Bestiality the new Homosexuality?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fire Haired14

Banned
Messages
2,185
Reaction score
582
Points
0
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b DF27*
mtDNA haplogroup
U5b2a2b1
I found these two articles from another forum which suggests Bestiality(Having sex with animals) is more common than most would think. IMO, bestiality is today's homosexuality. No one wants to talk about it but knows it exists and are disgusted by it. People are scared by it and react with anger and violence to those who practice it.

If bestiality is a perversion why can't most homosexuality be a perversion? Human sexuality can be perverted, this has been proven. We need to question the status quo view on homosexuality the elites and majority of the public have. And we need to end the creepy obsession many have with homosexuality and transgenderism(Bruce Jenner, etc.).

Do 275,000 Swiss people have sex with animals?
Dog lover loved dog far too much: court

According to the first article a guy in the 1950's; Alfred Kinsey, estimated Bestiality in Americans. He concluded 8% of American men and 3.5% American women have had sexual contact with animals. He updated this in the 1970s with 5% for men and 2% for women.

Surprising right. Considering how little contact humans have with animals as opposed to people of the same gender, it would make sense homoseuxal behavior is even more popular yet can still usually be a perversion.

The second article is about a Swiss man who had sex with his dogs for years and was a member in pro-bestiality forums. He claimed one of his dogs is his "Life companion".

The reactions of people in the forum where this was posted was anger and disgust. They wanted these people who practice bestiality dead. Many countries ban it and send those who practice it to physiologist. Sound familiar:D? That's the exact same way conservatives all over the world react to homosexuality. Yet, these same people who see zoophiles as mentally ill and needed of punishment, support homosexuals.

Just because in recent years the elite in our world have accepted homosexuality and just because it is now looked down on to consider it a perversion, doesn't mean we have to obey what they say like sheep.

Most who are 100% pro gay rights IMO don't give solid evidence homosexuality is not a perversion. They refuse to admit human sexuality can be perverted. They're just for freedom to do what you want. This is a stupid philosophy because, there's needs to be a limit or else there'll be chaos. If lets say animals weren't harmed by zoophiles should be allow sex with animals? Most would say no. And the reasons are the same reasons conservatives don't accept homosexuality. Yet Liberals call them crazy.

I want you guys to question the new western society's views on homosexuality. I wouldn't be surprised if there are people born homosexual. It's totally possible. But we have to consider the possibility some who claim to be homosexual are not. The creepy obsession our society has with it(There are gay characters and romances in so many popular TV shows) needs to be corrected even if some are naturally gay.

If you look at how our bodies work and puberty, homosexuality doesn't make sense. Are there really women attracted to breasts, attracted to effeminate behavior, and want to .......... other women?
 
Am I the only regular straight man in here?
Maybe I should have myself checked?
 
At another forum this thread of mine is treated as crazy. That's what I expected. Bestiality is a taboo subject and comparsion to homosexuality is seen as crazy(but for no good reason). Here's my response to an argument I knew would come sooner or later.

I suggest reading it. It destroys the "do whatever you want, adultery is not real" philosophy. And it verifies arguments homosexuality can be put under the "inappropriate sexual behavior" category just as bestiality is.

The keyword is consent.

My response said:
I dis agree. Opposition to bestiality is not just because the animals don't consent. Why did the Swiss get the bestiality guy psychological help? Their concern is not whether the animal consented. Their concern is the mental health of the man who had sex with animals. This is just like how we used to believe something was wrong with someone who was homosexual or transgender.

Is it socially acceptable for a mother/son, brother/sister, to have sex even if both consent? No. It isn't just because the children from those unions might have birth defects or whatever, but because people believe it is morally wrong. The relationship mothers and sons, brothers and sisters, etc. have is not supposed to be sexual. Anything sexual between them is inappropriate.

Just as having sex with animals or children is inappropriate. Therefore, I can argue having sex with someone of the same gender is inappropriate. Relationship between people of the same gender isn't suppose to be sexual, just as relationship between parents and children isn't suppose to be sexual. The idea there are no morals and everything is okay as long as there is consent and no one is harmed is a myth. Humans instinctively have ideas on what's okay to do and what;s not okay to do in certain types of relationships.
 
