• Suddenly unable to log into your ZooVille account? This might be the reason why: CLICK HERE!

Animals And Consent

MouseMoment

Lurker
If anyone has any of their go-to arguments for the consent of animals I'd love to hear some. I've been working on zoo activism for a bit and have started getting getting some support from people. I'm just looking for stronger arguments.

Answers related to female animals are strongly needed, as most people understand male animals mount.

feel free to delete this thread if one already exists.

1. How do you respond when someone says animals don't have a high enough intelligence to consent

2. How do you respond when someone say animals are simply feeding into a primal need when engaging in sex

3. How do you respond when people say gestures given by the animal (standing for you, tail flagging, etc) aren't enough for interpreted consent.
 
The first thing to realize is that some people aren't arguing, they're just screeching at you. Anyone who's honest and open will give you the benefit of the doubt if you can assure them you're thinking carefully about this and have some answers. Those people will be looking for flaws, though, so the best advice is to not speak poorly. (I can't put that into words; when I see some people speak, it's obvious they're missing some pieces, and that makes it easy for more 'normal' people to dismiss them as strange and wrong.) Keep in mind that group dynamics can keep people closed even if they would otherwise be more open, so it's rarely useful to speak to a whole group.

1. Anyone talking about consent is talking about something inherently human. I'd start there: legal consent is about the ability to be part of our social and legal structures. Animals don't worry about our social structure, and so they don't worry about their public image or feel general societal shame. This point is also where they like to conflate animals with children, so you can assure them these animals are fully-grown adults who will not be expected to integrate into society later. They won't have difficulties because of some new-found shame that they see in their past relationships. All of this is important and fairly intuitive for humans to think about with regard to other humans, but it just doesn't apply to animals.

From there, it's important to note that we're interested not in gaining some kind of invalid legal consent, but rather their assent. We seek their assent in many things, from training to play to choice of food. That's what animals need in order to avoid abuse. Most pet owners don't worry about their assent when altering their bodies with unnecessary surgery or locking them in kennels overnight. We think we'll be able to have some very important conversations about abuse once people realize we should consider their assent.

2. Some people think animals are soulless automatons, and I'm not sure you can convince them otherwise with some kind of argument. There's a huge industry in North America invested in de-sexing animals to keep them pure and simple and easy to think about, which is pretty disturbing to us. Adult animals will have sexual needs, and it's important for people to realize that it's entirely natural. There are a lot of people who have to come to terms with the idea that animals grow up and have sex. There are people who need to realize that their human sons and daughters have grown up and are having sex, and are more complete beings because of it. These people should spend less time worrying about visualizing others having sex in various ways.

It's important to realize that people probably block these thoughts because they don't want to think about animals who are abused for meat or dairy. It could be that people who think this way have a vested interest in not understanding animals, and being fine with their abuse. In that case, they're probably just angry at you for having weird sex. (See above.) A lot of these laws or moral laws, or specifically carve our exceptions for farming, so it's not like people are against the act itself. I don't think there's any way to argue the point, either. Don't tell these people about your sexual preferences, whatever those may be.

3. This is their weakest argument. You can assure them that any loving zoophile is taking on extra responsibility to read positive emotions in their partners' body language, and that we also look for the smallest negative reactions. It's our duty to constantly be checking for signs of discomfort, and to stop if so. As to the corollary: Many regular people aren't in tune with the needs of their pets, and cause abuse by neglecting them or feeding them improperly, or stuff like that. We're fighting for a world where people pay attention to their animals' needs.




In my eyes, ours is a righteous cause. We're arguing that we ought to care more about the wellbeing of animals; that we should be farming animals less, or not at all; that we should understand their place in the world as sentient beings with emotions. The one annoying bit is that we're driven underground by humanity's fear of sex.
 
1. How do you respond when someone says animals don't have a high enough intelligence to consent
Any animal that can't figure out what sex is and how to get is already extinct.

2. How do you respond when someone say animals are simply feeding into a primal need when engaging in sex
So am I. I might also consider that that makes providing them with some more important.

3. How do you respond when people say gestures given by the animal (standing for you, tail flagging, etc) aren't enough for interpreted consent.
I agree. That's why I take the extra step of waiting for them to come to me.

BTW, if you use the search function, you will find several major essays on the subject.
 
I get to say no more times than I say yes to my three boys so no one can come and talk about consent to me.
I am inclined to agree, Athena. Ours give clear indications when they want us. It may well be the case that non-zoo/non-understanding au fait people can't see the signs, but all the signs are plain to see. They can offer something akin to consent albeit without actually nodding and saying "yes" in a human way!
 
