on April 21 2010 08:13:57
Bestiality is something I've never understood.
Wikipedia offers little help on this subject. Zoophilia is just registered as a disorder, great.
Anyone have any clue why people would want to fuck animals? pocket-psychology will be accepted. |
on April 21 2010 09:22:15
Because they can't get any action from real people?
If not, then I'd just say they are sick, sick puppies. |
on April 21 2010 09:46:53
"cocaine smuggler and former dotcom millionaire". I'd say he could get action from 'real people' (are animals fake people?  ).
Yes, a farmer in Bóndi might seek to relieve himself with a sheep because the only eligible female around is uglier than the sheep, but I think a lot of 'regular' zoophilia has to do with taboos. This particular kind escapes my logic though.
On a side note, I get (I think) why the mice were smothered in vaseline and had a string tied around them, but why were their tails cut off? |
on April 21 2010 09:54:23
Sometimes Vuz... you scare me |
on April 21 2010 10:23:32
The tail is impractical, try it, really takes the edge off |
on April 21 2010 11:35:11
@ Vuzman:
I neither get your logical nor illogical reasoning for this.
I agree with Lazarus. You're scary, Dude
Isn't just cutting the tail of mice grounds for jailtime? |
on April 21 2010 12:03:47
"It has also been suggested that there is a mutual connection between Douglas Spink and Kenneth Pinyan. Pinyan was a Gig Harbor, Washington man who died after engaging in sexual acts with a horse. The case drew national attention and became known as the “Enumclaw horse sex case."" |
on April 21 2010 12:14:19
LOL Boddin A croc's tail now that is a bitch |
on April 21 2010 16:42:31
@Vuzman: I agree that Taboos might have something to do with it, although I'm far from convinced. Taboos are just as connected to asexual acts, such as cannibalism and patricide, to name two classical ones.
The farmer argument is accepted though. And I seem to 'GET' the vaseline-smothered mice aswell..fear me!  |
on April 21 2010 20:05:26
This thing working? |
on April 21 2010 20:06:01
So it seems |
on April 21 2010 21:51:07
@Boddin: what a romantic little story. Thank you! |
on April 21 2010 21:52:12
That's really, really, really, really, really FUBAR.
That can't possibly be real. That shit has got to be fake.
I refuse to believe that human beings can actually be THAT fubar'ed.
That has officially replaced the whale in my nightmares. |
on April 21 2010 22:00:17
@griz: actually I think isolated farmers are not very likely to get cozy with their animals. I think zoophilia is mostly a 'perversion' like fetiches (latex, golden showers, SM). Sometimes people are just horny and curious, other times it might be something in their childhood. Freud out. |
on April 21 2010 23:28:04
So the "Cleveland Steamer" was born out of curiosity or hornyness, either way it's pretty disgusting. |
on April 22 2010 08:22:23
I would think that the Cleveland Steamer and the like are taboo-related. People explore these things because they want to explore or break limits. I'd also think it has some relation to s/m with an emphasis on humiliation and submission.
However, I don't think this is the case for the majority of zoophiliacs. There is some taboo-issue involved (it's mentioned in the bible in the same passages that deal with homosexuality), but like with homosexuality, I don't think it's the taboo or forbidden fruit that attracts these people. I would guess it's something more complex or profound. |
on April 22 2010 12:23:31
I don't know...upon further reflection I think zoophilia falls under the very wide array of "kinks" which we seem to have the capacity for. S/M is somewhat apart from this category in my view, since I think I understand it to be based around the concept of control.
With regard to other relatively common fetishes, I'm at a complete loss to explain them at all; these include becoming sexually aroused by feet, raincoats, latex, animals (stuffed, cuddly or otherwise), smoking, milk and different kinds of foods, baloons, etc.
It seems we can become sexually aroused by almost anything. I'm sure we'll someday know the answer to this question. Maybe by means of neuroscience, maybe by means of something else. Still, I think just simply regarding these things as taboo or "sick", is the wrong way to go about it, if one is at all interested in learning more about the nature of such things. |
on April 23 2010 15:35:11
Damn Boddin, I forgot to view that video...Some nasty pictures in my mind now!
That kinda got me wondering if animals of legal age should have the right to engage consensual sexual activity with humans of legal age |
on April 23 2010 15:42:46
How will you know if it consents? Acceptance by silence? |
on April 23 2010 15:45:27
Also, why do you need to know?  |
on April 23 2010 15:52:43
In the above case, I suppose I'll know when he "makes his little hubbahubba noises to me" |
on April 23 2010 18:06:30
Acceptance by "grunts, whickers and blows in my ear etc." |
WTF
