|
Are we our own worst enemy?
|
11-16-2018, 03:08 PM
Is drawing public attention to ourselves inherently flawed and dangerous to us and our way of life? Is it even necessary? Does having public approval or tolerance of bestiality or zoophilia change your daily life with your mate or companion, and how? sw 
11-16-2018, 05:23 PM
As the gays did, we need to go through a period of being laughed at. Many of the Adult Swim cartoons make jokes about animal fucking. Some more obvious than other. In Archer, the scientist had a radioactive pig in his lab. He showed it was radioactive by pointing a geiger counter at it and it made the usual sound, then he pointed to his own crotch and it made the sound again. Back in '94 a show started and ran until 2015. 'The Vicar of Dibley'. Which had a farmer that openly talked about his love of sheep in a sexual way. This is an English show, Don't know how this sort of thing would fly in the US. We have to be seen as non-threatening. The more jokes the better. But too, realise that we may never get there. Too many people think of their 'ankle biter' dog is their child. To get folks to think of animals as fully consenting sexual partners, is something we may never obtain. So be happy to be the butt of cheap jokes. And leave it at that. 
11-16-2018, 10:09 PM
1) I have only seen bad outcomes to making a public spectacle of any kind. Another scandal, another law. Because it's only the goat rapist murder that makes the news, not the guy hugging his Great dane in a suggestive manner. Yes as Ramseys pointed out, sheep shagger jokes help I believe; it raises consciousness while being friendly and non-threatening. I have a poster I would post in Jokes if the Error 200 issue is ever resolved, it says "What do you get when you inject human DNA in a goat?" Answer: "Banned from the Petting Zoo." HaHa. No threat to people's sensibilities. 2) I don't give a Fat Flying Fig about public approval or tolerance. My kennel has no windows, neither does my barn, the doors lock from the outside and inside. I don't "do it" outside since Google Earth. So people will think what they will think, most of them will disagree with my views on 75 or a hundred different subjects completely unrelated to my "orientation". I really don't regard other people's opinions as more than a curiosity anyway, they are usually wrong. Young people usually are. Whippersnappers! (Puts on decades-old rock-n-roll and pulls down shades). [img]<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/cool.png[/img]/emoticons/[email protected] 2x" title="B|" width="20" />  "Is drawing public attention to ourselves inherently flawed and dangerous...?" Not an easily answerable question. If you focus on what we as a community send out, the picture our entire worldwide community is transmitting to society, I´d say we better keep our heads down and our asses off the radar. There is not a single ideal or ethical hallmark we zoos bring into the conversations with the normies that isn´t grossly violated by some other "zoo". And even worse, within our community a strong hive mind has manifested and was reinforced over decades. "Us versus Them". That leads to an almost automatic and reflex-like defense mechanism from our side when there´s just another incident with some "zoo" caught. Even the worst "zoo" will find his lemming like hive minded supporter...and with an atmosphere like that, basically sectarian like conduct and the continually underlying "idea" of "because I fuck animals, I absolutely am a divine expert with godlike knowledge of animal communication that makes your opinion invalid ab initio", it´s not too hard to understand why it´s better to shut up with all of that " educate society about zoos". I cannot say if our chances in society would chance if we as a community would give out a more trustworthy image, but I can say that it surely doesn´t help us if any highly ethical principle we zoos pull out of our brains is proven wrong by another "zoo" even before we are done speaking it out loud. "Is it even necessary?" Well, in a certain way, it is necessary. In another, it absolutely isn´t. If the main goal of "zoophilia" is developing a "zoo identity", it surely is necessary; but if the main focus lies on finding a way to live your life peacefully and content with your animal partner, then it´s absolutely detrimental. It just depends on whether "zoophilia" is more about the social media aspect for someone...or an orientation that even justifies sacrificing your ego in order to achieve a happy life with your animal. And we all should not forget that the emergence of the "anti zoo" scene didn´t happen out of the blue, it was just a reaction to all those "zoo activists" vomiting their "wisdom" into everywhere, even the most inappropriate places and forums. Newton´s law: "every action causes a counterreaction on the same potential energy level". Timing also plays an important role and I´d state that in a time of returning ultra religiosity, the re- emergence of right wing populists all over the world and a general pendulum shift towards conservativism, trying to gain tolerance for zoophilia, especially when a general and unlimited legality of zoophilia and bestiality is the demand, is plain silly. The excesses of all kinds of sexual deviants have made it hard for the average person to swallow yet another bitter pill, a pill that may be even more bitter of taste than every other pill swallowed before. In the 80´s and 90´s , there was a different social climate that was more promising. Today, in a time even the US law of Roe vs. Wade has been made a debatable issue again by Trump and his associates, what do you think, is the world ready for us animal fuckers? I guess we all know the answer... "Does having public approval (...) change your life (...)?" IMO, no. I just don´t see how it would be able to change anything. Since I consider my sexuality a private matter only and am in favour of not trying to sort out my own insecurities with anyone else but myself, the effect a public "okay!" would have on my mare, on me or on anyone else is marginal at best. Public approval only caters to the ego of the "zoo". Seeking reaffirmation in others surely is a natural trait in the species of the "zoon politikon", but when it´s the only thing that grants you your own personal bliss, I smell the self esteem issues from a hundered miles away. I don´t want applause or approval for sleeping with my mare...well, maybe from her, but that´s it. [img]<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/wink.png[/img]/emoticons/[email protected] 2x" title=";)" width="20" /> Zoophilia is an integral part of my personality, my sexual identity and my emotional landscape. It radidates into practically all aspects of my life. Emphasis on "my life"...it simply doesn´t belong anywhere else. 