This whole thread is disgusting. I am considering deleting the whole thing.

THERE IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY BETWEEN TWO CONSENTING ADULTS AND THE PERVERTED ABUSE OF AN ANIMAL INCAPABLE OF CONSENT.

What the heck are you thinking or not thinking to write something like this? You need to get off these sites frequented by morons and people with personality disorders.

You might not know it, but many of the interviewees for the Kinzey report were prison inmates, deviants by definition.

Perhaps you should read this...depending on the age and situational context, human sexuality can be pretty fluid.
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/08/why-straight-men-have-sex-with-each-other.html

@Bicicleur,
I never, ever, confuse the orientations and opinions of people who post on anthrofora with those of people in real life.
 
This whole thread is disgusting. I am considering deleting the whole thing.

THERE IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY BETWEEN TWO CONSENTING ADULTS AND THE PERVERTED ABUSE OF AN ANIMAL INCAPABLE OF CONSENT.

As I showed in my last post consent isn't all that matters. Sexual relations between certain adults is inappropriate. Sexual relations between close family members for example. It's very logical to argue homosexual relations are inappropriate just as those things are. The definition of homosexuality has been changed.

I don't have to follow this definition which is younger than I am. Homosexuality went from a mental disorder like Bestiality to being perfectly okay, and now all of sudden your crazy if you dare to challenge this young believe.

There's no good reason to shut down this thread. The discussion will of course be offensive. I'll try to make it unoffensive and I'm not a vulgar person. Offensive language isn't a good reason to shut it down. And me dis agreeing with you about homosexuality is not a good reason to either.

Your controversial opinion about homosexuality isn't the law just as my controversial opinion isn't. Shutting down this thread would be restricting freedom of thought on the topic. This forum doesn't matter much, but by definition it is restriction of freedom of thought. Of course there are boundaries. However I'm not a nazi, ISIS terrorist, etc.

What the heck are you thinking or not thinking to write something like this? You need to get off these sites frequented by morons and people with personality disorders.

I've made pretty good arguments that no one has refuted. Calling me crazy and this topic disgusting isn't an argument. I don't care how mainstream society has seen homosexuality for the last 7 years or so. That isn't evidence of anything. I came up with this discussion on my own. I only posted on one forum and most dis agree with me.

You might not know it, but many of the interviewees for the Kinzey report were prison inmates, deviants by definition.

Perhaps you should read this...depending on the age and situational context, human sexuality can be pretty fluid.
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/08/why-straight-men-have-sex-with-each-other.html

Wow, that's very long. Might read it later but can't consume it all now. Maybe his numbers are off. However what about homosexual behavior in prison? Is that not a reflection of their deviance? Or is somehow because it is homosexual it is natural and okay?
 
There are several issues that you bring up in the OP that I think we need to address individually in order to have a productive discussion. In particular: whether or not people have rights or deserve punishments to certain sex acts or inclinations; how to define perversion and how people should react to these sex acts or inclinations; and how common these things really are.

Regarding rights and punishments: Rights in Western societies rooted in classical liberalism are guarantees that those participating in the rights-system can perform certain actions as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. So homosexual sex can absolutely be a right exercised by two consenting adults. Bestiality, on the other hand, doesn't fit the paradigm in the same way because animals can't participate in a rights-system. It's up to us to determine if an animal's welfare outweighs the negative that is punishing someone who isn't harming another participant in the rights-system. My inclination is to only dole out punishments for animal abuse in extreme cases--considering that slaughtering animals is acceptable. And one word on incest, since you brought it up: Incest between very close relatives can be considered a borderline rights-infringement because it directly harms the product of the incest. It's actually sort of a unique thing in that it harms somebody who potentially results from the act.

Regarding how to define perversion and how to react: This is more of a cultural, flexible thing that's bound to change as attitudes shift and we find out more about psychology. Obviously, perversion is pejorative, referring to sex acts or inclinations that we'd like to condemn, even if it's not necessarily a good idea to make it illegal. A good reason why homosexuality has gotten past this in much of Western culture has to do with how we understand the psychology behind it, and how it's become clear that people are born with it. Being born with something isn't a sufficient reason to consider something non-perverted, of course, since we would still want to consider a born-that-way pedophile a pervert. But I think it's helped the cultural perspective, along with the fact that homosexuality can be consensual. Like it or not, born-that-way+consent is beginning to equal "not perverted." The consent part, again, is why bestiality doesn't fit.

Regarding how common these are: That's more of a sociological/scientific question that can be measured, and may affect people's attitudes, but probably shouldn't affect things like punishments.
 
Am I the only regular straight man in here?
Maybe I should have myself checked?

yeah same here bro, I feel like I just stepped into Family Guy land o_O. Anyhow, I'm not quite sure the rest of the world has caught up with the idea of such acts OP is speaking off.
 
@Sparkey,

Very good post. Good job explaining what this argument is; "What makes a sexual behavior perversion and wrong". Read the second post in this thread. I explain why consent isn't all that matters.

My inclination is to only dole out punishments for animal abuse in extreme cases--considering that slaughtering animals is acceptable. And one word on incest, since you brought it up: Incest between very close relatives can be considered a borderline rights-infringement because it directly harms the product of the incest. It's actually sort of a unique thing in that it harms somebody who potentially results from the act.

About incest it isn't only about the offspring or disease or whatever after sex. It is looked down on by the same society that accepts homosexuality because a sexual relationship between immediate family is inappropriate. Certain human relationships are not supposed to be sexual. I think the actual reasons people are against family-sex(Disgusting, inappropriate) and bestiality are the same reasons people are against homosexuality.

Regarding how to define perversion and how to react: This is more of a cultural, flexible thing that's bound to change as attitudes shift and we find out more about psychology.

Very true. However I think some is instinct and does not change. Humans instinctively have differnt types of relationships with differnt people. For some it is not appropriate to have sexual relations with them and that'll never change.

Obviously, perversion is pejorative, referring to sex acts or inclinations that we'd like to condemn, even if it's not necessarily a good idea to make it illegal. A good reason why homosexuality has gotten past this in much of Western culture has to do with how we understand the psychology behind it, and how it's become clear that people are born with it.

I had no idea it was obvious people are born homosexual. And I haven't heard pro-gay people give any arguments. I'm not saying I want you to list 1,000 sources. I can do the research myself.

Being born with something isn't a sufficient reason to consider something non-perverted, of course, since we would still want to consider a born-that-way pedophile a pervert.

You believe there are people born pedophiles?
 
I think it has to do with the brain. The chemistry during development affects it somehow. The chemistry may turn a male child to have a female brain and vice versa. Who knows how environment affects the brain. Men who have had no outlet for sex for extended periods often turn to the nearest outlet be it a male or an animal or a doll. Male prisoners have been known to rape other male prisoners even though they are not homosexual. It maybe the hormones are too strong and overcome all internal moral, cultural and physical restraints.
 
About incest it isn't only about the offspring or disease or whatever after sex. It is looked down on by the same society that accepts homosexuality because a sexual relationship between immediate family is inappropriate. Certain human relationships are not supposed to be sexual. I think the actual reasons people are against family-sex(Disgusting, inappropriate) and bestiality are the same reasons people are against homosexuality.

Well you're sort of responding to my take on incest from a rights/punishments perspective with a take on it from the perversion/reaction perspective. I didn't really get to incest in my perversion/reaction paragraph but to be clear, I think that the disgust felt toward incest (especially between very close relatives) is a more natural and less cultural thing than reactions to homosexuality, and so it will be more difficult to overcome the label of "perversion." If we're going to be specific, I don't think that the "ick" factor is likely to wear off for incest between anybody closer than first cousins--and that has a genetic basis. In addition, there's no reason that I'm aware of to think that there's any sort of "born that way" inclination toward incest.

Very true. However I think some is instinct and does not change. Humans instinctively have differnt types of relationships with differnt people. For some it is not appropriate to have sexual relations with them and that'll never change.

Fair enough, I'll concede that there is a natural inclination to disavow certain acts. I was trying to contrast the peversion/reaction perspective with the rights/punishments perspective by saying that the former is more cultural and the latter is more legal, but I'm comfortable with clarifying the former is more cultural or natural.

I had no idea it was obvious people are born homosexual. And I haven't heard pro-gay people give any arguments. I'm not saying I want you to list 1,000 sources. I can do the research myself.

I understand that evidence is pointing (perhaps still controversially) to epigenetics as a cause.

You believe there are people born pedophiles?

I don't know one way or another, I was speaking hypothetically. It wouldn't surprise me too much, though.
 
@Sparkey,
"I was trying to contrast the peversion/reaction perspective with the rights/punishments perspective by saying that the former is more cultural and the latter is more legal"

I agree with that. That's a good explanation of how people view whether sexual behavior is acceptable or not.

"I understand that evidence is pointing (perhaps still controversially) to epigenetics as a cause."

Okay, I'll look into that.
 
I found these two articles from another forum which suggests Bestiality(Having sex with animals) is more common than most would think. IMO, bestiality is today's homosexuality. No one wants to talk about it but knows it exists and are disgusted by it. People are scared by it and react with anger and violence to those who practice it.

If bestiality is a perversion why can't most homosexuality be a perversion? Human sexuality can be perverted, this has been proven. We need to question the status quo view on homosexuality the elites and majority of the public have. And we need to end the creepy obsession many have with homosexuality and transgenderism(Bruce Jenner, etc.).

Do 275,000 Swiss people have sex with animals?
Dog lover loved dog far too much: court

According to the first article a guy in the 1950's; Alfred Kinsey, estimated Bestiality in Americans. He concluded 8% of American men and 3.5% American women have had sexual contact with animals. He updated this in the 1970s with 5% for men and 2% for women.

Surprising right. Considering how little contact humans have with animals as opposed to people of the same gender, it would make sense homoseuxal behavior is even more popular yet can still usually be a perversion.

The second article is about a Swiss man who had sex with his dogs for years and was a member in pro-bestiality forums. He claimed one of his dogs is his "Life companion".

The reactions of people in the forum where this was posted was anger and disgust. They wanted these people who practice bestiality dead. Many countries ban it and send those who practice it to physiologist. Sound familiar:D? That's the exact same way conservatives all over the world react to homosexuality. Yet, these same people who see zoophiles as mentally ill and needed of punishment, support homosexuals.

Just because in recent years the elite in our world have accepted homosexuality and just because it is now looked down on to consider it a perversion, doesn't mean we have to obey what they say like sheep.

Most who are 100% pro gay rights IMO don't give solid evidence homosexuality is not a perversion. They refuse to admit human sexuality can be perverted. They're just for freedom to do what you want. This is a stupid philosophy because, there's needs to be a limit or else there'll be chaos. If lets say animals weren't harmed by zoophiles should be allow sex with animals? Most would say no. And the reasons are the same reasons conservatives don't accept homosexuality. Yet Liberals call them crazy.

I want you guys to question the new western society's views on homosexuality. I wouldn't be surprised if there are people born homosexual. It's totally possible. But we have to consider the possibility some who claim to be homosexual are not. The creepy obsession our society has with it(There are gay characters and romances in so many popular TV shows) needs to be corrected even if some are naturally gay.

If you look at how our bodies work and puberty, homosexuality doesn't make sense. Are there really women attracted to breasts, attracted to effeminate behavior, and want to .......... other women?

What you wrote here is pure rubbish and total non sense and probably you know it too. i think we already been through this a thousand times and as a homosexual i find this post very disturbing and offensive. Why don't you concentrate on getting a life.
 
I think that both bestiality and pedophilia are criminal activities and of the worst order. I would issue a capital punishment.
As for incest, where it involves a power position, eg a parent raping a child (I don't see that "sex" is an appropriate way to describe it) is also a criminal act and should be likewise punished. These people never change and are a menace on society, which includes the natural world, i.e., animals.

