as BM once said "Never argue with an idiot, they will just bring you down to their level and beat you." i was baiting you, you fucking moron.
what is your purpose here? i just know you are going to defend this to the very (furry) end and then piss off. do you even know what this place is about? and i am sure Ghost was right about you searching for zoophilia. how very sad.
also your grammar is fucking terrible. too cluttered, even for an OCD. Oddjob would have a field day.
EDIT: wow you double posted. you really are smart, doc.
what the? where the fuck did you graduate from?
You target me as a person for insults, yet you did not open your mind for my original subjection, seeking your opinion; seen as the thread started turning into a chat, rather than a discussion, I might as well have chose your forum.
And I am one of the many 1,000,000+ minimum zoosexuals in this world, and you mock me for personal faults of your own perspective, without guided evidence sampling.
Why don't you just ban me if you don't want to answer my question.
All I seek is an answer, there's other websites that'd surely love to take the money for traffic out there.
I double posted out-of-time, I was replying to multiple posts, yes I should have used multi-quotes, but I am a fast typer, with much time currently, and I hoped for you to answer that simple question.
I find it bizarre you don't think someone like this 'hi i amz a dawg fckr' as being someone as bad grammar, yet because I am a zoophile, you are implicating sexualism via personal mocking.
May be I am not English, after all, I'm good for a now-Dutch person, no?
If no answer, all I can say is, goodbye, at least for now; I'll check you in the morning, or perhaps the next day.
I can't really see any reason to have a problem with the doc's sexual preference. (Not saying anyone does have a problem with it, i just thought i'd get my thoughts out there)
__________________
Arise O Man in thy strength. The kingdom is thine to inherit!
“Also, we don't need no Jacob to gay this place up. We have officially won the award for the forum with a highest proportion of gay members whilst not being themed about poojabbing, cowboys or Kylie.” - Nate
Mr. James Smith, (you don't mind my calling you Mister, do you?), it seems like you have a very odd double standard. See, while you relentlessly defend the validity of cramming your dong inside of some poor pooch, you also tell other people that their opinions are (with extremely melodramatic flair) outright wrong.
Now, something I guess you didn't see with your Doctorery is that many, many devote their lives to breeding dogs (Not breeding with) or sheltering them.
Since an early age (pretty much since I was born) my Mom's best friend has been a dog breeder, trainer, and law teacher (not to dogs). I wonder if you've pondered in your mighty researcher brain how the mere concept of Zoophilia--the slightest hint of sexual animal abuse sounds to these people.
You know what, how much can I buy one of your kids for? 400-1500$ for a good purebred dog, right? Seems fair. I guess it doesn't matter what age group they're in, or if they haven't reached sexual maturity. Hell, I guess I'll just take one of them home and rape 'til the sun goes down! God knows there's nothing wrong with that, right? I mean, apart from social scrutiny on pedophiles, what could be described as an outright taskforce for catching them in some countries and the simple thought of "Hey, maybe this is wrong." one should feel at the thought of molestation or sexual predatory behavior.
I mean, those dog breeders--they don't put an effort into finding particular traits for nothing, right? Or raising them from puppies? Or taking them from the Bitch and hoping, hoping that they get a good home and family? Putting their trust in the person with the little doggie in their arms?
Think about it like that. You can pour over as much documentation and find as many ridiculous excuses as possible, but at the end of the day, what are you doing? Fingering your dog until you can cram yourself into it and feel like you're justified? Or hell, Tranquilize it even? What exactly is wrong with you that you decided to make love to your pet? Companionship? Hell, pooches are made for it. A warm, cozy feeling as they trample over your face and balls, knowing they don't mean any harm, they're just dogs? Well duh.
I've worked with Dogs in a shelter. A humane society. You know what's humane about having sex with a dog?
Nothin'.
Because it isn't human.
Now, let's go a little bit off topic. Let's talk about cats.
Cats have spines all over their penis.
This serves many purposes. We won't go into detail on what they are, but look down. Brush your neckbeard aside and take a look at your genitals.
You don't have any spikes on your cock, do you?
Now, maybe you haven't researched what a dog dick looks like. Allow me to enlighten you.
Here's the general shape of a human penis: Warning: Phallic!
Here's a dog penis: Delicious.
Hmm. Seems pretty different, huh? Odd, I mean, it's not like we're different species, right? Of course it's possible to inseminate a dog with human sperm, isn't it?
Something you're obviously forgetting is that, well, sex, above all things, is about reproduction.
Does it feel good? Aww yeeah, but it should, right? Makin' babies shouldn't be as humdrum as cleaning earwax or blowing your nose. You should be motivated, motivated, MOTIVATED to fuck.
