we need to further separate zoophilia from bestiality.

I didn't see where anyone here has shown much tolerance towards the guy who was the reason this went to the canadian supreme court. As far as I can see the lack of vocal opposition comes from people not including people like him in "the community" in the first place.

Well, technically it isn´t wrong to link bestiality to violent behavior.

It is wrong, in how it is often presented. That's why I was surprised to get a more elaborate version here:

Hearing about these cases, you may think that the link between the abuse of humans and animals incidental -- that abusers simply choose many ways to express those tendencies. In fact, several research studies conducted across North America confirm that the co-occurrence of these crimes represents an established pattern that is known as The Violence Link.

You can purge everyone you don't like from the community as much as you want, she will still not acknowledge that people like you exist.

instead of being just a bunch of delusional, self centered fuckheads

I think you only speak for yourself there.

Fuck "tolerance"!

How about no?

I don't know what fantasy realm you live in 30-30, but nearly none of these news cases I read about have people active in this "community" you seem so eager to cleanse.

Unless you all finally realise that the criticism from the antis isn´t just totally made up and drawn out of the blue

Hahaha. Let's look at the article's comments.

Some actually scientifically make no difference between humans and animals, and it is impossible to get them to think otherwise. When you cross that line, then I guess it is easier to lose your human decency. And this way of thinking (humans are animals) is spreading, then we wonder why abnormal sexual behavior is on the rise too, and more accepted, even encouraged by some media people, like that article about how we should enjoy sodomy (anal sex), published by this very site...And don't forget, if some animal sodomise each other, then it's a scientific proof that it's a sane sexual activity...

SCIENCE BAD! ANAL SEX BAD! BESTIALITY BAD! JESUS GOOD!

All sexual interference. Sexual touching, oral sex, all of it. Focusing solely on penetration leaves out a lot of damaging and exploitative behaviours that harm animals.

Except when it's done in the context of meat/dairy production. Or breeding of animals. Basically, if money is involved, it's okay. The act isn't the problem. The intention behind the act is.

Lumping animals and children together bothers you, Dave Jones. Why is this..let's look at how they are similair..children in most casses can not speak for themselves in regards to abuse, animals can not speak out about their abuse, both are in positions of trust believing the people who are to protect them will keep them safe when they don't, evidence is needed since the court does not go by words, both are vulnerable in our society. I see no different between the two actually.

... In other words, animals = dogs. And not even all dogs, it seems. Let's just ignore all the animals forced in containment so we can harvest their produce, slaughter them for food, test pharmaceuticals on them... Let's ignore animals forced to work for us, often in deplorable conditions and often risking their lives in the process. Let's ignore how society as a whole views animals as mere objects of property. Let's ignore that every aspect of their lives (down to the integrity of their biological mechanisms) is completely in the hands of their owner, for good or bad. There is indeed no different [sic] between children and animals.

Don't get me wrong, I am highly doubtful of a lot of self-proclaimed zoophiles' motives. But yes, the majority of the criticism of "anti-zoos" is absolute bullshit. The average "anti" is named Linda, is in her thirties, lives in the suburbs, is a soccer mom, owns a neutered Golden Retriever bought from the pet store and was raised by Disney movies to see animals as perpetual children. She considers herself an "animal activist" despite eating meat daily, raising her children to do the same, encouraging puppy mills, buying fur articles from China made from animals skinned alive, feeds her pet Beneful on a daily basis... She does not have the presence of mind to take a position on an issue unless the media brings her attention to it. Even then, the only action she will ever accomplish is writing a message on facebook about how it's sooooo wrong to kill wolves or how her precious fur baby is compromised by evil bestialists.

Linda is an "anti." I don't concern myself with her, and neither should anyone here.

And who do you propose should be in charge of this ethnic ethical cleansing? Anyone who nominates themselves or who wants to be in charge should immediately be disqualified IMO, as they clearly don't understand the implications of what they would want to do.

What metric should be in place to judge others in a manner that could never be exploited? By what process should it be created? What's to stop someone from being a petty shithead and fabricating evidence against someone they had a disagreement with?

Fill the zeta rules with life! Don´t use them as cheap excuses. These rules have been invented for a reason...and it´s not to dismiss any sexual adventurousness, but to ensure we zoophiles have a steady moral fundament to argue from.

Creating a set of rules to govern everyone isn't required to not be abusive. What is the end goal of these "rules" anyway? Anyone who violates a rule can't call themselves a zoophile? Yeah, good luck with that.

cucks

don't

only logically leads to raping children, obviously

I actually read the whole article before scrolling up again and seeing that it was written by Barbara Cartwright, CEO of the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, then it all made sense. Every single time I've seen any utterance from the humane society on the topic it has been highly opiniated and was light on facts. For some reason they seem to have the most trouble grasping simple concepts there.