Mainstreaming Bestiality: What It’s Like to Date a Horse

[roo_ster]

We had World War G(ay), then World War T(ranny).  Now it is time for World War B(estiality) and then World War P(edophilia).

Nope, no slippery slopes here.

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/11/what-its-like-to-date-a-horse.html

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/galloping-toward-gomorrah-new-york-bestiality/

A couple of nights ago, I ran across a lengthy interview in New York magazine, titled, “What It’s Like to Date a Horse.” I thought it was a satire of some sort. It’s not. I’m not linking to it, because it is sick, sick stuff. It’s incredibly graphic, and I had decided not to write about it. But the more I thought about the thing, the more disturbed it made me. Here’s why: What’s significant is not that this deranged behavior happens. It has no doubt always been with us. What’s significant is that this interview appears in a mainstream magazine...

One extremely tasteless and morally revolting interview in a leading magazine is not the end of the world. But it is a signpost. It’s not going to make everyone run out and get an animal boyfriend or girlfriend. But it does attempt to weaken an important taboo by giving a sympathetic forum to a deranged man whose behavior deserves the strongest condemnation, and who personally needs help. It’s important to pay attention to this for exactly the reason Robby George says. Ideas have consequences. If your idea is that all consensual sex is good, or at least beyond judgment, and that sexual desire is its own justification, then you have met your consequence in New York‘s anonymous zoophile. If you can stomach reading the thing, it’s rather remarkable how the perv defends himself and his desire using the language and reasoning we have all become familiar with in other contexts.

I suppose World War B will give new meaning to "Just keep f****** that chicken!"

[MillCreek]

Whenever I see this sort of topic, I immediately think of the small town of Enumclaw here in Washington. 

[White Horseradish]

So, is this your horse? Or did the horse complain?

I am seriously hard pressed to work up any concern over this and I am puzzled why anyone else can.

[MicroBalrog]

If your idea is that all consensual sex is good, or at least beyond judgment, and that sexual desire is its own justification, then you have met your consequence in New York‘s anonymous zoophile

If the choice is between accepting zoophilia and rejecting the idea of consent-based sexual ethics, I am happy to accept zoophilia.

[Balog]

If the choice is between accepting zoophilia and rejecting the idea of consent-based sexual ethics, I am happy to accept zoophilia.

This post demonstrates the remarkable success the Libertarians have at the polls perfectly.

[lupinus]

This post demonstrates the remarkable success the Libertarians have at the polls perfectly.

Does it count as zoophilia if they perpetrate the act whilst wearing a wookie suit?

[AJ Dual]

Does it count as zoophilia if they perpetrate the act whilst wearing a wookie suit?

I'm awfully tempted to make a crack about the First Lady at this point, but since it's against the rules/TOS I won't.

I'm thinking that would count as "rape by fraud"? I thought some states had laws on the books about that. Like some guy sneaking into a dark house, and the woman in bed thinking it's her husband until she realized it later for whatever reason.

And as far as the backhanded insult to libertarianism goes, realizing the state having the power to enforce laws on consent or bestiality is possibly worse (tax burden, intrusiveness, bureaucracy, mission creep etc.) than not having those laws is not the same thing as approving of of bestiality or pedophilia, or even so much as tolerating them.

[MicroBalrog]

Last I check, the whole premise of this thread is that more and more perversions are being successfully mainstreamed, which is ostensibly doing some sort of harm to the fabric of Western Civilization.

[Perd Hapley]

If the choice is between accepting zoophilia and rejecting the idea of consent-based sexual ethics, I am happy to accept zoophilia.

Do you find anything consensual to be morally acceptable?

Do you think that not accepting bestiality requires outlawing the practice of it?

[Balog]

Last I check, the whole premise of this thread is that more and more perversions are being successfully mainstreamed, which is ostensibly doing some sort of harm to the fabric of Western Civilization.

Correct. Also a bit of schadenfreude that all of the things that got us reviled as evil hateful people for suggesting they would happen are in fact happening.

It also bears on why doctrinal libertarianism is a utopian philosophy just as much as communism.

[MicroBalrog]

Do you find anything consensual to be morally acceptable?

Broadly, yes. Including certainly polygamy and dueling.

(Please do not try to devolve this intelligent discussion into 'gotcha' questions on the definition of consent.)

Do you think that not accepting bestiality requires outlawing the practice of it?

I think that in an ideal philosophical situation it does not, in practice it does.

[MicroBalrog]

Correct. Also a bit of schadenfreude that all of the things that got us reviled as evil hateful people for suggesting they would happen are in fact happening.

Sounds to me that the people I agree with on this topic are being successful.

[Balog]

I think that in an ideal philosophical situation it does not, in practice it does.

That's sort of ironic, I say roughly the same thing about libertarianism. In an ideal philosophical situation it works, in practice it does not. Speaking here of full on doctrinal libertarianism, not the sort of low key small l version most here including myself adhere to.

Sounds to me that the people I agree with on this topic are being successful.

This is sort of confusingly phrased, but 1. yes, the folks on your side are accomplishing their goals 2. so maybe your side could stop lying about those goals and slandering people who point out what they actually are?

[MicroBalrog]

I don't know what you mean when you say that doctrinal libertarianism is utopian.