But what you're doing isn't what we in the "Clear thinking" industry like to call:
"Genetically Practical".
Because you ain't makin' yo' wife' poop out mo' babies. You just pluggin' yo dog and callin' it a night!
See, being "Genetically Practical" means that you construct more life out of your gender-based protein chains. A "Genetically Practical" person simply does not bone animals.
Someone who does, is, well:
"Genetically Impractical". Meaning we should probably castrate you and forbid the artificial insemination of any semen not donated by you into a canine.
But hey, I've just taken care of dogs for the latter half of my life, taken a part in Animal Medical services and worked with SPCA officials, so who am I to judge?
__________________ I see you jockin' me.
Last edited by Mac Sirloin; 08-11-2009 at 07:16 PM..
: I edited this like eight times for the red color, just to have to add the 'Im' at the end. Fuck.
I think that the idea of genetically practical sex has further implications that makes it difficult for me to agree with that point. However, I find the idea of having sex with any creature that isn't capable of intellectually understanding what is happening to it, well.....abhorrent would be the word I suppose.
My real complaint with the good doctor stems from his feelings that we should give a shit about him fucking his dog. He clearly did not understand this, since he went on and on about how I was making assumptions without listening to his data yeah yeah fuck off. I don't care what you do. We don't know you. You came here not with the intention of being part of our community, but merely to talk about how you like to fuck your dog. So, I'll tell you what I told the last guy. Get the fuck out.
I think that the idea of genetically practical sex has further implications that makes it difficult for me to agree with that point. However, I find the idea of having sex with any creature that isn't capable of intellectually understanding what is happening to it, well.....abhorrent would be the word I suppose.
My real complaint with the good doctor stems from his feelings that we should give a shit about him fucking his dog. He clearly did not understand this, since he went on and on about how I was making assumptions without listening to his data yeah yeah fuck off. I don't care what you do. We don't know you. You came here not with the intention of being part of our community, but merely to talk about how you like to fuck your dog. So, I'll tell you what I told the last guy. Get the fuck out.
Genetically practical in the broadest sense. I'm saying you fuck anything that isn't human and you're fucked in the head. Also your hand counts.
:
But am I the only person who has a horrible curiosity about whether the Doc's dog is a male or a female?
I'm not into sex because it produces babies. I hate the things. If sex got rid of babies, I'd love it even more. I'm into it because it's fun.
Masturbating to porn isn't sex, Nemo.
__________________
Ah, we are high school boys,
the miserable high school boys.
If we were girls, we could get popular by doing anything:
rock band, jazz band,
karate, kendo, mahjong, cyborg, synchronized swimming...
On the other hand, high school boys are
useless outside battle and sports anime.
But they're recklessly trying to make a slice-of-life anime about us.
Ah, we are high school boys,
the miserable high school boys.
Anyhoo Kastere, while I agree with the general idea of your post there are some things I should point out. First of all, I don't know any zoophile that would ever touch any animal sexually until it is sexually mature and actually capable of receiving (or having, whatever) sex from/with a human being. Sex with a very small dog is not done because it would hurt them, for instance.
I understand it must be kind of annoying to breed dogs, take care of them, watch them grow up and by the end of the day you sit down at your computer, read this thread and realize that some people buying those dogs could be doing so to have sex with them when they grow up. I mean, you don't breed these dogs so people can have sex with them, I think that if I was in your place I'd be pissed off too. But what you should also realize is that the animals a zoophile keeps and loves often get extremely good treatment because he/she is a zoophile. The animal get all kinds of luxury no dog in a normal family would ever get, no matter if the dog wants to have sex or not. Being a zoophile is about more then just sex. It's a love for animals first, sex second. Therefor no real zoophile out there would ever mistreat any animal in any way. A real zoophile would not buy a dog just for the sex, he would not have sex with a premature dog, he would not force a dog into sex and most important of all, he would treat the dog like anyone else would treat their wive or husband, which can only be a good quality IMO.
And of course there are disgusting fuckers out there who sneak into a shed and violate horses with broomsticks (true story) or tie a dog down to have sex with the poor thing until the end of time against it's will. But you can't compare people like that with 'regular' (for lack of a better term) zoophiles. For all intents and purposes, that would be like comparing child molesters to normal people. They both have sex with other people, only one is wrong and one is not.
There is also no denying that dogs actually can enjoy sex with humans. I've seen plenty of cases where male dogs are excited to be allowed to mount his 'partner' again. Heck, some dogs even get a tad aggressive because they want to have sex NOW!
Same goes for female dogs, plenty of them will at some point beg for sex.
