Why is zoophilia condemned and homosexuality not? Watch

This discussion is closed.
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#201
Report 7 years ago
#201
(Original post by Stefan1991)

So animals CAN consent with animals of the same species.
But they CAN'T consent with humans.

No concept on consent in the animal kingdom, it is their nature to mate with one another in same species, it is not with humans. Consent is a term thought up by humans. Clearly. Unintelligent silly person you are.

You are telling me animals are completely oblivious to the fact they are having sex? How exactly more informed do they need to be? They are stimulating sexual organs for pleasure. That's all there is to it.

Oblivious? Did i say they were oblivious? no. Maybe you need to practice reading some more. The sex is just fulfilling an urge. Therew is no thought process put in to it.

(P.s. they do not do it for pleasure, if YOU knew anything about animals you would know this, hardly any animals have been thought to have sex for pleasure)


How exactly are they "informed" when they are having sex with their own species, but not "informed" enough when they choose to have sex with humans?

Same species = natural, done throughout time, sunk in to their minds and biology. It is natural for them to have sex with the same species, it isn't with humans. Thus extra thought process's are needed, they do not possess the ability to do this.

If it is your opinion that apparently animals aren't intelligent enough to make a choice about whether to have sex with a human, why can they consent with their own species?

They do not 'consent' to same species.. there is no theoretical term of 'consent'. Animals are not known to rape. The sex they have is just a normal instinct, an urge, there is no 'hmm shall i do this or not, what will be the repercussions if i do'. The choice of having sex wuth a human requires a full understanding of what is happening, they do not have this, so ignoring it you complete buffoon.

Many animals are perfectly capable of communicating with humans, I need water, I need food, I need sex.

In your mind a full system of communication only needs this? Great logic there. Communication has nothing to do with any other rational thinking, logical thinking or 'discussions' .. just food water and sex.. just .. wow. your an idiot.

That is EXACTLY how animals think. What are you talking about 'pure instinct' as if that's a completely different thing?

Most animals do not have sex for pleasure, dolphins and pigs are some of the only (if not THE only) animals thought to have sex for pleasure. Scientific fact.
Full of complete idiotic rambling like usual. Completely unscientific opinions that ignore basic common sense. But i tried to trawl through your pathetic post.

I'm all for opinions on both sides of this topic, but the way your doing it is just a complete and utter fail.

Keep your idiotc posts coming, it's really a funny read :rolleyes:
0
niall c
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#202
Report 7 years ago
#202
(Original post by 101flyboy)
There is no such thing as a natural negative reaction towards homosexuality. That is not in nature and therefore unnatural, especially since many heterosexuals do not have this reaction. It's a disorder of the mind.
(Original post by 101flyboy)
Homophobia by definition is an irrational constant personal state of being. Which makes it a disorder.
(Original post by 101flyboy)
It would be an irrational statement, and therefore not a credible one.
(Original post by 101flyboy)
Bestiality is known to cause harm in many ways, psychological as well as physical. There is a reason it's considered a paraphilia.

Homosexuality is not an issue whatsoever, so that's why fewer people are making an issue of it.
(Original post by 101flyboy)
Actually, this entire debate is based on a position that is untenable. So therefore, that's just the way it is is merely a statement in fact, that reality is what it is, and you simply can't change it to suit you.
Your level of ignorance is truly astounding. I applaud you.

I can just imagine you in a nineteenth-century British forum loudly and dumbly shouting 'Masturbation is known to cause harm in many ways psychological as well as physical. There is a reason it's considered a paraphilia', 'Homosexuality by definition is an irrational constant personal state of being. Which makes it a disorder', and 'There is no such thing as natural sex in any position but missionary. That is not in nature and therefore unnatural, especially since many heterosexuals do not have this reaction. It's a disorder of the mind.'

And that's without even considering the sheer stupidity in statements like 'The fact you see most hate crimes committed by those with previous criminal records proves this. It's psychopathic.' Untangling the layers of circular reasoning, non sequiturs and unsubstantiated assumptions in just these two sentences is a task beyond me - very, very impressive. Keep up the good work.
0
Pindar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#203
Report 7 years ago
#203
(Original post by Tommyjw)
Full of complete idiotic rambling like usual. Completely unscientific opinions that ignore basic common sense. But i tried to trawl through your pathetic post.

I'm all for opinions on both sides of this topic, but the way your doing it is just a complete and utter fail.

Keep your idiotc posts coming, it's really a funny read :rolleyes:
:lol:

How about you provide scientific evidence that animals having sex with humans is harmful and we'll get back to you!
0
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#204
Report 7 years ago
#204
(Original post by Stefan1991)
:lol:

How about you provide scientific evidence that animals having sex with humans is harmful and we'll get back to you!
And i said it was harmful when exactly?

Please stop posting random and just plain wrong assumptions and statements in your posts. It's embarrassing.
0
Fusilero
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#205
Report 7 years ago
#205
(Original post by Stefan1991)
Yes, animals aren't clever enough to decide whether they want sex or not. :rolleyes:
To the vast majority of them, yes. They don't 'decide' as we do, they simply do.

