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

Anti-zoo laws getting worse (how to deal with them?)

SigmatoZeta said:
@cantfit,
Zoophile pride must start with young zoophiles believing they have a right to have good careers and to hold down steady jobs and provide safe soundproofed homes in safe neighborhoods in which to keep their animals. They must not only believe that this is a good idea, but they must believe they should be willing to stand up and fight for it passionately and with a sense of revolution, no matter what obstacles or hindrances get thrown in their way. It has to start there.
Click to expand...
What does zoo pride have to do with a any of this??????
Myself and many here have this, it isn't zoo pride, its standing up like a human being and taking enough responsibility for your actions to MAKE it happen. You are ENTITLED TO NOTHING IN LIFE!!!! You must earn your place in society.
Those of us who have furry companions were not given what we have in most cases.... we simply made necessary sacrifices ... and did what we had to do so we could acquire the means to responsibly take care of our companions.
 
@arcticwolf69, I am going to merely revise my communication skills because I do not seem to be transmitting the message to you that I am trying for, and I would not want to confuse the matter further by pursuing any further exchange.
 
SigmatoZeta said:
uwotm8? I was talking about a more modest effort like just getting one small town on our side. It would have to start local. That actually is realistic thinking.
Click to expand...
You would need someplace outside the US until the conservatives and the evangelists are discredited. Might take another 30 years. State laws always take precedence over the towns. Its an interesting problem, but the US is strangled by powers no one really wants. Life sucks in a one party system.
 
arcticwolf69 said:
What does zoo pride have to do with a any of this??????
Myself and many here have this, it isn't zoo pride, its standing up like a human being and taking enough responsibility for your actions to MAKE it happen. You are ENTITLED TO NOTHING IN LIFE!!!! You must earn your place in society.
Those of us who have furry companions were not given what we have in most cases.... we simply made necessary sacrifices ... and did what we had to do so we could acquire the means to responsibly take care of our companions.
Click to expand...
Not in the USA . yet. Mexico seems right. they are more open minded than Americans. Americans are 95% propagandized. Work on your spanish.
 
Stallionjets said:
You would need someplace outside the US until the conservatives and the evangelists are discredited. Might take another 30 years. State laws always take precedence over the towns. Its an interesting problem, but the US is strangled by powers no one really wants. Life sucks in a one party system.
Click to expand...
Actually, about that time-frame is almost EXACTLY what is expected based on the Strauss-Howe generational theory!

Now, looking back on history, even based on the Strauss-Howe theory, "prophet" generations don't emerge from out of the primordial muck of creation fully formed and ready to do their thing. They have to be built-up during the tough times.

The gay rights movement started with the very discreet and cautious Mattachine Society. They had to be, and they were right to be cautious. They were not even enthusiastic supporters of the gay community coming out because they were, for good reasons, still in an incrementalist frame of mind. It's good that more bold movers and shakers stepped in to evolve what they created further, but without their initial cautious steps, nothing would have ever happened at all, and would-be crusaders like the Stonewall generation would have been shot down in flames and labeled as terrorists without their history of having established respect among the powerful people that were aware of them.

The Beat Generation was a very introverted version of the later hippie movement. They were very into the "hep" concept where you only really knew very much about it if you were "in the know." They were not even sure they wanted to be a movement. At heart, they were just some poetic individuals that moved to San Francisco and liked to hang out and bang on bongo drums while talking about life. Some of them were even horrified by the later, grungier "free love" movement, but that excess did have the beneficial effect of bolstering related, more civic-minded movements.

So yes, I agree we have probably shit our relationship with an entire generation, but if we are going to patch up our relationship with the next one, we have to figure out what cautious steps we can take in that direction.
 
Gregory said:
Like I said, its just talk in an echo chamber.

Go out and do something about it. Come out publically, start groups, hit up your legislators. You will lose 100% of the time. Sorry if you think im "pessemistic" but I am merely Realistic. Stop comparing animals to the struggles the LGBTQ community have faced, they're not the same.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of something someone on another zoo website said -- they said, "zoos always lose". And it sure seems that way. Then again, very few attempts have been made by zoos to confront society's anti-zoo policies, so potential outcomes of certain things (like challenging anti-zoo laws in the courts) are largely unknown.

