, intent, and thought process of the intelligent and grown dominant participant. Me, I kinda worry about both. Also, I kinda have respect for living things to not just use them for my own pleasure.

And I know this is bluelight, where such things as having a moral compass simply does not exist and everyone is willing to accept everyone else's shitty behavior b/c "everyone's special and beautiful" or maybe, just maybe some people here have done too many drugs for too many years, or maybe just maybe, some here are so lonely all they have in the world is to defend screen-names and strangers in news articles who prey on being weaker and less developed than them because their own pathetic lives are so incredibly screwed up that they just reach out to anyone. But me? I think anyone who defends this shit or does it themselves, probably should continue, because your mental facilities aren't much above the canine level anyways.
 
Last edited:
THE RED ACE BANDAGE WRAPPED AROUND THE DOG'S PAWS?!
Yeah that is normal for a dog. I hope she gets the highest penalty possible.
I am revolted. I feel the same about this as pedophila.
 
At the very least you are not recognizing that animal's right to just be, and don't recognize the value of that being's life and are using them as a toy, like you would a dildo.
Click to expand...
Dildos dont have the mental, emotional, or physically capability of having an orgasm. You are assuming that:
1. Zoo's dont love their partners which only shows your ignorance on the subject,
and
2- an animals desire to "just be" does NOT include having sex. They are animals-just like the rest of, they want and deserve to be able to get off IMO

What's the difference in a girl smearing peanut butter on her pussy for a dog (lesser being, non-developed mind compared to a human adult) and me covering my penis in chocolate syrup and getting a child to do it?
Click to expand...
If it were a puppy there would really be no difference. A grown canine however knows what sex is. Most likely they've done it before--and chances are HIGHLY likely that they (gasp) like sex. A child however is not physically or mentally prepared for what sex is until puberty. I take offense to you referring to a child as a "lesser being"

I would like to share a story about a time that an old boyfriend took me to a friends house where there were about 5-7 people. I was the only girl. I sat down on the couch when all of the sudden the home-owner's dog (cant remember the breed but it was medium-sized) came up and started humping the shit out of me. Everyone started laughing until the owner came up and pried the dog away from me.

I felt like I had been raped! But I ask you, if I had pulled down my panties and spread eagle--is that the same as fucking a child??? I dont understand the logic. I'm sure anyone who has ever been around male dogs has seen them hump numerous inanimate objects. So if a girl/guy decides they dont mind being the humpee--how is that not "letting them be"?? How is that equivalent to having sex with a child??


ps As for the ace bandage wrapped around the dogs paws, that does lead me to believe that this couple was possibly engaging more in beastiality than zoophilia. In which case-rape is rape is rape is rape and most definately should be punished
 
..and to think I may have helped stroke this fire, no pun intended (or maybe yes pun intended as I am obviously just a loser who has to resort to propping up his own screen name :p).
 
LoveAlways said:
Dildos dont have the mental, emotional, or physically capability of having an orgasm. You are assuming that:
1. Zoo's dont love their partners which only shows your ignorance on the subject,
and
2- an animals desire to "just be" does NOT include having sex. They are animals-just like the rest of, they want and deserve to be able to get off IMO

If it were a puppy there would really be no difference. A grown canine however knows what sex is. Most likely they've done it before--and chances are HIGHLY likely that they (gasp) like sex. A child however is not physically or mentally prepared for what sex is until puberty. I take offense to you referring to a child as a "lesser being"

I would like to share a story about a time that an old boyfriend took me to a friends house where there were about 5-7 people. I was the only girl. I sat down on the couch when all of the sudden the home-owner's dog (cant remember the breed but it was medium-sized) came up and started humping the shit out of me. Everyone started laughing until the owner came up and pried the dog away from me.