I am inclined to agree, Athena. Ours give clear indications when they want us. It may well be the case that non-zoo/non-understanding au fait people can't see the signs, but all the signs are plain to see. They can offer something akin to consent albeit without actually nodding and saying "yes" in a human way!

Yes
1. Yes they do not understand how it works they think we force the dog to do it
2. They do not understand that dogs have a strong sexual drive
3. They do not understand that everything is voluntary
 
I have exactly the same problem here at home If I did not say no to my pitbull boy then we would have done nothing but sex.
 
The first thing to realize is that some people aren't arguing, they're just screeching at you. Anyone who's honest and open will give you the benefit of the doubt if you can assure them you're thinking carefully about this and have some answers. Those people will be looking for flaws, though, so the best advice is to not speak poorly. (I can't put that into words; when I see some people speak, it's obvious they're missing some pieces, and that makes it easy for more 'normal' people to dismiss them as strange and wrong.) Keep in mind that group dynamics can keep people closed even if they would otherwise be more open, so it's rarely useful to speak to a whole group.

1. Anyone talking about consent is talking about something inherently human. I'd start there: legal consent is about the ability to be part of our social and legal structures. Animals don't worry about our social structure, and so they don't worry about their public image or feel general societal shame. This point is also where they like to conflate animals with children, so you can assure them these animals are fully-grown adults who will not be expected to integrate into society later. They won't have difficulties because of some new-found shame that they see in their past relationships. All of this is important and fairly intuitive for humans to think about with regard to other humans, but it just doesn't apply to animals.

From there, it's important to note that we're interested not in gaining some kind of invalid legal consent, but rather their assent. We seek their assent in many things, from training to play to choice of food. That's what animals need in order to avoid abuse. Most pet owners don't worry about their assent when altering their bodies with unnecessary surgery or locking them in kennels overnight. We think we'll be able to have some very important conversations about abuse once people realize we should consider their assent.

2. Some people think animals are soulless automatons, and I'm not sure you can convince them otherwise with some kind of argument. There's a huge industry in North America invested in de-sexing animals to keep them pure and simple and easy to think about, which is pretty disturbing to us. Adult animals will have sexual needs, and it's important for people to realize that it's entirely natural. There are a lot of people who have to come to terms with the idea that animals grow up and have sex. There are people who need to realize that their human sons and daughters have grown up and are having sex, and are more complete beings because of it. These people should spend less time worrying about visualizing others having sex in various ways.

It's important to realize that people probably block these thoughts because they don't want to think about animals who are abused for meat or dairy. It could be that people who think this way have a vested interest in not understanding animals, and being fine with their abuse. In that case, they're probably just angry at you for having weird sex. (See above.) A lot of these laws or moral laws, or specifically carve our exceptions for farming, so it's not like people are against the act itself. I don't think there's any way to argue the point, either. Don't tell these people about your sexual preferences, whatever those may be.

3. This is their weakest argument. You can assure them that any loving zoophile is taking on extra responsibility to read positive emotions in their partners' body language, and that we also look for the smallest negative reactions. It's our duty to constantly be checking for signs of discomfort, and to stop if so. As to the corollary: Many regular people aren't in tune with the needs of their pets, and cause abuse by neglecting them or feeding them improperly, or stuff like that. We're fighting for a world where people pay attention to their animals' needs.




In my eyes, ours is a righteous cause. We're arguing that we ought to care more about the wellbeing of animals; that we should be farming animals less, or not at all; that we should understand their place in the world as sentient beings with emotions. The one annoying bit is that we're driven underground by humanity's fear of sex.
Thanks dud
 
Since a lot of people's ideas about sex with animals are informed by information about abuse cases and such I usually work on establishing that the possibility of consent exists in at least some cases: a dog humping your leg being like the lightest case of animal sexual contact that is common enough to be not unheard of. Also since I am really familiar with dogs it's an easy stance to argue from.


1. Animals can't consent? I hope you've never pet a dog in your life. How many different ways are there that dogs can communicate they do want to be pet, and inversely, to leave them alone? Both passively and in a very clear way.

2.Dogs, as well as other animals masturbate. Because stimulating those nerves feels physically pleasant to the point of euphoria. Humans have it too. In some sense although not completely, it is part of the "primal urge" in the same way that human sex feeling good is the biological driver of procreation in humans too.

3. How about the active expression of consent such as repeatedly attempting to mount body parts? Would also go back to #1

Edit: holy thread bump lol
 
As for number 2, that's why I'm into it. That primal hardwire urge to take that nut deep inside me. I'm not looking for a cute fluffy shy puff ball. I want that rough alpha to use me for his pleasure.

As for 1 and 3 basically make the same point about consent. It's dripping rock hard sexually mature alpha dog cock , not difficult to interpret his intentions.
 
Back
Top