There are some comparable things when comparing zoos to LGBT, but it is true that they are not the same. Example: non-human animals (not present in LGBT relationships) can't stand up for zoo rights -- only humans can.
 
@Zoo50, I think that that is a reason why coming out to family members is so important for those to whom it is realistic. I think that there is a fine distinction, between those to whom it is and those to whom it isn't. Mine, not really. For those that this can be a reality for, blood is thicker than water. A good mom and dad don't care what you've done: they'll make sure you have a good attorney, even if they can't really afford it, because if you are a parent, you don't really want your kid to realize there is anything you couldn't do if you had to.

I was so skeptical because I had not had the best family background, but when I hear these more heartening stories, I think that these parents and sisters and brothers that put love first are going to be where it starts.
 
There is a thread about a federal U.S. bill that may impact zoos:

PACT Act: a federal ban?

Various news organizations such as CNN are reporting that the PACT Act (a bill which just passed the Senate in the United States) is going to ban "sexually exploiting" animals at the federal level in the United States. Is this true? If so, does that mean there will now be a federal law banning...
www.zooville.org www.zooville.org

Various news websites claim that it will ban sex with animals federally (and ban the use of online zoo forums), yet there appears to be nothing within the text of the bill that explicitly mentions sex with animals.
 
California has now passed a new bullshit anti-zoo law:

legiscan.com

California AB611 | 2019-2020 | Regular Session

Summary (2019-10-08) Sexual abuse of animals. [Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 613, Statutes of 2019.]
legiscan.com legiscan.com

There is an earlier article on the Zooville News Network about this bullshit bill:

ZNN - Zooville News Network - Updates

www.zooville.org www.zooville.org

Basically, the arguments for this California bill are not compelling, and the new California bill (and others like it) have not yet been tested constitutionally. Also, zero legislators in the California legislature voted against the anti-zoo bill.

In the article on ZNN, the following was said: "It is ironic that this bill focuses more on morality than preventing harm".

As I said, I keep waiting for people to challenge these unjust laws in court, but no one ever does.

States that made new anti-zoo laws in only the past 3 years: California, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, Texas, Vermont, New Hampshire, Ohio. Maybe it's time to leave the U.S. for those that are there.
 
Last edited:
I think the best group/way to combat this are libertarians, mainly arguing that these laws would be too costly to uphold.

Once you make something illegal then you make investigating the occurrence of it happening illegal a thing. Which means wasting police resources that can be better used.
 
politicians wont ever challenge such things because someone might think they are supportive of the people they are trying to stop with the new law
 
Wasbitchpolly said:
Why don’t you challenge it ?
Click to expand...
In the American legal system you can't just challenge an existing law because you don't like it. You have to have some direct personal involvement to have standing. Lawrence v Texas was started by 2 gay men arranging for cops to enter their home in order to investigate a burglary while they were having sex . They essentially forced the local law enforcement to prosecute them for a "crime" that hadn't been enforced in decades so they could challenge its constitutionality.
 
Gregory said:
Exactly. All talk, no action because people know it won't ever be made legal.
Click to expand...

This is a very pessimistic, defeatist attitude. The reason zoos aren't challenging the laws is because doing so would cause oneself to become "outed", and that would probably ruin one's life. People who can challenge anti-zoo laws: non-zoos, zoos who have already been outed / arrested, and/or zoos that don't own animals and never will. Zoos who are willing to ruin their lives and become a "martyr" can try to challenge the law, but so far, everyone is hiding.

So, the reason laws aren't being challenged isn't because "it will never become legal" -- it is because people don't want to be publicly identified as zoo.
 
Zoo50 said:
This is a very pessimistic, defeatist attitude. The reason zoos aren't challenging the laws is because doing so would cause oneself to become "outed", and that would probably ruin one's life. People who can challenge anti-zoo laws: non-zoos, zoos who have already been outed / arrested, and/or zoos that don't own animals and never will. Zoos who are willing to ruin their lives and become a "martyr" can try to challenge the law, but so far, everyone is hiding.

So, the reason laws aren't being challenged isn't because "it will never become legal" -- it is because people don't want to be publicly identified as zoo.
Click to expand...