11-17-2018, 01:52 AM
It all depends on the presentation... No, I have absolutely no fricking idea what the proper presentation is, so don't ask. I'd avoid powerpoint, though. (Libreoffice is better anyhow). 
11-17-2018, 07:31 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-17-2018, 07:36 AM by WinterGreenWolf.)
Quote: I don't think it's necessarily always dangerous, as stated in my thread I came out to a good close circle of friends a few years back and they understood completely (most of them did, there was one female friend whom I don't think likes me much these days: but you win some you lose some). That being said: spectacles like Hands, Aluzky and Whitney Wisconsin are -bad, bad- juju for us all around. It could be a decent idea to pose better animal cruelty laws, reverse some of the absolutely retarded bestiality laws (which solve nothing.. for those of us with a brain...) and maybe reduce some of the hostility.. I have a point on that one later, touched on by Ramseys.. As far as 'daily life', while it would be nice to not to have to constantly look over my shoulder, worry with blackballing or blackmail: nothing would change. They would still be my companion / lover / mate, our intimacy would continue to be private, and I'd do what I could to keep them always happy and healthy. Not to mention not have to deal with the sneers and rash of bullshit about 'OH, you AREN'T getting your animal's genitalia mutilated, what -is- *wrong* with you?'. There's logical, even scientific reasons for not doing so, but just saying '(S)He's my mate..' would be so much easier. Yet again not a deal breaker and a 'need tolerance' to fix: a good ol' fuck off to the sneers of vets and public works just fine. Now.... Quote: These, these people should never even be allowed to have a pet rock! Yes, this makes me angry and yes I *am* going to vent... These dumb shits are the same people who always bring up 'the situation' with sex, 'power imbalance', 'they don't know', 'their IQ is that of a two-year-old'.. I get -so- tired of that bullshit, I want to spew violently every time I hear that sick old rhetoric.. Animals, are, not, human, children! Animals are also not 'innocent fur babies'. I bet that stallion plowing a Mare of his harem in a pasture is just there in his mind, to these people, going 'Oh I don't know what I'm doing! Oh why oh why, hey: magic baby!'. It's absolutely laughable to me too, the old procreation drivel is just stupid too: if you say we can't read an animal's mind and don't know what they want, then neither can you! If you -know- that animals fuck eachother silly simply for a baby, you are the greatest Animal Psychologist, Animal Behaviorist, Zoologist, and Biologist who's ever existed in human history! Even most modern Biologists will tell you sex is had, and triggered: even the instinct behind sex is driven by Dopamine release.. Feel good, do more.. Really when you think of it, a non-human is the ultimate hedonist... They don't give two fucks really as long as something feels good and they get to do it. Doesn't mean they're stupid, or dumb. Sex can form very powerful bonds, but they're also not going to sit around for two weeks and think 'Was plowing that young human up the rear -really- a good idea? I mean it felt good but..'. No animal alive is going through that struggle, I can almost guarantee.. Sorry, a bit off topic.. But the 'pet-parents', 'fur babies', and animal-children bullshit really gets my heckles up.. Especially since some of it runs in members of my family..
11-17-2018, 01:08 PM
"In individuals, insanity is rare. In masses, it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche WGW, the essence of all this is that we should completely refrain from "campaigning" on a large scale and focus on making small baby goose steps instead. Social media is the wrong way for our activist urges. We´re mostly successful when we´re having eye-to-eye conversations with our best and closest friends, those who know more of us than just our screen name and thus have a wider picture of us "deviants". In social media, everyone showing even the least bit of sympathy towards us finds himself lumped in with us immediately ("If you´re defending those vile animal rapists, you must be one of them , too!"). Actual discourse is buried by social dynamics in social media and tribalism prevails. That´s the lesson that has to be learned and internalised by our community. If you feel the urge to tell "it" to somebody else, do it in a framesetting that is in your favour, not one that is rigged against you from the very beginning. Fight the battles you can win, not the ones you cannot. "...reverse some of the retarded bestiality laws..." I´d opt for another approach, regulation. Much like with soft drugs, limited access and neutral control that could immediately interfere when symptoms of harm appear. I absolutely do appreciate the deterring effects anti bestiality legislation can have, I don´t want "zoophilia" to become the next hip and "in" thing for the sexually bored, the inevitable consequence of legalising it with no possibility to steer and direct it. Or, as I say, " legal ´zoophilia´ is heaven for the beasties, but utter hell for the animals". In zoophilia , at least three parties are involved, society, the zoophiles and last, but not least , the animals. "Legal zoophilia" would hand out the keys of the candyshop to the "zoos", with a big middle finger swung at the other two parties involved. Only controlled zoophilia would create a stable balance with all three parties´ rights taken into the equation. "Animals are not human children" True dat. But I´d furiously advise against feeling smugly encouraged by this truth. We zoos don´t know more than anyone else. Sticking your penis in an animal (or vice versa) does not miraculously turn us all into Dr Dolittles. We are equally dependent on guesses and assumptions as anyone else feeling entitled to say "how animals really are". My take on this wouldn´t match your approach of calling them hedonists, I usually try to stay away from labelling animals as I understood that "function follows form" when humans talk about "what animals are". We are way too entrenched in our "humanhood" , we simply cannot make valid statements about animals without subconsciously applying human reality to them. But if I´d be forced to make a statement about how aminals perceive life, I´d compare it to the experiences of "depersonalisation" you have with large doses of psychedelics or that "non mindset" of accomplished zen roshis who have dedicated all their life striving for nirvana/satori/illumination. A kind of spontaneous manifestation, only slightly disturbed by rudimentary symbol systems to communicate with each other. No yesterday and no tomorrow, in a human sense. But that´s just an approximation since even I , with my three decades of experience with horses, cannot really make definite statements about horses, every horse is different and what works with one will not do with another. That´s why I despise the whole therian and anthro scene, including furries. No one of them knows what it feels to be an animal, they only mistake their ideas of what it would feel for a HUMAN to have animal bodies, limbs and minds. Mistaking the map for the real territory. And don´t get me wrong on this, I too am "suffering" (well, not really [img]<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/wink.png[/img]/emoticons/[email protected] 2x" title=";)" width="20" /> ) from "species dysphoria". Having said that, it´s no surprise that most of those "I really am an animal inside!" types show little to no real traits of their "animalhood" when they are confronted with their "real species". Well, besides the implausible stories they usually not hesitate to tell to convince...as long as you´re human, you will always be bound to human mind patterns. Even satori and the deepest egoless trip won´t change that fully. And beware of stepping into the same pitfall as those you accuse as "creationist drivel advocates". You have to know that creating patterns out of the chaotic world we experience everyday is an essential survival strategy of humans. We literally are the "pattern making apes" of nature. We are doomed to make "sense" out of everything and are way more of artistic creators of our "reality" (Ì´d rather call ´em reality tunnels) than we´re aware of. I recommend just accepting the "so-ness" of animals and not trying to impose human mindsets onto them. The very moment you verbalise "what animals really are" , you have proven yourselves wrong. Animals are ...*sound of a gong* [img]<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/wink.png[/img]/emoticons/[email protected] 2x" title=";)" width="20" /> The tendency to verbalise concepts about animals is coined into every human and it takes a shitload of efforts to even become aware of that, let alone developing a different mindset that´s not so dependent on human concepts and comparisons of animals with these concepts. We can only understand animals from a human perspective, we´ll never be able to fully understand unless the Hindus are right and reincarnation is real. About that " they don´t really give two fucks as long as someting feels good" bit, well, it only tells a partial truth. If you are right, then why don´t animals do it all the time then? Besides a tiny number of species, there are mating seasons regulating sexuality. We humans with our all-around-the-year readiness are rather untypical mammals. Don´t get me wrong on this either, my Hannover mare quickly learned that daily consummation of our partnership was something good and pleasant, she awaited me every morning and while I was feeding the other horses, she usually peed and expected my return with her tail held up high in the air. But that isn´t something she would have done naturally, even though the males in every species are always "ready". So it seems to be a bit more complicated than what you said. There is more to it and even I still am puzzled why even with my new mare I´m no longer than 1 and a half year with, sleeping way more frequently with each other than the natural hormonal cycle would suggest is so effortlessly and flawlessly achieved. The only thing I could bring up here is the most unscientific word in the world....love.
