The Ethical Zoo

RSS
Aug 2

ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT

Y.know…flooding my inbox with 10 messages in all caps isn’t going to make me feel guilty, sorry or change my mind about what I think. It will only get you blocked and deleted. Waste your time on someone who cares about knee-jerk capslock statements over well thought out arguments and data. Toodles!

For you metal fans out there. \m/ -_- \m/

monorailphoenix:

So I decided to watch this. It was a pretty interesting documentary.

MCSO: 4th arrest of bestiality suspect caught through Craigslist posting

omnimodus:

theethicalzoo:

Oh look another queer and trans zoo. Don’t say I didn’t tell you we existed.

But seriously though, 4 times this has happened. 4 TIMES! I keep telling you guys (or girls, or non-binaries), STOP doing stuff like this. Are you REALLY that desperate? It’s like looking for marijuana on craigslist, DON’T DO IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO GO TO JAIL!

Masturbate!

Do something else that won’t land you in jail!

Next time, save the cops some trouble and just walk right into the station all cuffed up and ready to go why don’t you? 

I warn you all again: If you go looking for experiences from other people, you are really putting yourself at serious risk. Not only to you, but also any animals you may have in your care. Save up and move to where it is legal if you have to. Get some animal dildos. Do “whatever” you have to do as long as it is ethical and not something like offering yourself up on a silver platter to the authorities.

The more you all go to jail, the more we get thinned out as a community. Think about that.

just going to note that fox is misgendering her. she’s a trans woman, not a man.

the huffpo article at the very least treats her with the barest respect

Ahh, thank you. I always hate posting from FOX for reasons just like that, but it was the only link I found for that story at the time. I was confused at first because of the wording that FOX used to describe her.

mintypartdeux:

hey are you Mr Tumnus because i want to faun-icate with you

I had such a crush on him <3

MCSO: 4th arrest of bestiality suspect caught through Craigslist posting

Oh look another queer and trans zoo. Don’t say I didn’t tell you we existed.

But seriously though, 4 times this has happened. 4 TIMES! I keep telling you guys (or girls, or non-binaries), STOP doing stuff like this. Are you REALLY that desperate? It’s like looking for marijuana on craigslist, DON’T DO IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO GO TO JAIL!

Masturbate!

Do something else that won’t land you in jail!

Next time, save the cops some trouble and just walk right into the station all cuffed up and ready to go why don’t you? 

I warn you all again: If you go looking for experiences from other people, you are really putting yourself at serious risk. Not only to you, but also any animals you may have in your care. Save up and move to where it is legal if you have to. Get some animal dildos. Do “whatever” you have to do as long as it is ethical and not something like offering yourself up on a silver platter to the authorities.

The more you all go to jail, the more we get thinned out as a community. Think about that.

zoosexualblacklist:

Zoosexuals are just plain attention whores who like to fuck animals for attention or because they’re too fucking ugly to get laid by another human. What they call “zoosexuality” isn’t even a sexuality it’s probably just some sick kink somebody made up for publicity.

image

We’ve been together for almost 2 years in a poly relationship. I also have a close friend with benefits and I got out on dates with other people about a couple times a month or so. They all know I am zoo.

But, I’m only this way because I am too ugly for people to want me. Not that we should be holding human beings to normalized beauty standards anyways.

Why most internet activists don’t change any minds

On Facebook I quietly unsubscribe from friends who regularly make angry issue-related posts, even if they’re right. I don’t want to be pummeled by “truth,” no matter how true it is.

I understand why they do it. I’ve done it. Ignorance — of overfishing, of puppy mills, of normalized sexism, of what vaccines can and can’t do — can be genuinely dangerous, and wanting to reduce this ignorance is understandable.

Some are able to do it carefully and diplomatically, and I have learned a lot from these people.

But most internet activists let contempt seep into the message. It becomes about making others wrong instead of trying to help them be right. Just visit virtually any issue-related message board. It’s adversarial. It’s normal to blame people for their ignorance.

Ignorance, if that’s what it really is, isn’t something people can fairly be blamed for. We don’t choose what not to grasp, what not to have been taught, what not to have understood the significance of.

Ignorance is blind to itself. When you’re trying to rectify ignorance in someone else, it’s easy to forget that you’re ignorant too, in ways you can’t know.

Whoever you are, you have to admit there’s a hell of a lot you don’t know, and you don’t know that you don’t know it. None of us are free of ignorance. So in our attempts to reduce ignorance we ought to approach others as fellow learners, rather than people worthy of blame.

The worst thing a person can do for their stance is to deliver it packaged with a moral judgment. This effectively eliminates the other person’s freedom to agree, and may even create a committed opponent to their cause. Doing this to a lot of people reduces the public’s receptivity to the cause altogether. Even if it is the truth, when you hurl it at someone it will bounce rather than stick. 

Learning means letting go of a current belief, and a person needs to be in a particularly receptive state in order to do that. Yet, most attempts at internet activism are openly derisive of the people they (ostensibly) want to educate.

Changing minds is very delicate work. Great care must be taken not to express contempt for people who don’t (yet) see it your way. Put people on the defensive, and their minds are closed until they feel safe again. The moment a discussion triggers a defensive reaction, the possibility of learning anything is gone for that person — even though this conflict point is where most online “activism” begins.

This crucial delicateness is threatened by our frustration with beliefs we see as ignorant. It’s hard not to be angry at the ill-informed anti-vaccine movement, now that we’re seeing domestic outbreaks of measles and whooping cough.

Anger is the easiest response, and also the most destructive. What do you think started the anti-vaccine movement? Probably the same kind of anger: “What we’ve been told is wrong and it’s putting our children at risk. People need to smarten up!”

Even if one side is factually correct — and this isn’t always the case — the more anger that’s directed at the other side, the fewer of those people will feel safe to change their minds. Cornering people and making them wrong only encourages heel-digging and rationalizing and the touting of bad science, because at that point it’s just an exchange of emotional noise.

This kind of arguing is an almost perfectly useless approach to reducing ignorance. Helping people to understand something (if that is indeed what the arguers want) is the opposite of fighting.

The feeling of being right is an extremely attractive high to us. It feels as good to be right as it feels awful to be wrong. But whether we have that feeling or not has little to do with whether the facts indeed back us up, and that’s why it’s such a dangerous drug to get used to.

Once you get attached to the feeling of being right, it becomes more important than actually being right. We’ve all found ourselves in pointless debates with friends: Was Crash a good movie? Is Bono actually helping anyone? You may have noticed that in these debates, we don’t want the other person to make a good point, even if conceding it could leave us with a more intelligent stance than we had before. Instead we want them to make dumb points that make ours sound good. We want them to be wrong more than we want to learn anything.

If you were wrong, would you want someone to tell you? Maybe, if it were done privately and sympathetically. Doing that isn’t a common skill. If you want to learn how to talk to people about anything without putting them on the defensive, Marshall Rosenberg’s brilliant book Nonviolent Communication is your Bible. (In my humble opinion.)

It is hard to pass up the temptation to make people wrong. I’m not very good at it. In the process of writing this article I’ve noticed anger emerging again and again in my words, and I’ve done my best to keep it out of this piece. After all, my goal here was to “cure” a particular kind of ignorance.

That’s always shaky ground though, because you have to begin with a rather self-important belief: “I have a truth you don’t have, and I’m going to give it to you.” I’ve tried to keep my aims pragmatic here and not succumb to the impulse to attack and tell-off. But I’m sure it still shows where I am blind to it.

I do think I’m right, but it’s possible I’m being ignorant in a way I don’t understand. And some people may say so in the comment section, and again I’ll have to monitor my temptation to bully off their opposing views with rhetoric. If I’m skillful enough, I might be able to genuinely consider agreeing with them.

Even now I’m afraid I won’t be able to do that when I have the chance. I’m pretty good at rhetorical swashbuckling, or at least good enough to satisfy myself when I try. This blog’s comment history is strewn with verbal throttlings I’ve given to people, mostly just for the way in which they disagreed with me. I hope this time my detractors are gentle and diplomatic, because that rare form of generosity will give me the best possible chance of learning something.

Do animals think and feel?: Sy Montgomery at TEDxAmoskeagMillyard

How Can You Tell Who's "Just Trying To Win"?

I admit, it has taken me some time to be less of a tyrant in many aspects of my life, even when arguing my points with people. But I like to make an effort to stay classy during a debate, because who really wants to be the asshole? 

It doesn’t matter if you are zoo or not or what cause you are fighting for, I think everyone who read this could learn a thing or 2 about how to better interact with other people.

Apr 6

http://lightscameradouchebag.tumblr.com/post/81842910199/just-watched-zoo-not-a-perfect-movie-felt

lightscameradouchebag:

Just watched ZOO! Not a perfect movie, felt disjointed and very bizarre at certain points (seriously what the heck was up with that whispering math formulas while flashing maniacal grins and posing naked with horses scene trying to do???) but absolutely worth a look if you want a film that…

Yeah, I’m not much of a fan of the creepy music and the poor structure of the whole thing. It doesn’t look very professional/practical which will make it hard for non-zoos to connect to it. But, at least it’s a start.

