Deep thoughts on Zoophilia

Skatje makes a good point on Zoophilia, which leaves me pensive:

Sexual relationships between humans and animals come as such a shock to people, but it doesn’t to me. There can be very deep, meaningful relationships between humans and their pets. Obviously they can’t obtain the same level a deep human-to-human relationship, but loving your pets isn’t anything unusual. People care for their pets, talk to them, spoil them, feel relaxed in their company, and mourn them when they die. This relationship is so underestimated. Why does it come as a surprise that when someone feels a deep connection to their pet, they might be interesting in doing something more expressive and intimate like we do in human-to-human relationships?

That said, I remind you that my position isn’t based on my own personal wants. I just don’t see any reason to ban it other than the same reason things like homosexuality and sodomy were banned: it’s icky. I think it’s bad practice to put social taboos into legislature when no actual logical argument can be made against it.

Comments

[Craig]

I don't want to be intolerant or anything, but is an animal really able to give consent to *sex* any more than, I don't know, a child? On the other hand, we hunt and kill animals for sport (pleasure), so if anyone has some bestial fetish, I can't see how it could be much worse than that.

[djw]

Zoophilia? There is nothing wrong with it. Animals cetianly can give their consent to it, even intiate it. Ever owned a male dog that still is intact with his testicles? Well, I am sure that those without their testicles intact certainly never consented to having them removed. If zoophilia is outlawed, then removing a dog's testicles should be outlawed also. Get one to give his consent to having his testicles removed!