So challenge them
 
I think not enough zoos are alarmed at just how bad some of these anti-zoo laws are (in the United States). For example, if someone is caught having sex with an animal in Oregon, the fine can be as high as $125,000. Indiana, Kentucky, Washington state (and others) have a fine of $10,000. These laws are really terrible.
 
Zoo50 said:
I think not enough zoos are alarmed at just how bad some of these anti-zoo laws are (in the United States). For example, if someone is caught having sex with an animal in Oregon, the fine can be as high as $125,000. Indiana, Kentucky, Washington state (and others) have a fine of $10,000. These laws are really terrible.
Click to expand...
You'll serve prison time before they even mention paying a fine. Courts want to lock you up, not write you a fine. Unless someone is rich, then sure, pay yourself off.
 
knotinterested said:
If the female animal were to back herself up and make contact and keep going for penetration that would show that the dog was a willing participant - but that does not happen when the sex is between a human male and a female animal.
Click to expand...
I have to admit I'm just getting into this thread, so I haven't seen if there were any other responses to this, nor do I want to take off on a tangent from the original topic. Also, I'm not trying to be obtuse; just interjecting my own experience. On a few amazing occasions, I have had a female dog in her estrus phase literally do most of the work if I made myself "available" (so to speak). 2 different girls actually, at different times in my life. Neither were groomed for inter-species sex relations. Usually it's a mutual effort, but it does happen, apparently.
I've never done it if it seemed my partner didn't want to; otherwise signals seemed to indicate they were either enjoying it, or didn't care and just let me do my thing (although I prefer their enjoyment).
knotinterested said:
That being said the Human Male/Animal Female sex that is giving the authorities the fuel to say it's animal abuse.
Click to expand...
I agree with you there. Along with the highly-debatable "can't consent" claims, and men who do it are just pervs using them as sex objects, etc., etc., when it comes to actual physical harm it's likely more common in female animals than male if their human partner isn't knowledgeable and considerate. And I did see a bit of the zoosadist stuff all the hubbub was about - which I can never un-see now - and the victims were typically female animals.
 
To my last post responding to @knotinterested : But then, how would one convey that to the world to help change law? Would one come out on YouTube and Twitter with censored video titled "Consent & Desire! Watch My Female Dog Come On To Me & Fuck Me, Not the Other Way Around!"... no, probably not. Do not pass Go....
Even so, skeptics would say she was trained, or punished if she didn't comply.
Even if not publically, I doubt such a video offered as evidence in a case would make the judge all like "Oh yes, she's clearly consenting. No abuse here! Case dismissed."
 
Last edited:
I guess that's a serious question (again, maybe it was already brought up; still working my way through this thread):
How does one prove it to somebody who cares?
You would need a few things I think: someone objective who has voice and authority is willing to see a demonstration and then support it publicly, has the public's trust, have a big enough impression to make enough people believe them, AND then care to see it decriminalized.
And/or a petition signed by a shit-ton of veterinarians or animal care professionals claiming that sex between a man and a bitch (or mare, or other large-enough animal) is perfectly safe and does no harm. But that could break down where we're claiming a majority of straight, zoo men care about their partners' sexual well-being, and adhere to their partners' facial/vocal expressions and body language.
I think it's gonna be a tough row upstream, especially since it seems most people don't really care about that stuff, they just think it's "unnatural", "immoral", "degrading", "against God's will", or just plain "gross".
 
Last edited:
IHO said:
I think it's gonna be a tough row upstream, especially since it seems most people don't really care about all that, they just think it's "unnatural", "immoral", "degrading", "against God's will", or just plain "gross".
Click to expand...

The argument that zoo sex is "gross" / "disgusting" is not a rational argument, and that particular "argument" could be dismissed easily.
 