I'd like to point out while I don't condone zoophilia, I also don't condemn it and don't think the state should be outlawing it.
0
cttp_ngaf
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#206
Report 7 years ago
#206
I think I can summarise the main (only) arguments here:

1) It's "unnatural".
2) It's wrong.
3) Humans and animals are not matched in intelligence, so expressions of will/desire/approval from one to the other must be disregarded.
0
imperial maniac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#207
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#207
(Original post by IndigoRockGirl)
I don't see how sex with an animal is sex between two consenting adults, and it does not really occurr in nature, just as cats and dogs don't have sex.
It really does occur:

Exhibit A:

The Mule. Interspecies breeding between a Horse and Donkey, two separate species, and the mule is itself infertile.




Exhibit B: Interspecies breeding between a donkey and a zebra.



And that's only interspecies breeding that is able to produce offspring.
0
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#208
Report 7 years ago
#208
(Original post by imperial maniac)
It really does occur:

And that's only interspecies breeding that is able to produce offspring.
To be fair.. a donkey and a horse.. and a zebra .
A lion, a tiger are examples too.
I think i would fairly accurate in guessing the coupled animals have certain biological and physical similarities that humans & most other animals don't have?

Like i've said before, all for hearing arguments on both side. But saying a human having sex with a dog (for example) is 'ok' because other animals do it, is kinda ridiculous.
0
IndigoRockGirl
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#209
Report 7 years ago
#209
(Original post by imperial maniac)
It really does occur:

Exhibit A:

The Mule. Interspecies breeding between a Horse and Donkey, two separate species, and the mule is itself infertile.




Exhibit B: Interspecies breeding between a donkey and a zebra.



And that's only interspecies breeding that is able to produce offspring.
They're still in the same kind of family though :dontknow:
0
imperial maniac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#210
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#210
(Original post by mevidek)
are you sure you are not a zoophile?
I make a thread asking people to give their opinions about zoophilia having parallels to homosexuality as I noticed the arguments used for homosexuality are similar to the arguments used for zoophilia.

This does not make me a zoophile.
0
imperial maniac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#211
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#211
(Original post by IndigoRockGirl)
They're still in the same kind of family though :dontknow:
So are we and apes.
0
imperial maniac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#212
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#212
(Original post by Implo)
Your the first.
Trying to have a sensible conversation about zoophilia in these forums is like getting water from a stone.
0
Kaykiie
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#213
Report 7 years ago
#213
(Original post by WelshBluebird)
But that isn't showing consent, or a will, to have sex with the person.
Dogs naturally hump anything! Pillows, other dogs, shoes, etc etc. Doesn't mean they want sex with the object / thing.
How do you know that though? The dog can't tell you otherwise so it may well want to have sex with a teddy bear

EDIT: For clarification, I have no sexual urges towards animals :p:
0
IndigoRockGirl
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#214
Report 7 years ago
#214
(Original post by imperial maniac)
So are we and apes.
Good point. I never said it was wrong btw.
0
imperial maniac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#215
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#215
(Original post by Jordenfruitbat)
zoophilia is not comparable to homosexuality in any form, we are not meant to have sex with other animals it is gross.
That is exactly What homophobes say about homosexuality.
1
Jordenfruitbat
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#216
Report 7 years ago
#216
(Original post by imperial maniac)
I make a thread asking people to give their opinions about zoophilia having parallels to homosexuality as I noticed the arguments used for homosexuality are similar to the arguments used for zoophilia.

This does not make me a zoophile.
If you think zoophilia is similiar to homosexuality, you must think it's similar to heterosexuality too? Even though homosexual relationships don't exist to pro create intimacy levels between two humans is very different between a human and an animal, humans have speech, face to face interaction, sexual attraction, zooiphiles have sex because it's a fetish not an orientation I still fail to understand how it's similar to homosexuality.
0
Kaykiie
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#217
Report 7 years ago
#217
(Original post by LethalBizzle)
No they can't. The age of consent is 16. Before then they aren't considered mature enough to give consent, even though they are far more capable than most sheep I've met.
Other countries have younger age of consents though.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, this isn't my opinion :)
0
im so academic.
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#218
Report 7 years ago
#218
(Original post by LethalBizzle)
I'd love to see you in court trying to prove that a horse gave you consent.
If a horse doesn't want to be ****ed by a human, a horse will not be ****ed by a human.
0
BackDoorEntry
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#219
Report 7 years ago
#219
What the....
0
PurpleMonkeyDishwasher
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#220
Report 7 years ago
#220
(Original post by LethalBizzle)
I'd love to see you in court trying to prove that a horse gave you consent.
He'd be all



And the horse would be all



It wouldn't go down well.
1
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (212)
39.41%
No - but I will (38)
7.06%
No - I don't want to (36)
6.69%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (252)
46.84%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed