Thursday, February 28, 2008

Consent: Can animals really say yes or no to sex?

One of the main attacks against bestiality/zoophilia is the issue of consent. These arguments take shape into something like this: "having sex with a dog is wrong because the dog can't say no". Through logic I will show that these arguments by anti-zoos hold no logical reasoning at all, and in fact the consent issue is generally a smoke screen for the icky factor. I will show here that animals can, and do show sexual consent with a human.

Before I can effectively show that animals do have the ability to consent for sex, I need to define exactly how I am using consent:

–verb (used without object) permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield (often fol. by to or an infinitive): He consented to the proposal. We asked her permission, and she consented.
2.Archaic. to agree in sentiment, opinion, etc.; be in harmony.

Animals are sentient beings just like humans, that is they have the power of perception and a consciousness. An animal experiences pleasure and pain. A person who owns a dog knows if what they do causes pleasure or pain. When we scratch a dogs head we can tell the dog enjoys this, he may roll on his back and let you rub his stomach. Likewise, hitting the dog in the head with a shoe causes pain and the dog will shy away and be fearful in the future.

Animals can not verbally say yes or no to sex in our human languages but they have other ways to show how they feel. Surely a dog who has mounted, say his human lover, experiences pleasure. This is evident because of his orgasm. Female dogs have orgasms too. Once a dog for example realizes you as a sexual being, they show sexual desire quite often: females will sway their tales revealing their swollen vagina's and dry hump the air in front of you, males will become erect and try to mount.

Anyone who is zoo will be aware of when their animals want sex. More importantly, they will respect their animal partner when they do not want sex. Sometimes when you rub your partner down there they will pull away and sit elsewhere. That is how animals show they are either interested or not.

If an animal does not enjoy what is happening to them they will show bodily signs of this: they will tense up, their eyes and ears will move, tails might jitter, and they will pull away. If you continue it could bring painful results: Dogs have powerful teeth and will bite you! Horses can break bones (or worse) with a single kick. Quite simply, it is obvious to see what causes pleasure and pain.

As I said before, the consent issue is really a smoke screen for the icky factor. By and large people are disgusted about the idea so they claim consent is a big issue when in fact it is not. People do many awful things to animals who do not consent to what is being done:

(1) Do animals consent to locking them in a cage?
(2) Do animals consent to being slaughtered and killed in the millions every year for food?
(3) Do animals consent to being tested on by chemicals?
(4) Do animals consent to being 'fixed'?

If you did any of those four things to a human you would be thrown in jail for life (possibly killed in many US states). Not so ironically though, doing those things to animals is okay. It is accepted and happens everyday.

But as soon as you have loving sex with your dog who you care for more than anything in the world, somehow you are a sick and awful human being.



Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

now,I liked this post. Animals do can interact with humans about their sexual desires,but they do it in a feral matter,as said in here,the females will stay on place and lift tails,while the males will pretty much jump over you and try to hump you. And I wondered about the other stuff by myself as well,how can an animal be killed (oh,no,but it's not killing,a zoo-hater will say,because they are not humans) and it won't be a horrible thing? That's why I hate hunters,unless it's really required,like if there is a big population of wolves and they atack herds of cattles,sheeps,whatever other animals or even humans while walking in the forrest,then it might be nessesary,but otherwise,if you're not doing it for feeding yourself from it,you're just a sick fuck and the law supports you because it's a "hobby". And what about neutering animals? I like animals,but if it's needed for lowering the population in city areas of dogs,cats and others,then it may be ok,as I won't enjoy my dog being bitten by strays and getting flees from them. But why do it on animals,who you own? It doesn't break their disobedience,you just hurt your animal in ways you can't later fix. And if it's about lowering the population,why don't they do this with humans? We have overwhelming population over 7 milliards,let's neuter the current population so we can't have problems later. Maybe we will be lucky and no ignorant and trolling bastards will be born.

And again,your post is well made and holds a lot of sence behind it.