Apr 3
vicemag:

This Danish Guy Has Legal Sex with His Dog
It hasn’t been long since the Copenhagen Zoo pissed off the entire internet by turning a young, healthy giraffe named Marius into lion food. But last week, they were at it again,killing four lions to make room for a new male lion.
The zoo’s enthusiasm for culling healthy animals underscores Denmark’s unique approach to animal rights. For example,a it’s illegal to buy a pit bull in the country, but completelylegal to have sex with a dog, or any other animal, as long as you aren’t torturing it. There have been multiple attempts to criminalize zoophilia, but nothing has been done yet—presumably because none of the major political parties seem to think that having sex with animals is that big of a deal.
A number of animal rights groups don’t share the Danish political class’s breezy apathy and have warned that Denmark is becoming a prime destination for animal sex tourism. The thing is, there’s not a lot of evidence to support the activists’ claims—onlysome websites set up by various Danes demanding that lawmakers clamp down on zoophiles and “beasts” (as proponents of bestiality are called by people who know about that sort of thing).
To find out more, I logged onto Beast Forum, a popular zoophilia message board and apparently a great place to go if you want to borrow a dog from a stranger for an evening of consensual love-making. On the boards I met a 29-year-old I’ll call “Michael,” and spoke to him about his country’s attitude towards having sex with animals.
VICE: How did you realize that sex with animals turned you on? Michael: It started when I was 14 or 15 years old. I grew up in the countryside, so I’d often seen animals mating, and that made me curious.
When did you first act on that curiosity?A couple of years ago. I’d talked about animal sex with a female friend and she got curious about it. She had her own dog, and one day she let the dog take her. She told me about it the next day, and we went to her place and I got to watch. And, later, to try it myself. The dog looked interested in me, so I let it take me.
What is it about animals that turns you on? It’s difficult to explain. They’re more honest and, well, more animal-like. If a dog likes you, there’s no doubt about it. Contrary to what people think, an animal can easily say no if it doesn’t want to have sex with you. I guess some animals are just beautiful and lovely to be with.
Which species turn you on in particular? Mostly dogs. Horses a bit as well. And, with dogs, specifically collies, labradors, and German shepherds. They’re beautiful dogs. Most of my experiences have been with dogs, but I also caressed a mare once.
Continue

vicemag:

This Danish Guy Has Legal Sex with His Dog

It hasn’t been long since the Copenhagen Zoo pissed off the entire internet by turning a young, healthy giraffe named Marius into lion food. But last week, they were at it again,killing four lions to make room for a new male lion.

The zoo’s enthusiasm for culling healthy animals underscores Denmark’s unique approach to animal rights. For example,a it’s illegal to buy a pit bull in the country, but completelylegal to have sex with a dog, or any other animal, as long as you aren’t torturing it. There have been multiple attempts to criminalize zoophilia, but nothing has been done yet—presumably because none of the major political parties seem to think that having sex with animals is that big of a deal.

A number of animal rights groups don’t share the Danish political class’s breezy apathy and have warned that Denmark is becoming a prime destination for animal sex tourism. The thing is, there’s not a lot of evidence to support the activists’ claims—onlysome websites set up by various Danes demanding that lawmakers clamp down on zoophiles and “beasts” (as proponents of bestiality are called by people who know about that sort of thing).

To find out more, I logged onto Beast Forum, a popular zoophilia message board and apparently a great place to go if you want to borrow a dog from a stranger for an evening of consensual love-making. On the boards I met a 29-year-old I’ll call “Michael,” and spoke to him about his country’s attitude towards having sex with animals.

VICE: How did you realize that sex with animals turned you on? 
Michael: It started when I was 14 or 15 years old. I grew up in the countryside, so I’d often seen animals mating, and that made me curious.

When did you first act on that curiosity?
A couple of years ago. I’d talked about animal sex with a female friend and she got curious about it. She had her own dog, and one day she let the dog take her. She told me about it the next day, and we went to her place and I got to watch. And, later, to try it myself. The dog looked interested in me, so I let it take me.

What is it about animals that turns you on? 
It’s difficult to explain. They’re more honest and, well, more animal-like. If a dog likes you, there’s no doubt about it. Contrary to what people think, an animal can easily say no if it doesn’t want to have sex with you. I guess some animals are just beautiful and lovely to be with.