By "doctrinal libertarianism" do you mean "A system where every jot and line of the libertarian belief system is implemented"? Yes, that is certainly utopian because there's not even an agreement over what this comprises among self-identifying libertarians.

By "utopian" do you mean "it cannot be done, because libertarians cannot come to power", or do you mean "if libertarians came to power, the results would be heinous, similarly to what happened when Communists and Nazis came to power"?

so maybe your side could stop lying about those goals and slandering people who point out what they actually are?

I think we both know that there's not a central command on this issue. There are surely millions of people who genuinely support marriage equality but not, say, polygamy. So when they say polygamy isn't their goal they're not lying per se.

[Balog]

I think we both know that there's not a central command on this issue. There are surely millions of people who genuinely support marriage equality but not, say, polygamy. So when they say polygamy isn't their goal they're not lying per se.

It's late, I'm tired, and I'll need to address the first bit later.

As for this, it's also something I've been saying for a long time. Most supporters of SSM etc have no bad intentions, they're just useful idiots for the folks who do.

[roo_ster]

Libertarian is utopian in that it argues from theory down to practice & implementation rather than from observable human nature & organization to practice.  It is analogous to Marx screaming in rage at a socialist factory worker/union organizer that the worker is nothing and can achieve nothing without his (Marx's) theory of scientific materialism.

Libertarianism, like Marxism, assumes a plastic human nature that can achieve greatest liberty only through unmooring from and destruction of organic social institutions.  To be replaced by a shiny, new, theory of human relations.

[MechAg94]

I figured a big part of hard core Libertarianism is people who don't fit in claiming that anything they do is okay as long as they are not affecting others or at least others don't complain or are talked into thinking it is all okay.

My problem is you throw around polygamy and some other things like it is all fully consensual and no harm is done.  Most of the stories I have seen regarding polygamy in the US is it not always fully consenual.

Personally, I think any society without a firm moral foundation won't be a utopia for anyone.  People with your attitude love working at destroying the moral foundations set up based on Christian principles, but replace it with nothing.  They usually go way beyond simply wanting to remove laws enforcing morals to trying to wipe out any societal standards whatsoever. 

[Ned Hamford]

Tho sex positive attitudes do bring a very specific increase in pleasure; unwanted pregnancies, unstable rearing environments and their fallout, and most relevant for bestiality... disease.  Tho I suppose from the free market libertarian view, there is a whole new niche to be explored with animal related sexual aids and prophylactics.   

[lee n. field]

Libertarian is utopian in that it argues from theory down to practice & implementation rather than from observable human nature & organization to practice.  It is analogous to Marx screaming in rage at a socialist factory worker/union organizer that the worker is nothing and can achieve nothing without his (Marx's) theory of scientific materialism.

Libertarianism, like Marxism, assumes a plastic human nature that can achieve greatest liberty only through unmooring from and destruction of organic social institutions.  To be replaced by a shiny, new, theory of human relations.

I've been mulling over this for a long time.  Libertarians are utopian idealists.  I suspect childhood trauma.  I also suspect a lot of them simply have no internal model of human behavior that has any predictive value.

That does not mean their critique of the evils of the state is invalid.

[MechAg94]

Saying what I said, I think a lot of main stream people might go along with the whole notion if the govt stopped giving our tax money to such people and they weren't mandated special priviledges and protections.  I think a lot of the resistance is because things generally go way beyond simple tolerance.  

[White Horseradish]

Tho sex positive attitudes do bring a very specific increase in pleasure; unwanted pregnancies, unstable rearing environments and their fallout, and most relevant for bestiality... disease. 

I'm pretty sure there are fewer STDs that can be passed from animal to human than from human to human. Really, in all these respects you seem to be making more of an argument for bestiality than against.


I am still puzzled why some guy screwing a horse is a problem for anyone but the guy and the horse.

[lee n. field]

I'm pretty sure there are fewer STDs that can be passed from animal to human than from human to human.

Or, new and interesting diseases start to circulate in the human population.

[Jamisjockey]

Last I check, the whole premise of this thread is that more and more perversions are being successfully mainstreamed, which is ostensibly doing some sort of harm to the fabric of Western Civilization Judeo Christian controlled society

FTFY

[brimic]

I'm pretty sure there are fewer STDs that can be passed from animal to human than from human to human. Really, in all these respects you seem to be making more of an argument for bestiality than against.


I am still puzzled why some guy screwing a horse is a problem for anyone but the guy and the horse.

The known diseases are few, but are pretty big ones- various forms of HIV and Syphillus.

[Ron]

Freedom and liberty don't exist in a vacuum.

It will be interesting to see just how far we can stray from the philosophical presuppositions about humanity our founding documents are based upon and still have liberty.

Classical liberals try and square the circle of libertarian thought and the legitimacy of the state.

Unfortunately in the USA today libertarianism only rules in the realm of morals and culture while in the realm of politics the state is the true sovereign.

We need libertarianism to moderate the power of the state without corroding the moral fiber of the population.

Using the state levers of power to control the culture whether it is the historical Judeo-Christian majority or the new post modern majority that believes in nothing is fraught with dangers.

A nation of moral degenerates cannot maintain a free society IMHO

I've come to the conclusion we are doomed