I felt like I had been raped! But I ask you, if I had pulled down my panties and spread eagle--is that the same as fucking a child??? I dont understand the logic. I'm sure anyone who has ever been around male dogs has seen them hump numerous inanimate objects. So if a girl/guy decides they dont mind being the humpee--how is that not "letting them be"?? How is that equivalent to having sex with a child??


ps As for the ace bandage wrapped around the dogs paws, that does lead me to believe that this couple was possibly engaging more in beastiality than zoophilia. In which case-rape is rape is rape is rape and most definately should be punished
Click to expand...

ahh.. i feel so much better knowing that you're pregnant. more people should think like you in this world.

i love bluelight.

rofl@you comparing a dog humping you to rape. you were so violated! you poor thing :( how did you get past the trauma? go post in SLR maybe they will have some sound advice for moving on.

btw, pedos also claim they love their victims too.
 
LoveAlways said:
Dildos dont have the mental, emotional, or physically capability of having an orgasm. You are assuming that:
1. Zoo's dont love their partners which only shows your ignorance on the subject,
and
Click to expand...

I don't agree with circuses b/c i don't believe animals should be ripped from their nature purely for our amusement. I don't believe animals should have been domesticated for pet purposes to begin with, but they were and they are and it's a fact of life and there's no undoing it. So I am simply not going to support using a living, feeling being purely for someone's sexual pleasure.

I also never once said zoophile's don't "love" their animals. They may love them like a subordinate pet or child, they may love them like a pedophile would one of his/her victims, but they sure as hell don't love them as an equal, consenting, thinking adult human being.


2- an animals desire to "just be" does NOT include having sex. They are animals-just like the rest of, they want and deserve to be able to get off IMO
Click to expand...

Animal's (most of them anyways) desire for sex is purely for procreation, few species have sex for joy or out of feelings of what we know of as love. It's purely a function like eating, breathing, sleeping and taking a shit. And people exploit that for their own selfish ends, not because their concerned about the animal's feeling of pleasure during intercourse.

If it were a puppy there would really be no difference. A grown canine however knows what sex is. Most likely they've done it before--and chances are HIGHLY likely that they (gasp) like sex. A child however is not physically or mentally prepared for what sex is until puberty. I take offense to you referring to a child as a "lesser being"
Click to expand...

No a grown canine doesn't know what sex is, neither does a puppy. They have no conceptual knowledge of it period, it's simply a function that they perform based off hormones and instinct. While I'm no expert, I would also fathom that the instinct has been somewhat modified through the domestication process which affects their actions with their human owners when they're in heat.

I would like to share a story about a time that an old boyfriend took me to a friends house where there were about 5-7 people. I was the only girl. I sat down on the couch when all of the sudden the home-owner's dog (cant remember the breed but it was medium-sized) came up and started humping the shit out of me. Everyone started laughing until the owner came up and pried the dog away from me.

I felt like I had been raped! But I ask you, if I had pulled down my panties and spread eagle--is that the same as fucking a child??? I dont understand the logic. I'm sure anyone who has ever been around male dogs has seen them hump numerous inanimate objects. So if a girl/guy decides they dont mind being the humpee--how is that not "letting them be"?? How is that equivalent to having sex with a child??
Click to expand...

Like I stated above, there is probably something to their instincts becoming warped through a domestication process. I've had dogs jump on my arm or leg before, and no I wasn't raped. They simply do not have conceptual knowledge of what they are doing. To coerce them into that, like I stated before, requires a predatory or sociopathetic mental process from the adult human being.

They were not put on this earth (whether you believe in creation or evolution) for us to get our jollies. I never said harm comes from zoophilia, I also stated harm does not come from me licking the pussy of an infant too young to remember it ever being done to her. I'm saying it is wrong because of the predatory and self indulgent nature of the action.
 
sooo... let me boil down the gist of all this, imle & imho: there are 2 (two) prevailing opinions here:

A. This an abomination uner God, an assault on science and a contamination of the human genome, and,

B. Someone fucked a bunny rabbit, Oh, my God, someone call the fire brigade! :)p)
 
..oh, and those poor, poor doggies.. ..yes, yes, yes, they eat them in China, you know, which is the least of those H.erectuses* **(problems / genetic inscription errors).

*PS, I fully expect a warning for this blatantly racist statement, so somebody better get on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top