IHO said:
I guess that's a serious question (again, maybe it was already brought up; still working my way through this thread):
How does one prove it to somebody who cares?
You would need a few things I think: someone objective who has voice and authority is willing to see a demonstration and then support it publicly, has the public's trust, have a big enough impression to make enough people believe them, AND then care to see it decriminalized.
And/or a petition signed by a shit-ton of veterinarians or animal care professionals claiming that sex between a man and a bitch (or mare, or other large-enough animal) is perfectly safe and does no harm. But that could break down where we're claiming a majority of straight, zoo men are knowledgeable about - and care about - their partners' sexual well-being, and adhere to their partners' facial/vocal expressions and body language.
I think it's gonna be a tough row upstream, especially since it seems most people don't really care about all that, they just think it's "unnatural", "immoral", "degrading", "against God's will", or just plain "gross".
Click to expand...
There is a simple and reliable demonstration. All you need is an experienced mare (any size) and a familiar (to her) male human in the springtime. Put both of them in an open area comfortable to both of them and free of any nearby stallion. Within a few weeks she will rape him.

It might be well to do exactly this with disguised participants and scatter it around the net as a funny vid.
 
IHO said:
I guess that's a serious question (again, maybe it was already brought up; still working my way through this thread):
How does one prove it to somebody who cares?
You would need a few things I think: someone objective who has voice and authority is willing to see a demonstration and then support it publicly, has the public's trust, have a big enough impression to make enough people believe them, AND then care to see it decriminalized.
Click to expand...

As @SigmatoZeta said in another thread, zoos are in a pretty helpless state right now. In other words, zoos are so marginalized that whenever something bad happens (like when a new anti-zoo law is made), zoos do nothing. The helpless state zoos are in right now is pretty bad. No major organization that I know of is defending zoos and their interests.

Also, one of the original questions of this thread was "how to deal with these laws". So far, most people say the only solution to this problem is to hide.
 
Last edited:
Zoo50 said:
As @SigmatoZeta said in another thread, zoos are in a pretty helpless state right now. In other words, zoos are so marginalized that whenever something bad happens (like when a new anti-zoo law is made), zoos do nothing. The helpless state zoos are in right now is pretty bad. No major organization that I know of is defending zoos and their interests.

Also, one of the original questions of this thread was "how to deal with these laws". So far, most people say the only solution to this problem is to hide.
Click to expand...
Hiding is self-defeating, even suicidal, for a community. The more secretive you are, the more you scare the shit out of people.

An organized advocacy program might help. Zooier Than Thou seems to have a good approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IHO
I dunno - I'd like to think people could at-the-least come around to being indifferent about zoosexuality rather than immediately going to that "immoral and disgusting" place. I've been zoo all my life and I don't feel hidden or removed from society, I just keep it to myself (except online in zoo-friendly places). I mean, if someone were to flat-out ask me if I'm a zoophile IRL, I might be cautiously honest about it, but nobody would ask that like they might ask "are you gay?".
Personally, if I'm not hurting anyone (animals), my IRL sexual preferences and practices are nobody's business. I don't think anybody's sex life is anybody's business except those involved in the relationship. I'm not sure why everybody wants to know everybody else's personal shit unless there's a perceived/suspected problem.
I guess my only concern is if I were to ever get caught-in-the-act outright by someone who would actually "out" or report me, that it would amount to nothing if authorities found no signs of harm or abuse. THAT is where I hope we can get to at the minimum; that not all bestiality is blindly labelled cruelty or abuse without due process, because it's not.
I have no concerns right now because I'm not an active zoo, and the last time I was there were no laws against it where I live. There are some vague laws now, but I can't say that would stop me if someone were to come into my life.
 
Zoo50 said:
This is a pretty pessimistic attitude. I think most people are apathetic about this issue, or are hostile towards it purely due to ignorance (or speciesism). With that being said, there is another thread about whether zoos should leave the United States and move to another country:

Where should I go? (Leave the United States?)

Firstly, I'm in the U.S. There have been many anti-zoo laws passed in the United States in the past few years, and now there are only four U.S. states left where sex with animals has not been banned it (they are Hawaii, New Mexico, West Virginia and Wyoming). The District of Columbia also has...
www.zooville.org www.zooville.org

Just because a majority of people think something is wrong doesn't necessarily mean something should be criminalized. I think slaughtering animals is wrong, and I think that should be criminalized (it is thousands of times worse than sex with animals).

If the anti-zoo laws in the U.S. will never be repealed, then they should be challenged in court (there's a separate thread about that).
Click to expand...

I propose that all "zoophiles" all get sent to Madagascar, and should be isolated to become a human zoo for civilized men to come and admire the degeneracy of human beings since world war 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top