01-03-2018, 07:20 AM
You surely display some serious signs of fetishism here, Cynolove.
"I guess I´m more animalistic than others..." No, you´re not. Quite the opposite, urine/pheromones distributed with urine for animals is some sort of roadsign leading them to their "destination" while for you, the "roadsign" itself IS the destination, as it seems. Not at all "animalistic", just full blown human fetish. I highly recommend reading some psychoanalytical theories regarding excrements as a sexual trigger, such as Freud, Jung, Reich....it may shed some light onto you and also gives a good idea why you´re anything but "more animalistic" than others.
Still wonder why you´re saying that drinking urine can be harmful to humans...it cannot as urine usually is sterile.
"I mean you have to be openminded at least to some point to even consider acting on zoosexual attractions...." Nope. You just have to have a raging boner and an additional complete lack of self restriction to act on "zoosexual" desires. No "openmindedness" needed here....and I´m not sure whether you´re misinterpreting openmindedness in the usual way of the sex lib or not. Anyway, you seem to be way too excited about this whole "piss thing"....I´m active with mares for nearly three decades now, would consider myself rather openminded (in the non sex lib way, with a basic level of rationale still intact), but that openmindedness never played any role for me in my decision to act on my desire; I´ve come into contact with mare urine quite alot but still haven´t developed any form of attraction to it. It just is a rather unimportant detail for me, I don´t actively involve it into my sexuality and am not drawing any kick from it at all. I´ve been peed on during intercourse, I´ve had some unwanted extra moisturising during cunnilingus, but that never built up into a source for additional sexual arousal...it´s just there. I won´t stop pleasing a mare that pees during cunnilingus, but I also don´t actively try to make her pee for the "extra kick".
"...don´t ever let others´ opinions of something change your views..." Well, that´s called egocentrism, I guess. Self absorbance. Sure, some sort of personal independence from others is vital to develop your personality, but completely dismissing input from the outside of your personal bubble basically is what brought our community to the current state of blockhead trench fights, mind you. Individualism surely is a fine thing...but if it becomes self serving, if it is mainly done because of erecting personal safe spaces, numbing and fading out any form of criticism , even justified criticism, then this advice becomes toxic. Real openmindedness also includes signals from outside, signals that are not pleasant to recieve, and combine all of this into a weltbild that takes everything into account, not just your rather subjective and probably very biased self perception. Advice like that tends to support and sustain exactly the wrong ones in our community. If you really want to live at peace with yourself AND society, then for god´s sake, DO let others´ opinions influence your way of thinking and percieving certain issues....especially in zoophilia, constant self testing and self actualisation are VITAL virtues. Don´t ever make the same mistake as those solipsists ( sole ipsum = just yourself) and doubt everything except yourself....the real form of ratinal scepticism is zetecism, doubting everything INCLUDING yourself.
"...as long as your animals are happy..." and that is where it starts to get debatable....how do you know beyond a reasonable doubt that your animals are indeed happy and you´re not just projecting your expectations onto them? Wouldn´t be the first time of "subjective blindness" occurring...too many zoos still believe that fucking an animal will make you into a legit animal communication expert when it honestly doesn´t at all.
"...there is nothing really wrong with it, so what if people see it as gross, we´re already seen as gross people by a huge majority of population..." Well, we Germans have a proverb "Ist der Ruf erst ruiniert, lebt sich´s gänzlich ungeniert" (Once your reputation is destroyed, you don´t have to care about anything anymore)....there still is something wrong with "it" when you´re already part of a despised minority that already is heavily and falsely connected with fetishism. It adds up to the already existing negative public image of zoophiles, that´s what´s wrong with "it". To have zoophilia recognised as a legit sexual orientation, it would be better for anyone if we´d keep out any form of fetishism that might reassure any outsider of his unfavourable notion of zoophilia being a "fetish" itself. Not to mention the slippery slope argument that gets reignited by too blatant displays of real urophilia fetishism...
I really wonder where this idea comes from...this notion that "if you´re fucking animals, you MUST be openminded towards EVERYTHING else bizzarre/fetish/ pervo too". I am an exclusive , hetero zoo, no fetish, no "bucket list", no other twists in his mind. I just want to sleep with my beloved mare every once in a while and that´s it. This alone is enough for me, there´s no need to search for another "kick", another "kink", another novelty. But I´ve already understood that I´m a minority within a minority, what is quite sad for an orientation that is so desperately trying to display itself as a non fetishistic one...."once you step over a line, linestepping becomes quite a habit for some"...more, harder, more extreme, "kinkier"....the slippery slope might just not be that imaginary as a lot of the ones leaning to the left side are insisting...