Which species turn you on in particular? 
Mostly dogs. Horses a bit as well. And, with dogs, specifically collies, labradors, and German shepherds. They’re beautiful dogs. Most of my experiences have been with dogs, but I also caressed a mare once.

Continue

Apr 1

how is penetrating object(s)/genitalia into the orifices of an animal considered consensual?? like honestly its the same thing as rape and sexual assault. animals cant tell their abuser to stop when they cannot even make any notion for it to be stopped. its disgusting and sick and horrible that there are people doing this type if vile shit. its an insult to the sexual orientation of the lgbtqa+ to have a scientifically proved mental illness for the strange aversion of attraction to animals.

how is penetrating object(s)/genitalia into the orifices of an animal considered consensual??

I’m not entirely sure how I feel about objects being inserted into animals. It could very well end badly considering objects don’t have feeling and you can’t really tell if you are penetrating correctly until the animal shows signs of discomfort. Really soft objects might be OK, but it’s still risky.

Different animals show consent in different ways depending on the species.. When aroused, they will display the mating signs that they would normally show for their own species. It is then up to human involved to make sure that they don’t manipulate, force or otherwise harm the animal in any way during the act. The females usually have to be in estrus before they are comfortable and even then, many female animals are not sexually receptive to penetration from human males, but some are. Also there are other stipulations that tie into being ethical about zoosexuality.

These things include “no small animals”, “no animals that are not sexually mature”, “no penetration of species with incompatible genitalia.”. This is still all very new to this community and I know some zoos are unaccepting of these “rules”, but it’s the only ethical way. We cannot risk injury or death to sentient beings for something we can surely live without.

its the same thing as rape and sexual assault.

Going by Dictionary.com’s definition of rape and Wordnet’s definition of sexual assault, anyone can have sexual contact with a certain amount of animals without overstepping any of those lines presented in the definitions I linked. If you have a link proving that there is flaw with the definitions presented, I’d like to read it.

animals cant tell their abuser to stop when they cannot even make any notion for it to be stopped.

The ol’ “Animals can’t say no.” argument. It’s true, they can’t open their muzzles and speak in clear English (or whatever other language that happens to be your native tongue) and say the exact words “No.” But it should be assumed that the answer is always no until clear mating signs have been displayed anyways. The mating signs are the “Yes.”. And you are probably thinking “many females orgasm during rape”, and that is true. They do. However, mating signs happen BEFORE any touching even occurs. We can’t just walk up to an animal and ask “Hey, you interested in getting sexy?”. An animal wouldn’t know what we were saying unless it were trained to associate sex with a human with a certain phrase. An animal has to see the human as a sexual object, get aroused and give that human the green light.

There is a common argument in the zoo community that generally states “Animals can fight back, bite, claw, etc. and that is how they say no.”. That statement implies that a human would have already have to be touching the animal before the animal tells them to back off. We are in a age where feminism is becoming more noticed and I am glad that it is. It means more people are becoming more aware of what full consent means because the general population still believes that a lack of a “No.”, automatically means yes. Even in my community there are many who believe this and I find it repugnant.

its disgusting and sick and horrible that there are people doing this type if vile shit. 

I’ll agree with you that animal brothels are sick and horrible. I’ll agree that the cases you most commonly see are disgusting. But I assure you that the cruelty cases are mostly a matter of cultural lag. After all, how do you explain a spike in teen pregnancies and STIs in southern and midwestern bible belt states? - lack of education and a shunning of sex, especially “deviant sex”.

The digital age zoo community is still quite young. This means that we are still working out the kinks and it means that people will be making many mistakes and hurting animals because they didn’t know of a safer way to do it. I am doing my best to help try and offer knowledge to fellow zoos who want it. I am not a sum of what some other people have done.

its an insult to the sexual orientation of the lgbtqa+ to have a scientifically proved mental illness for the strange aversion of attraction to animals.

Since when do you speak for the entire LGBTQA+ community? I’m agender/trans/FAAB, pansexual and polyamorous. I know of several other queer zoos as well. You don’t speak for me or them when you make that statement. 

Also, what you are referring to is zoophilia. Which BTW is not classified as a mental illness unless certain conditions are met. One can still be attracted to animals and even have sexual relations with them without meeting any of those required conditions. Also mental illnesses aren’t proven. Psychoneurosis is provable, but conditions are not.

If you want to debate any of these statements, be my guest.