Zoophiles should stand by other zoos. We're all in this together against the ignorant world. I think kkllee has done a great job at trying to help us and we should respect him/her. Zoophiles are alone and we need all the in-group support we can muster and only offer encouraging and helpful constructive criticism of things rather than just criticism. For every one thing that you find that isn't good you should find two that are good about that thing. If you are not a part of the solution then you are part of the problem. Zoophiles DESERVE positive public recognition and acceptance in the general society and this is my dream and I don't see ANY reason why this can't become a reality. Yes, it will get worse before it gets better but it is of the utmost best character that we begin the war. Non-zoos do not have the right to regard zoophiles IGNORANTLY in the ways that they do but if we do not stand up for ourselves then we deserve to sleep in the bed we have SETTLED for.
/r/zoophilia archive
All he's done is post incomprehensibly inane articles dictating how we should act in order to be accepted by society. Its arrogant, rude, unwelcoming, and certainly not something someone would post as their first interaction with a community. Societal change does not happen quickly, and its certainly not going to be helped by anyone presenting a list of rules and saying "heres how we agree to act, now love us". Not to mention the problem arises that everyone is different, and there will not be any one set of rules that everyone would live by. At the very best its simply a stupid idea, and at worst, arrogant, an attempt to inflate his own ego, and unproductive. Zoophiles dont have to be alone, i have met more wonderful zoophiles over the last few months that i consider to be closer than family. Kkllee has no interest in being a friend of zoos, he merely wants to act as a mediator between a persecuted group and the law, and bring us to justice. His methodology is flawed, crass, and beyond stupid. I think many would prefer if he stayed out of our way.
To go on what he said, kkllee is simply not an expert by any means in zoophilia. I am aware you are a newish user here, but in his last post for example, he was unaware of what a knot was and even suggested surgical removal of it in order to meet the standards of his proposed "rules." I agree somebody could take the stand and make something at some point, but not kkllee and not at this point in the game.
Yes! I'm not sure if he's a zoophile or not, but what is clear is that he has very little real knowledge of the subject. Yet he feels perfectly qualified to propose "guidelines" to us (and to animals, and to aliens!) on what behavior is and isn't acceptable. It's arrogant and ridiculous.
He told me he isn't a zoophile. He's more like a plushophile.. But perhaps what he is doing isn't meant arrogantly. Perhaps he is just trying to help the world in his own strange way. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, you know :o)
What you said here seems to be fair. Obviously we shouldn't stick our necks out to do anything in the real world until we feel good and prepared to make any move
Knot removal... what. The. Fuck.
I'm sorry if he offends you so much. And I certainly don't know him personally. But I've seen the guidelines that he recently posted.
Why would it not be good to address some of the fears that non-zoos have about zoophiles? For instance, fears such as them thinking that zoophilia is inherently animal abuse or that zoophiles are just pervy individuals who sexually abuse and don't care about the welfare of their animals. Zoophilia is not a topic which is commonly discussed in the open public in a serious way. And because of this I think it is natural for many non-zoos to have negative suspicions about zoophiles. Wouldn't it be a good idea to help the public get past their initial aversion to zoophilia by first addressing the fears and how they are irrational?
I think the only way anti-bestiality laws can be created is if bestiality can be said to be inherently abusive to animals so I think it is logical that that is what we need to nip in the bud to have any hope of staying legal.
I don't know maybe it really is demonizing zoophiles by having to have some kind of "guide" for us.. But if you try to romance with non-humans it is a whole other can of worms as far as rules go as far as what's right and what isn't. I don't want to hurt an animal, physically, mentally or emotionally. But I must say that I don't exactly know the full extent of thoughts that non-humans animals have. What if they have important thoughts and feelings that they can't communicate through using body language to humans. I feel that non-humans are somewhat mysterious so am I bad for being overly cautious in regards to how non-humans may feel about my zoophilia? I believe that animals are conscious beings but I don't know if I can say that I definitely know how they think and what their worldview is.
