Oh look, they are declaring victory after jumping on the bandwagon late, suppressing any information except their own lies and having a law passed that was a forgone conclusion. I'd giggle snort if it wasn't so sad.
But I guess us rapists (the first two lines of the story are classic propaganda) just don't know any better.
OriDog 6 points on 2015-04-23 11:47:53
Aaaaand this is why I stopped looking at any news involving zoophilia/bestiality. I get so annoyed at how people can make blanket statements/judgements about such a complex thing.
Now back to not clicking news articles anymore.
Yearningmice 4 points on 2015-04-23 12:08:58
A zoo I recognize is in the comments and would be a good read, a fairly comprehensive take down of the statements. The problem is that there are so many half-truths and unbelievable statements that are uncritically accepted by the interviewer, almost too many to refute.
OriDog 4 points on 2015-04-23 12:33:38
Thank goodness someone can be bothered trying to have a sensible reply to the interview.
I hadn't made it all the way through the interview as I really don't like hearing ignorant people masturbate each other's ill-informed views so I didn't see the comment about tits... Obviously the person they are interviewing has no idea what zoophilia is!! So now I'm even more pissed off, so that's annoying...
HeartBeatOfTheBeastHoof and Claw 3 points on 2015-04-23 14:20:46
This statement they made is complete BS: "Regardless of physical harm, is emotional harm possible to gauge? In what study were these tests conducted, where sex with an animal occurred and physical harm was not detected?"
zootrashcandoggy doodle dandy 3 points on 2015-04-23 17:08:10
In answer to that question, yes, it is possible to gauge or estimate emotional harm. Emotions cause the release of hormones and chemicals that can be measured. You can measure the levels of cortisol in urine after a sexual act and compare them to levels after natural mating and AI.
furvert_tailEquine, large canid 7 points on 2015-04-23 18:26:13
I've thought about this a while ago. Cortisol and oxytocin both, so it can be seen if it's stressful, pleasurable, or neither. Trouble is, you also need to run a whole bunch more experiments to make absolutely sure that those hormones correlate reliably with stressful or pleasant situations, and you have to justify why those situations are pleasant or stressful for a wildly alien mind without referencing those hormones or your own biases — we enjoy fireworks and hate poo, dogs are widely believed to experience the reverse from their behaviour.
I'd been hoping to help fund research into this in… well, in Denmark.
zootrashcandoggy doodle dandy 3 points on 2015-04-23 18:49:47
What I would think is comparing the levels of those hormones with and without sexual input and include different kinds of sexual input like semen collection/artificial insemination, natural mating, and bestiality. Including natural mating would indicate whether or not the levels of hormones are standard for all sexual activity or are influenced by the human element.
Also the dogs could be filmed both before, during, and after sexual activity to be examined for visual and aural signs of stress.
To account for differences in reactions caused by training, housing, how new the dog is to the contact, and other factors, dog owners would be given an extensive survey on any outside influencing factors that could alter the results.
It might be possible to do a study like this in a state it is legal, such as New Jersey or New Hampshire. Getting participants would be difficult though.
YesIloveDogsDags 3 points on 2015-04-23 18:38:25
Correct me if im wrong, but i dont think a twitter campaign results in official laws. Denmark was already considering this ban, im pretty sure anonymous is responsible for none of the "victory"
zootrashcandoggy doodle dandy 3 points on 2015-04-23 19:01:56
Yup, they announced it back in October. While the op is apparently a year old, it only gained visibility recently.
zootrashcandoggy doodle dandy 3 points on 2015-04-23 19:04:39
Oh hey, they're now posting images of dismembered human beings. I'm sure that's within Twitter's rules.
