Possible trouble in the future (self.zoophilia)
submitted 2016-09-19 17:12:11 by Edog91
So some parts of feminism is spreading its self out to female animals now and I fear this could have bad consequences for us and animals in general. Or maybe i am just worrying to much.
I'm sure you're just worrying too much :P It's important that we point out and call out harmful or wrong actions the feminist/social justice crowd take against zoos, but I don't think hand-wringing over something that hasn't really happened yet is a good idea.
wow you shitlord, I for one am against slut shaming of females from all species. just because they are dogs doesn't mean you can dictate what species they can and cant fuck. #beautyinallspecies
Lol u can go fuck your self with your fals accusation, u are exactly what I was worried about trying to push a fals narrative of me slut shaming and dictating there sex partners. Stop reading into nothing or improve you reading comprehension skills.
lols, I thought the sarcasm was obvious. I forgot we're on the internet.
It was obvious, worry not.
Oh sorry I thought u where for real I have been through allot on the internets. I will try and be more light hearted next time
How old are you? You type like you're either a preteen or legitimately mentally disabled.
You're on /r/zoophilia. Everyone is mentally disabled.
Mentally ill, you might say, but far from disabled.
no worries, it was partly my fault, I forgot /r/zoo is serious business ;)
Just because they are dogs doesn't mean they are bitches.
This isn't limited to female animals. One of the main ideological opponents of sex with animals, Carol J. Adams, opposes it along feminist lines, arguing that the historical oppression of animals by human beings is an extension of the patriarchy, and that consent is impossible between species due to this power imbalance. I disagree, since individual animals are unaware of this imbalance in general and, due to domestication, in some sense even thrive because of it. But there is a type of feminism which views animals as an oppressed class, and therefore views all interactions between humans and animals as moral evils to be purged in the pursuit of a better world.
If what they stated were true wouldn't consensual sex with women be impossible as well due to the current "power imbalance?" Just a thought, I don't mean anything by it.
That would be precisely my thought. Any definition of power that doesn't ignore everything but the most basic descriptions (human/nonhuman, male/female, black/white) results in a power imbalance in practically all relationships, thus making interaction between any two creatures on the planet impossible. This is unworkable, at best.
Last time I checked any website/blog/thread that discussed the subject, it was made clear to me that these people are discrediting the feminist movement with their nutjobtery rather than achieving anything else.
Given the current political climate, I think feminists have much bigger issues to face. They will whine about zoophilia, but do nothing about it.
were already almost universally persecuted by society and by law. its not like they can bury us any deeper
Yeah, you´re probably worrying too much... But, on the other hand, quite similar viewpoints to those of the "feminists" are voiced every once in a while from within our own community; every now and then, I run into some "zoophile" claiming that having intercourse with female animals is rape , but intercourse with males isn´t. This "all men are rapists" mindset isn´t exclusively owned by the "feminists"/feminazis.
I truly believe that some of you are already exaggerating again, being a zoophile surely isn´t a thoroughly pleasant experience, but it is far from that blown up imagery of "persecution" by the state. Do I really have to remind you of the fact that ANY so called "zoophile" who got into trouble with state and authorities has done his/her fair share of drawing attention towards them?
We zoos can communicate freely via such sites as r/zoophilia and only the most stupid folks get into trouble by publishing porn or pimping out their animals online. What the hell are you all talking about when yellin´ "persecution"? Don´t record and publish porn, don´t participate in large "zoo" gatherings and meetings, don´t fencehop and you´re all good. Close the doors, draw the curtains and no authority will ever interfere....
Back to "feminists": Am I the only one wondering why so many menopausal women and (sorry for being blatantly open here) underfucked girls participate in these anti groups? Usually, it´s these women voicing the worst castration and killing fantasies on social media platforms when talking about bestiality/zoophilia. Is it some sort of envy? "Those stinkin´ animals get it between the legs while I don´t" Some sort of outlet for their manhate? "Castrate ´em with a rusty nail!" , " Gas ´em, hang ´em, shoot ´em!".
I´m not scared by "feminists" enlarging their ideological battlefield to female animals...I´m more scared by the general direction mankind seems to be headin´ recently. Easy answers for tough and complicated matters...Trump, Duterte, Le Pen, Geert Wilders, The AfD, UKIP ...it seems as if totalitarianism will have its comeback very soon. The feminazis are but a small detail within a much broader picture and you youngsters may get some persecution worthy of complaining about in the near future.