I won't blame anyone who is morally opposed to this because it's not natural or because they find it disgusting. But in a lot of cases there is nothing abusive about zoophilia at all so that shouldn't be a reason to hate it.
EDIT: And to make this post more insteresting, I found the OANST video blooper reel .
Anyhoo Kastere, while I agree with the general idea of your post there are some things I should point out. First of all, I don't know any zoophile that would ever touch any animal sexually until it is sexually mature and actually capable of receiving (or having, whatever) sex from/with a human being. Sex with a very small dog is not done because it would hurt them, for instance.
I understand it must be kind of annoying to breed dogs, take care of them, watch them grow up and by the end of the day you sit down at your computer, read this thread and realize that some people buying those dogs could be doing so to have sex with them when they grow up. I mean, you don't breed these dogs so people can have sex with them, I think that if I was in your place I'd be pissed off too. But what you should also realize is that the animals a zoophile keeps and loves often get extremely good treatment because he/she is a zoophile. The animal get all kinds of luxury no dog in a normal family would ever get, no matter if the dog wants to have sex or not. Being a zoophile is about more then just sex. It's a love for animals first, sex second. Therefor no real zoophile out there would ever mistreat any animal in any way. A real zoophile would not buy a dog just for the sex, he would not have sex with a premature dog, he would not force a dog into sex and most important of all, he would treat the dog like anyone else would treat their wive or husband, which can only be a good quality IMO.
And of course there are disgusting fuckers out there who sneak into a shed and violate horses with broomsticks (true story) or tie a dog down to have sex with the poor thing until the end of time against it's will. But you can't compare people like that with 'regular' (for lack of a better term) zoophiles. For all intents and purposes, that would be like comparing child molesters to normal people. They both have sex with other people, only one is wrong and one is not.
There is also no denying that dogs actually can enjoy sex with humans. I've seen plenty of cases where male dogs are excited to be allowed to mount his 'partner' again. Heck, some dogs even get a tad aggressive because they want to have sex NOW!
Same goes for female dogs, plenty of them will at some point beg for sex.
I won't blame anyone who is morally opposed to this because it's not natural or because they find it disgusting. But in a lot of cases there is nothing abusive about zoophilia at all so that shouldn't be a reason to hate it.
EDIT: And to make this post more insteresting, I found the OANST video blooper reel .
Wow, your entire point falls apart with the word 'annoying'.
A variety of things, mostly your defense of this bullshit.
There's no validity to be had with Zoophilia. It's like stealing. You can't say, "Oh, I stole 10$ from my friend, but at least it wasn't twenty." There's no justifying it period. Taking it so lightly is really fucking arrogant, too. People who raise the animals don't say, "Oh, that's annoying." they go fucking nuts over the revulsion of it.
Just because an animal is sexually mature doesn't mean you're allowed to have sex with it. It's so fucking simple.
Now, let's go a little bit off topic. Let's talk about cats.
Cats have spines all over their penis.
This serves many purposes. We won't go into detail on what they are, but look down. Brush your neckbeard aside and take a look at your genitals.
You don't have any spikes on your cock, do you?
Now, maybe you haven't researched what a dog dick looks like. Allow me to enlighten you.
Here's the general shape of a human penis: Warning: Phallic!
Here's a dog penis: Delicious.
Hmm. Seems pretty different, huh? Odd, I mean, it's not like we're different species, right? Of course it's possible to inseminate a dog with human sperm, isn't it?
Something you're obviously forgetting is that, well, sex, above all things, is about reproduction.
Does it feel good? Aww yeeah, but it should, right? Makin' babies shouldn't be as humdrum as cleaning earwax or blowing your nose. You should be motivated, motivated, MOTIVATED to fuck.
But what you're doing isn't what we in the "Clear thinking" industry like to call:
"Genetically Practical".
Because you ain't makin' yo' wife' poop out mo' babies. You just pluggin' yo dog and callin' it a night!
See, being "Genetically Practical" means that you construct more life out of your gender-based protein chains. A "Genetically Practical" person simply does not bone animals.
Someone who does, is, well:
"Genetically Impractical". Meaning we should probably castrate you and forbid the artificial insemination of any semen not donated by you into a canine.
But hey, I've just taken care of dogs for the latter half of my life, taken a part in Animal Medical services and worked with SPCA officials, so who am I to judge?
When in doubt...
Just add more perspective calculcations and sexualist insults?
Scratch that, do gay men see a vagina on their partner's anus?
Ah, no; because the guy he is fucking is a 'guy'.
Considering by latest theories (yes, NOTHING is evidential YET, so both you and me hold our OWN opinions; just by average they are different), that the sexes are different species, and shouldn't be classed as equal legally or biologically (so you can't change sex, and you can't change species either); unless of course, you honestly think they are the same...