To call these mental illnesses or psychological blah blah blah, is nonsense. Psychiatrists have no real tests and no genuine theories. You only need to look at how they arrive at the DSM to see that they dream up new conditions in order to widen drug sales. IMO they are big pharma puppets and nothing more so they cannot be trusted to make any such "diagnosis" of mental illness for these people.

As for homosexuality, I do consider it as a perversion but there is the question of what two consenting adults want to do, provided it doesn't harm or affect anyone else. I don't see a case for it to be prohibited but tolerated.
 
What you wrote here is pure rubbish and total non sense and probably you know it too. i think we already been through this a thousand times and as a homosexual i find this post very disturbing and offensive. Why don't you concentrate on getting a life.

Tell me how I'm wrong. Me questioning whether most homosexuals are born homosexual is not offensive. By your logic, you disagreeing with me on anything is offensive. There's nothing wrong with what I'm discussing.

As for homosexuality, I do consider it as a perversion but there is the question of what two consenting adults want to do, provided it doesn't harm or affect anyone else. I don't see a case for it to be prohibited but tolerated.

I mostly agree here. However a point I've been making is tabooed sexual behavior can be consensual. But does that make it okay? Whether something is consensual or not should be our only way to decide whether it is okay or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ike
Tell me how I'm wrong. Me questioning whether most homosexuals are born homosexual is not offensive. By your logic, you disagreeing with me on anything is offensive. There's nothing wrong with what I'm discussing.

It dose not take a university degree to suss out your intentions. Connecting homosexuality to Bestiality and more is no ground for a civil debate but to demonize homosexuals for whatever reason prompts you to do so (which I have a good idea) . These are arguments commonly found among bigots and radical / fanatical Religious persons and not someone who is interested to a civil debate. And by the way, the perpetual fascination on the subject makes me think you are fighting some demons inside you. You will get over it one day.
 
It dose not take a university degree to suss out your intentions. Connecting homosexuality to Bestiality and more is no ground for a civil debate but to demonize homosexuals for whatever reason prompts you to do so (which I have a good idea) . These are arguments commonly found among bigots and radical / fanatical Religious persons and not someone who is interested to a civil debate.

You have to give me solid reasons why homosexuality is totally differnt. I'm not saying no one is born gay, I'm saying some who claim to be are not. Saying my views make me a bigot does not hurt my arguments. Questioning whether homosexuality is natural in all people who claim to be gay is not bigotry. Calling anyone who questions the status quo on homosexuality a bigot is anti-free thought. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I understand this can be very offensive to you. Questioning anything anyone identifies with can be offensive.

And by the way, the perpetual fascination on the subject makes me think you are fighting some demons inside you. You will get over it one day.

I'm a completely heterosexual man. I have perpetual fascination in lots of things. When I was younger it was baseball stats, then it was cars, then it was genetics. It's just my personality.
 
@Maleth,

I don't mean to offend anyone. Please understand that. I'm not attacking gay people. I'm bringing up what I think is an interesting debate topic. You have attacked and straight up insulted Christianity. What I'm doing here isn't insulting anyone, it is questioning whether all gays are born gay. If you argue Christianity is false, does that make you a bigot?

Here's what I'm doing with this thread.....

I'm showing that the reason people are against bestiality and others tabooed sex acts are the same reasons people are against homosexuality. So, for someone who is anti-family sex but pro-gay to say consent is all that matters and someone who is anti-gay is restrictive and against gay rights just because he is disgusted by it, is a hypocrite. If we can all agree family-sex/bestiality/etc. is wrong and consent is not all that matters, why not question whether or not all people who claim to be naturally gay really are and whether homosexual behavior is an appropriate part of non-gay(by birth) same-sex relationships.
 
You have to give me solid reasons why homosexuality is totally differnt. I'm not saying no one is born gay, I'm saying some who claim to be are not. Saying my views make me a bigot does not hurt my arguments. Questioning whether homosexuality is natural in all people who claim to be gay is not bigotry. Calling anyone who questions the status quo on homosexuality a bigot is anti-free thought. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I understand this can be very offensive to you. Questioning anything anyone identifies with can be offensive.