I agree completely with this, but especially the last paragraph. There's some historical context here, but long story short, the Western world hasn't really had enemies worth mentioning since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and even they were clearly on fragile footing for the last thirty years or so of their existence. As such, we've had two or three generations without a defining conflict, with Western values being practically unmatched in terms of success and prosperity.
What this means is that most people don't understand very well what makes our societies work better than others, namely liberal ideals and limited government interference in personal lives. People have become lazy and apathetic to the workings of their countries on a massive scale. This has meant, among other things, the rise of an out of touch and aloof political class, the deregulation of economic systems, and an increasingly fragmented populace concerned with identity politics rather than issues of real importance.
We are living in an age ripe for revolution. Between the insanity of the collectivist left (in particular, the EU and the government of Justin Trudeau in Canada), and the reactionary movements which have risen in opposition to them (UKIP, Trump, far right parties in Germany and France), I would be very surprised if no country in the EU (including Great Britain, during the transition) had a violent revolution in the next 25 years, whether communist, fascist, or some similar collectivist ideology.
I find it a bit ironic to praise the good ol' Western values as a zoophile, but yeah. I agree with this entirely.
It is bizarre, but I'd rather live in the U.S. or Great Britain or Germany and have to hide my... indiscretions... than in other parts of the world where it's more acceptable in part, like Thailand or Colombia. The clean water alone makes it worth it.
Yeah, I agree somewhat... with the exception of Great Britain, I think I would like Northern Europe personally. Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands... It might not be expressly legal there, but the attitude seems to be a lot more lax than what we have in U.S./Canada.
Eastern Europe is also starting to pique my interest, but I admit I don't know enough about that part of the world to come to a definite conclusion.
It is interesting to note that many want to fight right or left-wing collectivist governments... by imposing their own collectivist revolution.
Like I said earlier, women have been raised by Disney to see animals as eternal children. They don't take too kindly to people who want to stick their dick in them.
I frankly disagree. I think totalitarianism will happen if we stay on the path we are on now. Reactionaries, although far from perfect, are our salvation in a way. The batshit insane left and its gratuitous apology of backwards cults needs to be BTFO.
Interesting perspective u all have
I was raised by Disney (I suppose you could say- as many people have been) and I turned out zoo and I'm a woman. Huh. I'm not a feminist though. I thought it would be interesting for me to note this.
To be honest, after I got burned by participating in this community "too seriously," I made this account to post tongue-in-cheek crap and spam stuff with sneering titles in /r/animalromance and /r/tailbait.
Don't take what I say too seriously.
Many city folks are "rised" by Disney but don't have regular contact with animals out of what TV shows them. The opinions they will have about animal matters are likely to be highly inaccurate due to sheer ignorance, as opposed to people who consumes Disney entertainment and has contact with animals. The media always offers a romantic point of view on the subjects it deals with, you get to know that at a subconscious level only when you face reality on a regular basis.
That said, I don't think this is totally an issue of childyfication of animals. I think it is mostly a "yuck" reaction. "We think that doing it myself would be disgusting, hence it is bad". Some even argue that the yuck factor is a legit standard for defining morals and ethics.
The point wasn't to criticize Dinsey at all. I really meant "Disney" as a metonym for the tendency in the Western culture of entertainment to put a spotlight on anthromorphized animals specifically made to be relatable to children.
The question was why are women so overrepresented in "anti" groups and, by extension, why they are generally much more vocal than men on this issue. This is something I notice myself. You don't even need to go look further than facebook comments, but when you look at "protests" against bestiality, news outlet covering bestiality cases or even blogs written on the subject, I tend to notice that these things disproportionately involve women and they are much more vocal about what they feel.
I mean... It's just like the video of The Young Turks that was posted here just recently. These 10 seconds illustrate the situation perfectly. "NO THEY CANT CONSENT TO SEKS SHUT UP STOP RAPING MAH FUR BABIES WAH WAH." There is just an incredibly weird disconnect considering that these people (women) probably do not give two shits about any animal rights issue whatsoever and even directly encourage the culture of animal abuse (even sexual abuse!) but go apeshit when confronted to the thought that animals may enjoy sex with humans.
Why women? Is it the motherly instinct taking over?
I suppose an evopsych would answer "yes".
I don't have the stats at hand, but in this area, men are more politically active on every field but animal welfare and feminist activism. And by that I mean that any regular political party that does not touch those subjects as a matter of ideology may have a 80% to 20% men vs women as members.
I don't have data enough to answer the question of "why women?", sorry.
