Animals as food and sexual partners

[Virtual ghost]

This will probably sound like a bad joke to some people but I think that we have philosophic problem here or illogicality in the best case.


For example goat has 5 little goats. You can kill those little goats one by one and consume them one by one. When you are done with that you can even kill grown-up goat.

But if you use a condom and try to have sex with it you need help.


Is it just me or this doesn't make any sense?

 

[Haight]

I think you need to elaborate.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I think you need to elaborate.

You can kill them on many different ways and all of them are brutal(more or less).
But if you have sex with an amimal what usually means that animal will stay alive.But people will think that you have serious problems.
Also if you have sex with an animal that is big enough you will not (probably) cause permanent damage.



For me this looks like something that does not make any sense.

 

[ptgatsby]

For me this looks like something that does not make any sense.

It's built into the human psyche. Sex is the most refined of the evolutionary pressures, which would work against inter-species couplings... violence is also ingrained, but works with inter-species competition.

 

[6sticks]

Because that gives it an odd taste.

Plus if you rape a goat you're inflicting misery for pleasure, but if you kill it as humanely as possible you're minimizing the misery for the purpose of making a nice curry. You need food to stay alive, but you don't need to rape goats to live.

 

[kiddykat]

It makes sense for some to have sex with an animal, those who are from the outskirts of society w/o human contact I guess.

I mean, people go as far as making out with plastic vaginas.. shove bottles up their anus, and go as far as eat fecal matter during sex while they pee on each other. I don't see how it wouldn't be impossible..

If we can resort to killing, we can also resort to several other barbarous acts. This poses a moral question.

The thought of killing an animal just is impossible for me. I couldn't do it. Maybe a spider that could potentially bite me, but vertebrates? I don't know... Makes me think of being vegetarian (although, I didn't know if I could really rough it out)!

 

[Geoff]

Same reason that violence is increasingly, if not almost totally accepted as a cultural idea (eg cartoons for kids) but sexuality is still restricted.

 

[Atomic Fiend]

This is by far the most interesting thread title I have ever read on this site.

 

[Eileen]

Same reason that violence is increasingly, if not almost totally accepted as a cultural idea (eg cartoons for kids) but sexuality is still restricted.

Ummm, yeah, I don't think that's the case. Yes, sexuality is restricted. No, I don't think that the reason humans are against having sex with animals is merely that sexuality is restricted.

It is pretty normal for animals to eat animals--in terms of nature. It is not normal, in terms of nature, for a member of one species to have intercourse with another. Yes, dogs hump legs, but I presume that's just masturbatory.

I am against it because I think it's the same basic offense (I'm not talking about degrees of horrifying, really--just concepts) as having sex with a child. An animal cannot consent.

I also think it's kind of fucked up to say that somehow violation of anybody sexually is not a big deal.

 

[Geoff]

Ummm, yeah, I don't think that's the case. Yes, sexuality is restricted. No, I don't think that the reason humans are against having sex with animals is merely that sexuality is restricted.

It is pretty normal for animals to eat animals--in terms of nature. It is not normal, in terms of nature, for a member of one species to have intercourse with another. Yes, dogs hump legs, but I presume that's just masturbatory.

I am against it because I think it's the same basic offense (I'm not talking about degrees of horrifying, really--just concepts) as having sex with a child. An animal cannot consent.

I also think it's kind of fucked up to say that somehow violation of anybody sexually is not a big deal.

Well, we sorta agree, as I was driving at that, but didnt elucidate what I meant very well!

I was driving at sexuality being a much more sensitive subject generally.. and one in which a violation IS a big deal, and thus not acceptable.

 

[kyuuei]

First I'd like to say my stance: I do NOT care nor do I want to know what people do in their personal time. The thought of having sex with an animal is disgusting to me for several reasons. I also have no qualms with killing, preparing, and eating animals. I have never been hunting, but I would have no problem with doing so. (Although I do dislike wasting animals)

With that said.. I agree with the fact that it's been engrained that one is considered interspecies taboo, and the other okay. I think that another big factor for me is that animals cannot use language.. Even if body language is taken into consideration, do we ever really know if the animal is consenting or not?

Although both based on moral values.. killing to eat is a seperate topic entirely from sex.

Edit: It's known as well that dogs of the same gender humping each other is a sign of dominance, so it's not entirely sexual in nature.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Because that gives it an odd taste.

Plus if you rape a goat you're inflicting misery for pleasure, but if you kill it as humanely as possible you're minimizing the misery for the purpose of making a nice curry. You need food to stay alive, but you don't need to rape goats to live.

Ok, But if you are going to kill a goat during a day there is no logical reason not to rape this goat before its death if you are horny.

On the other hand you can have condom sex with a goat even if it isn't alive.


What is actualy more moral towards a goat but people will take it as even more bizarre idea.


Maybe you were right. Maybe my very low S actually makes more animal unfriendly

 

[Neo Genesis]

You can kill them on many different ways and all of them are brutal(more or less).
But if you have sex with an amimal what usually means that animal will stay alive.But people will think that you have serious problems.
Also if you have sex with an animal that is big enough you will not (probably) cause permanent damage.



For me this looks like something that does not make any sense.

Because killing and eating other creatures is/was a necessity. Beastiality is not.

 

[6sticks]

Ok, But if you are going to kill a goat during a day there is no logical reason not to rape this goat before its death if you are horny.

Kill and rape two birds with one stone, eh? You're making a moral argument that it's better to have sex with an animal than to kill it because all ways of killing animals are brutal. This would make its death even more brutal.

On the other hand you can have condom sex with a goat even if it isn't alive.


What is actualy more moral towards a goat but people will take it as even more bizarre idea.


Maybe you were right. Maybe my very low S actually makes more animal unfriendly

I have less of a problem with goat necrophilia than goat rape, because you're not causing pain - except to Jesus. But I don't see the appeal either way.

 

[heart]

Plus if you rape a goat you're inflicting misery for pleasure, but if you kill it as humanely as possible you're minimizing the misery for the purpose of making a nice curry. You need food to stay alive, but you don't need to rape goats to live.

+1

 

[heart]

Ok, But if you are going to kill a goat during a day there is no logical reason not to rape this goat before its death if you are horny.

On the other hand you can have condom sex with a goat even if it isn't alive.


What is actualy more moral towards a goat but people will take it as even more bizarre idea.

If someone gets horny from looking at a dead goat, I don't want them at my BBQ, condom or no condom!

 

[violaine]

You need food to stay alive, but you don't need to rape goats to live.

Never were truer words spoken in the history of the world. lol.

 

[millerm277]

6sticks got it. Also, I'd argue the animal doesn't feel too much pain being hunted if you aim well...

 

[ptgatsby]

6sticks got it. Also, I'd argue the animal doesn't feel too much pain being hunted if you aim well...

Slaughter houses wouldn't be as kind, in general.

No, Antisocial makes a good point. If we have no problem being cruel to animals on a massive scale, and animal brutality is nearly universal with humanity until trained otherwise, then it is illogical to separate rape on general principle.

Nor is it a requirement for us to kill animals anymore. We choose to kill animals, and we choose to kill them in inhumane ways.

The only reason we find it distasteful is because we are engineered that way, and/or are taught to find it distasteful.

 

[kyuuei]

But is our engineering really flawed? I don't have any problem knowing that I grew up being taught that, and continuing to think that way myself.

In essence, you don't NEED to eat animals to live, this is true. Based on pure necessity, neither are up there. But it's natural for us to eat other animals to survive. It's not as natural for us to have sex with other species.. so our brains are engineered to think this way for the most part.