Thursday, February 28, 2008
There are some valid points to the whole zoophilia/Veg debate. First, let me say I believe we all have the right to eat whatever we want. I don't look down or up to anyone who has a particular diet. What works for some obviously can't be expected to work for all.
"Are VegHeads harming animals directly and indirectly? How do they you ask? Answer: It’s in all the things we have in life as humans. Material things like motor vehicles, modern homes, paper, computers, electricity, beauty products, plastics, medications and modern shoes to name a few."
The things humans use to live on a daily basis can and do cause harm, directly or indirectly, to animals. However, it is all about something called 'mindful treading'. The idea that it is better to perserve and protect as much as possible instead of reckless abandon on the premise that it will always be. A real "VegHead" would not own a car but rather ride a bike or walk. Likewise this VegHeaf woud use 100% recycled papers, alterative energy like solar or wind, organic and harm-free beauty products, alternative medicines, etc. If someone were to live like this, the death impact to animals and the environment would be significantly less than alternative forms of living. Is it possible to avoid killing animals both directly and indirectly? Yes, but unless you live Life on the Pond it is a very remote life. That is where the 'middle road' comes into play: Minimizing the the damage to animals and the environment.
DP further claims:
"What happens to the used products the packing or the chemicals that make up any products we consume? Where do they end up? Most likely these toxic chemicals end up in landfills or other environmentally friendless places. Once there they infest the environment with toxicity, which harms or kills animals in one eco system or another. So we ALL harm animals. We all are to blame just by the way we live. Even the lifestyle of VegHeads actually harms animals. Do they ever wonder about the animals that die so they can eat veggies? No of course they don’t. An example. A farmer has a problem with rabbits or mice or other vermin. So he shoots them or worse he poisons them. He may even spray the crops with chemicals to kill the insects. Did you know that many birds of prey eat dead vermin (rabbits, mice or other small animals and insects). One fact is certain happened when The American bald eagle (USA’s national bird) almost disappeared from the USA. The American Bald Eagle was eating fish and vermin that had ingested DDT. Ever wonder why the USA banned its use of DDT almost totally? It was also in the water. Water used to grow crops like veggies."
That is why a true VegHead buys 100% organic. No chemicals. No GMOs. No pesticides.
"Did you know it takes 39,000 gallons to make one car? Most VegHeads drive cars right?"
Where does DP get the idea "most" VegHeads drive cars? Was that just made up or does DP have some valid proof on this? Few VegHeads I know drive cars. They walk or ride bikes...
Eating meat or being a VegHead causes animal suffering directly and indirectly. However, it is clear that the meat-eater is causing more damage.
Not that I really give a shit in the end --- but there might be something about loving animals, both as friend and erotically, and respecting ALL animals by not eating their meat. Afterall, zoophilia means the love for animals. How can we as Zoos say we love animals when we just pick and choose which animals we love? Something to think about.
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)
|1.||to 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.
Well! First things first: this blog will probably disgust and shock people as the primary subject I will be writing about is zoophilia. I have set an open comment policy here which means even those who are not registered with blogger can comment. I don't actually expect many people to find let alone care to read a nobody writing about zooish issues, but mostly I am writing for myself. I have always found writing to be therapeutic. Oh, and I love to hear myself talk too! I hope my zoo friends will enjoy reading though I know they're busy with their own sites/forums/blogs/farm animals ;)
Who am I? I go to school.
That is all I am...
I'm bi/zoo and have a girlfriend too.
Keeping it short to start, going to fall asleep now.
I also x-post but try to keep stuff unique in these locations:
Notice: You won't find porn here so look elsewhere. I am not condoning zoophilia/bestiality or breaking any laws in your state of residence.
Adult Blog Cloud // Submit Blogs