fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2748 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2748 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

Notes:

Early because ... World Cup! No other excuse.

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 087 secrets from Secret Submission Post #393.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

do you think zoophila will ever be accepted?

http://www.vice.com/read/apparently-animals-consent-to-sex-in-the-beastiality-brothel

defender of heterospecies relationships
Because gay zoophila is just plain wrong. /facepalm

There's just so much wrong with this, I don't know where to begin. So I will be squicked out by all of it and feel sorry for those poor animals.

hetero means different, so heterospecies would mean two different species

Ayrt

Yeah, my bad. I'm so used to seeing the hetero in regards to human sexuality, so I jumped the gun on that a bit.

Nope.

Even if someone figures out how to speak dog or something, the power imbalance is too great and there's too much of a difference in mental capabilities for it not to be disgusting as hell.

And that's why you're vegetarian?

I'm not?

Right.

Which seems to leave you in a bit of a clear intellectual conflict.

Animals don't consent to be food, and don't consent to their current living conditions, which lets be honest, are generally pretty horrific.

are you a vegetarian or a zoophile

That's a false multi-choice question. You're ignoring the third choice - hypocrite.

But no and no. It's an interesting thought experiment though. Morally I just don't see a compelling argument meat eating to be okay but not zoophilia. Or rather in the first world. You do not need to hunt to survive, and the idea that we allow more animals to live that wouldn't in the wild doesn't even slightly hold up if you follow through with it.

do you feel the same way about poisoning stray cats and dogs?

I don't follow?

how is it any worse than eating cows?

You're going to have to take a few steps back here, and expand on what you mean by poisoning stray cats and dogs, and how it links to the original discussion.

if it's hypocritical to eat meat and think having sex with animals is wrong, wouldn't it also be hypocritical to eat meat and think poisoning stray animals is wrong?

or is eating meat morally equivalent to having sex with animals, but poisoning them is worse?

I think there's a moral difference between using animals for sustenance and abusing them for your own pleasure. Just like I'm ethically fine with hunting animals for food but I find hunting for sport to be somewhat tacky

So if you eat cheeseburgers, you have to accept a guy molesting his dog?

Don't question it--ill_omened is dumb a lot.

There's a big difference between screwing an animal and living with one.

Kids don't consent to living with their parents either, but I don't consider that cruel as long as their needs are taken care of. And many domesticated animals are not suited for a life without people.

As for the meat industry, I acknowledge that there's issues with its treatment of animals and animals don't consent to being slaughtered and all that jazz, but it's not a topic I feel educated enough or comfortable about to discuss.

Random passerby anon just saying I think this is a really good response.

Ten points for blatant attempt to pointlessly sidetrack discussion with idiotic non-parallel. Nice work.

[ SECRET POST #2748 ]

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?

Re: tw for animal cruelty?