Also it doesn't help when people actually rape animals
But I think you also pointed out even here on this forum how exactly hiding behind closed doors stimulating.. well, not best of zoo.
Even if you advocating (indirectly) for political activism (actions, active political life) it exactly ensures very this conflict between various humans as elsewhere..
For me it already feels like totalitarism, because if you strongly move to the side of animals (non-human) - it will become obvious, and personal, too. But again, this is not exactly narrowly defined totalitarism in human political sense - but more broadly, complete annihilation of some opposing lines of thinking/living/acting by most powerful ones.
Edit:may be my friend u/naliju will have more to say, we discussed link between politics, animals, society and various movements for years (not on reddit yet).
Um... what?
Animals should be treated well, regardless of their sex. That would be this feminist's view of it. Just like I believe humans should be respected, regardless of sex/gender. shrug
I know that there are some extremists who think that male-female intercourse is always rape, but believe me, those are few and a lot of other feminists find them ridiculous. There are a lot of different fractions with very different opinions on sexuality.
Yes, exactly.
Unfortunately the sub is full of libertarians utterly divorced from how politics works (the so-called "insane left" are cenrists, every political party in the west has been becoming more and more libertarian since the capitalist power-grab of Reagan and Thatcher went unopposed by the masses, their "insane" policies have been proven to work much better than lassez-faire in times and places foreign to them, etc.)
Yes, western political parties have been turning libertarian. Everybody knows that Hillarious and Disaster Trump are old school libertarians that support the Non Agression Principle and would never socialize services, impose special custom taxes against China or discriminate people due to ethnics \sarcasm
As a feminist zoo who has discussed zoo life with other non-zoo feminists, I have to say that some feminists are extreme, but that's every group. Here we have people like 30-30 (or BlazeWolf in other places)...and in feminist groups, you have the ones that shame and like to police instead of trying to reach resolution in a way that doesn't leave others feeling attacked and degraded. That's the basic definition of any extremist really, a desire for control and punishment towards others when they cannot get their way.
My advice: Just ignore the extremism, it's everywhere and you alone can't change their minds, but you can speak your mind in hopes that others may draw inspiration from what you have to say if you know how to say something in a way which brings out the best in people.
As for feminists trying to change zoos, it's not going to happen. We operate and are functional regardless of laws and regardless of the opinions of others. Humans are naturally opportunists, and if there is a loophole, we'll find it.
So you´re calling me an extremist, right? It´s quite funny when the only thing I´m after is correctly interpreting the definition of zoophilia. I never said "If you´re not a true zoo, then quit fucking animals immediately", I´m just insisting that dissolving the definitions, watering down any differences is the reason why "zoophilia" has become a synonym for fucking animals in general, rendering the true meaning of zoophilia invalid. I hold no grudge against bestialists if they treat their animals well. My only reason to become hostile is the mindless spamming of the z-word. I don´t want to "control" anybody, I just want them to use the right terms so we zoos aren´t forced to deal with the negative repercussions the usual beastie´s behavior will inevitably lead to. Fencehopping, the publication of animal porn, meetups with the sole purpose of getting laid with an animal, etc....
How I see it: we zoos are held hostage by a large group of individuals that isn´t capable of handling this form of sexuality with dignity, responsibility and reason. Every single effort we zoos make to teach the public, gain trustworthyness and shape our own public image is sabotaged by this large group. How can I say that zoophilia is about love, not sex and every other day, another fencehopper makes a splendid headline? How can I expect others to believe in what I told ´em about zoophilia when the counterproof is just a few clicks away? And I´m not talking about some "biased media coverage"...
Just imagine being a "normal" for a minute, will you? Go online and browse all the sources of "zoosexuality", read it with the mindset of a normal person and then, ask yourself how long you would leave these "online zoos" alone with your animal.
If it is extremistic to expect reason, respect and responsibility from everyone messing around with an animal, then all hope is lost. IMHO, it´s the lack of this form of "extremism" that is the main origin of our efforts´ futility to teach the public.
Your admittedly well meant advice has proven to be uneffective...ignoring a basic problem won´t get the problem solved. The zoo community drifted off into a very permissive mindset and today, we have to face the consequences for that....new laws, increased risks etc. Even if you manage to "bring out the best in people" when they´re online, all your influence will be gone immediately by pressing the computer´s power button. You even wrote it yourself "Humans are naturally opportunists, and if there is a loophole, we´ll find it". What if our entire, elaborate justifications for zoophilia are just another halfway-successful hunt for yet another loophole?
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. \(Info ^/ Contact)
This could be a major problem