In other words I'm not afraid of people criticizing my zoophilia. As long as the criticism is based in logic and rationality. Of course I need friends and acceptance but if you feel I'm really doing something wrong or immoral then please tell me about it and then we can proceed with an intellectual dialogue about that. But I am grappling with the nuances of this rather difficult sexuality as well. I desire to romance with an individual of another species.... This is a completely different creature from the creature that I am. They can't speak as I do. There are many ways in which we are quite different from each other. In a way this is a very romantic aspect about zoophilia but at the same time are we too different to be able to have a real romance outside of just my own desire/fantasy/perception/imagination? Are we "really together" (emotionally, mentally) or is it more a reflection of my own wishes to connect to a vastly different being to whom I experience some emotional attraction and can acknowledge the physical beauty of.
I have engaged in multiple fronts on reddit in an attempt to combat those kinds of ideals before. Most people were surprisingly reasonable, however, there are also those who are the stereotypical hatemailers, and I know myself and at least one other person received mail asking us to kill ourselves. These kinds of people will never listen and its simply not worth the time. People get immediately defensive if you rush in and tell them how they are all completely wrong about a subject and its only likely to cause a larger divide.
Anti bestiality bills are a poor representation of public attitude because they are often used for quick political gain. drafting a bill that the public obviously wont disapprove of, yet not doing anything productive. any politician who opposes does so at their careers peril.
There are no rules that are set for normal sex and acknowledging that we need any in the first place is an acknowledgement that we need help determining whats right and wrong. kkllee, certainly is not the person who should be telling us what to do, given his clear lack of knowledge on the subject.
Hm... I'm not sure I agree with that. Legally we have laws that apply to normal sex covering various aspects of consent. Non-legally different groups and organizations create rules to cover aspects of normal sex that the local laws don't cover.
I don't think applying similar rules to bestiality would be an indication at all that zoophiles have trouble grasping what's right and wrong. If done correctly (and not by someone with no knowledge of animal anatomy and who insists on including aliens) there could be laws that would keep bestiality legal while not permitting unethical acts. It actually would even be possible to add protections for animals against unethical sex acts without even mentioning bestiality.
And yeah, anti-bestiality bills are often influenced by loud minorities rather than public opinion. While, generally, public opinion is negative, there's a very large percentage who are neutral, or else believe it's wrong, but don't care if there's a law.
I agree to an extent. There should be laws in place that dictate what counts as animal rape and the like in order to properly punish those who harm their animals for pleasure. However, that is not what kkllee is suggesting. He appears to be suggesting that we should live by these rules in order to appease the government and make our love lives legal.
Personally, I think the best approach would be strengthening existing animal welfare/cruelty laws. For instance including sedating or drugging animals without medical purpose as cruelty, or classifying the involvement of an animal in an action with failure to minimize risk as neglect. That way animals can be protected without ever putting zoophilia on the table.
[deleted]
Appeal to conspiracy
Big money in animals, really? who is gaining money by keeping zoophilia illegal? If anything is an untouched market opportunity.
Please explain how these guidelines don't protect animals.
[deleted]
Because you know, illegal stuff it's the best stuff.
I just can't grasp why you actually don't seem to care to be considered an outlaw.
Not only that, you fail time and time again, to actually quote the guidelines to prove your point, where is the article that says: "zoophiles should appease the government"?
YES!! This is just what I was thinking! Bestiality should have some rules.. Just like any sex has rules. And it wouldn't mean that zoos have trouble grasping what is moral...
And I also agree perhaps the majority of non-zoos do not really have a problem with what we do other than, "wow that's crazy different but okay different strokes different folks". Perhaps it's a tad more negative than just that but- What is annoying is really just this minority of extreme haters who scream about what we do and go crying to law-makers.
Proposing these verbose, ridiculous "guidelines" does nothing to address anyone's fears. If anything, it makes us look even stranger.
I'm just gonna post here to see if my intrusiveness is truly that bad, maybe I'm missing something here.