I dont think you are suffering from any sort of dementia...are you?

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/21551-Homosexuality-VS-Autism?highlight=homosexulaity
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29999-Y-DNA-R1b-and-homosexuality?highlight=homosexual
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/7090-The-Gay-Marriage-Controversy?highlight=homosexual
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...hild-of-the-opposite-sex?highlight=homosexual

there are even more... and you have learned nothing yet? Some of them you have participated in actively, repeating the same garbage as your new thread. Still asking same questions? when you are not interested in answers. What is your point? take my caring advise. Get a life
 
I mostly agree here. However a point I've been making is tabooed sexual behavior can be consensual. But does that make it okay? Whether something is consensual or not should be our only way to decide whether it is okay or not.

I don't believe that a criteria of consensual is enough in some cases. For instance I disagree with pornography and prostitution which may be consensual. Exceptions are for instance people selling their children to prostitution houses or people who will exploit them. Also people both male and female that have in some way been forced into prostitution.

The reason I disagree is because the porno image and the prostitute reduce the human being into an object and that affects public perception. This means other people are affected, especially young people. The consequences are how people perceive others and in this perception can they be used or exploited and not necessarily for sexual reasons.

Some homosexuals do fit into this group because you hear them talking about "how many tricks they did today etc." This is also a form of using another person's body as if they themselves didn't matter, that they are just an object.
 
It's totally absurd, as I said, to equate what two consenting adults do in their bedrooms to pedophilia and bestiality. It is indeed about informed consent and whether there is any harm to the other partner and to the larger society. Not to be too graphic, but certain heterosexual couples sometimes also engage in acts that were defined as sodomy under criminal statutes. Look it up. Those statutes are never enforced even when they're still on the books. I totally understand why some people see these acts as gross and would never engage in them, but would people advocate going into the bedrooms of married (or unmarried) heterosexual couples and monitoring their sexual behavior? I personally find the sexual promiscuity and total lack of responsibility exhibited by some heterosexual men, like the notorious man who fathered twenty children while on assistance and can support none of them, damn reprehensible too. The only recourse we have as a society is to incarcerate men like him for non-payment of child support, for which I would increase the penalty and make the counts consecutive for each child and each infraction. Done right you could lock him up for twenty years, and good riddance. Why should society pay to support his offspring and then suffer their dysfunctional behavior in years to come?

I would really urge people to do some reading on the subject of human sexuality, especially young people who don't have much worldly experience. Are people "born" homosexual? I don't know for sure, but the research seems to be leaning in that direction. My homosexual friends certainly report that's the case. I do think the science indicates that human sexuality is more fluid than many think. It's on a continuum. There's interesting research being done on primates too in that regard. There's a certain amount of "sexual play" among little boys and little girls too that arises out of curiosity. Sometimes it's heterosexual, sometimes not. It used to be called "playing doctor" when it was a little boy with a little girl. It continues into adolescence sometimes, with some girls and boys getting "crushes" on one of their friends, for example. It doesn't always escalate into sexual touching for pleasure. There's also, among certain boys and young men, "sexual" activity to exert power, as in hazing or fraternity rituals. This doesn't make someone "gay", although it may be illegal given a certain set of circumstances. Sexual preferences sort of solidify at some point, with the majority as heterosexuals. However, given certain situational contexts, the behavior might be expressed again. Are there people nowadays who were not "born" gay but because of relaxed societal attitudes have homosexual sex? Probably. It doesn't matter to me. So long as none of this harms another person and is totally consensual, and by that I mean there is no abusive power relationship of any kind, then I don't think it's anyone else's business. So long as these conditions are met, I'm far more concerned with how people behave outside their bedrooms, both toward me and toward the society as a whole, and the havoc they can create there.

@Fire-Haired,

Maleth is correct by the way. You're participated in these discussions over and over again, but you never do the research. Reading may not be a favorite or easy endeavor for you but there is no substitute for it. Until you do it there's no point in repeating the same things over and over again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 24764 times.

Back
Top