Battlecropsdogs, cats, snakes, ungulates 6 points on 2015-04-23 20:07:44
One of the "look how horrible bestiality is!!" images I saw floating around on twitter was a bitch strapped on a breeding stand, which is, of course, used in plain ol' dog breeding. I highly doubt any of their example pictures of animals are even bestiality cases. Several popular ones have already been disproven and attributed to other things.
zootrashcandoggy doodle dandy 3 points on 2015-04-24 01:17:58
The only one I know is a real bestiality case is the dog in bondage. Apparently the guy who did that was busted by a zoophile.
furvert_tailEquine, large canid 3 points on 2015-04-23 20:53:25
Really? Oh boy, this is now as dumb as the anti witchcraft lobby when Buffy was still on air...
/r/zoophilia archive
Oh look, they are declaring victory after jumping on the bandwagon late, suppressing any information except their own lies and having a law passed that was a forgone conclusion. I'd giggle snort if it wasn't so sad.
But I guess us rapists (the first two lines of the story are classic propaganda) just don't know any better.
Aaaaand this is why I stopped looking at any news involving zoophilia/bestiality. I get so annoyed at how people can make blanket statements/judgements about such a complex thing.
Now back to not clicking news articles anymore.
A zoo I recognize is in the comments and would be a good read, a fairly comprehensive take down of the statements. The problem is that there are so many half-truths and unbelievable statements that are uncritically accepted by the interviewer, almost too many to refute.
Thank goodness someone can be bothered trying to have a sensible reply to the interview.
I hadn't made it all the way through the interview as I really don't like hearing ignorant people masturbate each other's ill-informed views so I didn't see the comment about tits... Obviously the person they are interviewing has no idea what zoophilia is!! So now I'm even more pissed off, so that's annoying...
This statement they made is complete BS: "Regardless of physical harm, is emotional harm possible to gauge? In what study were these tests conducted, where sex with an animal occurred and physical harm was not detected?"
In answer to that question, yes, it is possible to gauge or estimate emotional harm. Emotions cause the release of hormones and chemicals that can be measured. You can measure the levels of cortisol in urine after a sexual act and compare them to levels after natural mating and AI.
I've thought about this a while ago. Cortisol and oxytocin both, so it can be seen if it's stressful, pleasurable, or neither. Trouble is, you also need to run a whole bunch more experiments to make absolutely sure that those hormones correlate reliably with stressful or pleasant situations, and you have to justify why those situations are pleasant or stressful for a wildly alien mind without referencing those hormones or your own biases — we enjoy fireworks and hate poo, dogs are widely believed to experience the reverse from their behaviour.
I'd been hoping to help fund research into this in… well, in Denmark.
What I would think is comparing the levels of those hormones with and without sexual input and include different kinds of sexual input like semen collection/artificial insemination, natural mating, and bestiality. Including natural mating would indicate whether or not the levels of hormones are standard for all sexual activity or are influenced by the human element.
Also the dogs could be filmed both before, during, and after sexual activity to be examined for visual and aural signs of stress.
To account for differences in reactions caused by training, housing, how new the dog is to the contact, and other factors, dog owners would be given an extensive survey on any outside influencing factors that could alter the results.
It might be possible to do a study like this in a state it is legal, such as New Jersey or New Hampshire. Getting participants would be difficult though.
Correct me if im wrong, but i dont think a twitter campaign results in official laws. Denmark was already considering this ban, im pretty sure anonymous is responsible for none of the "victory"
Yup, they announced it back in October. While the op is apparently a year old, it only gained visibility recently.
Oh hey, they're now posting images of dismembered human beings. I'm sure that's within Twitter's rules.
One of the "look how horrible bestiality is!!" images I saw floating around on twitter was a bitch strapped on a breeding stand, which is, of course, used in plain ol' dog breeding. I highly doubt any of their example pictures of animals are even bestiality cases. Several popular ones have already been disproven and attributed to other things.
The only one I know is a real bestiality case is the dog in bondage. Apparently the guy who did that was busted by a zoophile.
Really? Oh boy, this is now as dumb as the anti witchcraft lobby when Buffy was still on air...