11-17-2018, 10:09 PM
There was a time I thought hearts and minds could be changed by my little writings and others like them, and should be. The only effect I know such have had is to have influenced a few folks wavering on the cusp of laziness to call themselves "zoo" instead of continuing to work at a life. This, perhaps not in those words, from their own mouths. Never have I heard a non-zoo exclaim that our writings have influenced a friendly attitude from them. Rather the opposite has happened. I fear the same with jokes and other humor. It has after all existed longer. I fear I no longer want a "better" public image for zoophilia as we define it, or a greater image for bestiality than has existed for millennia. Neither prevented my relationships with my lovers from being full and rewarding for both of us. Nothing will change for any future relationship that I can see by having such improved upon. So why desire it? Perhaps I've just become jaded. Maybe I'm in a deep funk with it all. But is it dangerous to us to even be trying? That's probably the most important question I asked above. My own thoughts have changed much over the years, as have they on many "zoo" topics, but I still feel some sort of public image is necessary by us only to prevent there being instead an image of us by the public in general. I do believe we need to not embrace everyone who hangs the label "zoo" upon themselves and show the public some sort of ethical stance and behavior. Without doing so, yes it is dangerous to have a public image because it will be that of the abuser, the newspaper shock story, the neighborhood ridicule and nothing else. My somewhat mixed thoughts, sw I don´t think you´ve become jaded, Silverwolf. You´ve just reached that point of clarity many older zoos occasionally reach when they had just too much of that "activism" bs and seen too much to continue pursuing illusions, illusions that don´t even have any benefit for our relationships. As I said, we´ve lost our true priorities and replaced them with something that pets the ego. That led us to the absurd situation we find ourselves in today. I´d even say that at this moment in time, we couldn´t better our public image even if we wanted and used the appropriate, most promising ways available to generate understanding. Too much porcellain has already been broken and it will be decades before "zoophilia" does not evoke pictures of Pinyan, Spink, et al. I too believe we screwed up this to a point where it simply doesn´t matter anymore. Where the main focus of any zoophile should be completely restricted on building an environment that provides the maximum of safety for our animal partners. That is what really counts, not whether you can run around , yelling "I´m a suuuuh!" in everyone´s faces without any repercussions. I made that promise to myself some 20 years ago, the promise to quit and pull out of all "zoo forums" when I will turn 50. That date is not too distant in the future and I will enjoy completely abandoning all that hassle and bickering about "zoo issues". I will use my remaining time on this planet for my beautiful ladies, especially my Tinker girl. I have this luxurious option because I understood very early in my life that I had to prepare the grounds early. In my teens, I was just an average guy with a strange sexual orientation, but no access to horses whatsoever. I had big dreams, but no idea how I could ever achieve them. And then I started to work for my dreams. Against heavy resistance from my mother, I chose to become a riding instructor. I worked my ass off , I somehow coped with the unfavourable circumstances in public boarding stables. And now I´m here, nearing my fifties, on my own farm, with my four ladies who always start a fight over who´s the one that gets the first and the longest scratches and cuddles when I enter the pasture to bring the "crew" back in. I look back onto my life and am thankful to the max that I haven´t shied away from the "years of bleeding hands" as I call my apprenticeship time. I had to clean 40 boxes every morning, from 6 AM to noon. Everything was worth it. I met my soulmate mare, had the blessing of 22 years with the most loving and loveable mare, no, female being and have served my purpose on this planet, that of being my mare´s guard and company. When I finally will leave this life, I want to go with a smile...and I will go with a smile. Life is fine.
11-17-2018, 11:39 PM
I think you've had some exceptionally bad activists taint your perspective frankly. But I am by most definitions, a bad activist, so ignore me. I was raised and educated in one of the most liberal college cities in the continental US and it shows. |