So that means that two same-shelled species are floating around in ya' balls?
This may sound funny to you, but the only reason why you can't impregnate a dog is because you don't carry the two dog species (male and female) in your sperm. However, despite environmental and development boundaries, a forced scale could enable a third sex; but hey, may be zoophiles could have that in the future? After all, humans want to become better; surely that means, improve/change their species? No, you can't have it both ways.
Look laddies, I'm afraid to say you're only here now, because this successful system (out of many, by the way), we call 'sexual reproduction'; yet you find it mandatory to keep the species going, and use it as a pressing reason against zoophilia, however the fact that logically, it doesn't matter if we even stop having sex altogether and die out, does it? After all, for as long as you live your life to the fall; surely you are just confining yourselves to your traditions, which, by the way, religion has accelerated.
I don't honestly give a fuck what you think, I have my opinion, you have yours.
I just find it amazing to see how much immature conduct is constructed between the lot of you at this current moment. It is almost like you are brainwashed by the average theory. I mean, even the most professional scientists and philosophers (even like I), are sought to as having the 'superior opinion'; yet, what makes you think we do? We read from others studies, and this intellect has developed by historical sciences, not instantiated intelligence. Yet you say 'humans' are the only ones with superior 'intelligence', but you forget you model the word 'intelligence' to suit our understanding of exterior forces, which again, is by averages; and averages can go wrong.
Of course inter-species mating on the scale between a dog and a human is near enough impossible; but one thing you're missing is, despite this sounds abstracted, it relies on concepts as an average, and this abstract is born and put into your heads. Now, with my love towards my 'dog' (whom I handle 'dog', despite my disliking, because 'person' normally means 'human', in your eyes), I have broken the boundary, and realised how much we really model ourselves on bad-to-inherit intellectual bodies; and forget that the evidence found is purely data, and the information is purely perspective.
Yet you ignore the issue by saying there is a creator or something, and he designed humans for humans; and dogs for dogs, and do you realise how insane that makes you?
I only have sex because my dog likes it, in fact, I don't anymore, you know why I continue? Because 'they' like it. Zoophiles vary between homosexual and heterosexual; in fact, there's a lot more heterosexuals than homosexual, so it is a really bad idea to call it 'sick and sodom'.
All in all, you do say 'you've go nothing wrong with dog ', though the expletive says it all about your opinion. Now from the first expression, all you've made is insults, but could not explain any REAL reason, that it is anti-zoo, and not pro-zoo.
You speak as if I'm some sex-crazy animal fucking whore! And it is your direct 'implication' (may I say, as an oxymoron), that befalls your argument, as it really does go to show you know nothing, and you know what, I'm a doctor with lots and lots of research in this field, and I do.
I'll tell you, if you must know; I did purchase 'them', yes, and for certain, I had no intention of delivering my sexuality onto an non-human animal, just like you don't, right now, I should think, anyway. I fell in love, that love turned into passion, I just loved to give them pleasure, and you know what the best form of giving pleasure is? Sex, of course. It just 'happened', it's not like I put duct-tape round their legs and force myself for live-masturbatory purposes only, I love my dog, would you do it to YOUR partner? I most certainly hope not, there are rapists, in both non-human-to-human relationships (bestiality/zoosadism), and human-to-human relationships (just call it: - rape / brutal rape). Only rape makes the news, and the same goes for bestiality; why do you honestly think non-brutal activity would make the headlines? These bestialists don't make a good example for zoophiles, because bestialists, zoosadists and zoophiles are all zoosexual; just because we all have sex, doesn't mean we're all the same!
Now, if you fall in love with someone, what's wrong with devoting PLEASURE, NOT HARM to your beloved; it is love that drives me to lust, not the other way around. I just enjoy giving them that ultimate pleasure, after all, for as long as nobody is harmed in it all, who cares? And how dare you even suggest I'd harm my beloved!
And I don't fuck cats!
:
A variety of things, mostly your defense of this bullshit.
There's no validity to be had with Zoophilia. It's like stealing. You can't say, "Oh, I stole 10$ from my friend, but at least it wasn't twenty." There's no justifying it period. Taking it so lightly is really fucking arrogant, too. People who raise the animals don't say, "Oh, that's annoying." they go fucking nuts over the revulsion of it.
Just because an animal is sexually mature doesn't mean you're allowed to have sex with it. It's so fucking simple.
Christ.
You make the rules do you 'signed 'Christ''?
Ok, whatever you say skin rubber...
Last edited by Dr James Smith; 08-12-2009 at 09:00 AM..
.
