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

Are we losing the battle for tolerance?

Yeah....if it even remotely could be called a "battle"...we've lost it. We lost it the very same day Joe Mundane left his kid alone with a computer. The advent of the net made us visible to millions of people who were blissfully leading lives of "out of sight, out of mind" sensibilities. In our case more information, usually a solution-oriented factor, has worked against us to the point of no return. The Mundane world equates us with pedophilia, and yet we tolerate, to an extent, pro-kp and pro-sexualizing children as sex objects. There ARE things that are beyond the pale, for good reason; that's one.
Perhaps it was natural, in the day, to grasp at community, and vocalize our feelings, our loneliness, and our relief that we were not alone, nor were we crazed and valueless pervs. That was probably a mistake, though mostly visible in the rearview. Still, we as a group survived this long by staying private. We'll continue to survive. Maybe in a farther flung future, we can try again to normalize.
 
Last edited:
Yeah....if it even remotely could be called a "battle"...we've lost it. We lost it the very same day Joe Mundane left his kid alone with a computer. The advent of the net made us visible to millions of people who were blissfully leading lives of "out of sight, out of mind" sensibilities. In our case more information, usually a solution-oriented factor, has worked against us to the point of no return. The Mundane world equates us with pedophilia, and yet we tolerate, to an extent, pro-kp and pro-sexualizing children as sex objects. There ARE things that are beyond the pale, for good reason; that's one.

Here's a concept: Instead of playing along with this "MAP" bullshit, why not call them what they are? Namely, child-fucking pedos. Piss on this "let's try to be polite and call 'em what they wanna be called" garbage, and call them exactly what they are. Fuck politically correct, fuck polite, fuck what they feel on the subject, and fuck them - with a rake. Crosswise. And if they're offended by that, too bad for them - I'm offended by the fact that they're permitted to continue breathing.

I'm making this reply for both of you guys. I know this is going to sounds extremely infuriating, but from what I've seen MAPS/Pedophiles are the only other group of people who seem to support zoophile rights as a majority. And the fact that so many people here post stories and shit about them engaging in bestiality as a minor in light or jest, is probably one of the reasons why people associate pedophiles with zoophiles.

If us zoophiles want to distance ourselves from them, then the very least we could do is to stop taking about minors doing indecent things with animals in light or jest. It's much easier to refute the connection between the two if we start doing that. If you don't respect the boundaries between childhood and sex, then the amount of arguments pedos will have to support their cause goes from 0 to 50.

This is what outsiders probably think: "These people are so fucked up in the head because of their premature promiscuity" And in my opinion it's kinda true. The people here who do brag about their early experiences have certain attributes that I don't want to elaborate on. You can discover zoophilia in a much more healthy and safe manner once you're an adult, as the case with me and many others.
 
I'm making this reply for both of you guys. I know this is going to sounds extremely infuriating, but from what I've seen MAPS/Pedophiles are the only other group of people who seem to support zoophile rights as a majority. And the fact that so many people here post stories and shit about them engaging in bestiality as a minor in light or jest, is probably one of the reasons why people associate pedophiles with zoophiles.

If us zoophiles want to distance ourselves from them, then the very least we could do is to stop taking about minors doing indecent things with animals in light or jest. It's much easier to refute the connection between the two if we start doing that. If you don't respect the boundaries between childhood and sex, then the amount of arguments pedos will have to support their cause goes from 0 to 50.

This is what outsiders probably think: "These people are so fucked up in the head because of their premature promiscuity" And in my opinion it's kinda true. The people here who do brag about their early experiences have certain attributes that I don't want to elaborate on. You can discover zoophilia in a much more healthy and safe manner once you're an adult, as the case with me and many others.
Um, you do realize hundreds of millions of people (likely more, it's a big world with billions) who aren't zoo get involved in sexual activity well before the age of 18, right? Simply talking about what age you got started doesn't make you a pedophile - having an attraction to minors as an adult is what "legally" does.
 
Um, you do realize hundreds of millions of people (likely more, it's a big world with billions) who aren't zoo get involved in sexual activity well before the age of 18, right? Simply talking about what age you got started doesn't make you a pedophile - having an attraction to minors as an adult is what "legally" does.

I never said talking about underage experiences made them a pedophile as a general rule. I said it gives zoophiles a very negative reputation as crazed valueless perverts from the outside world, especially when people start talking about literal prepubescent shit. And If you pay attention to the people who do brag about such things, it's very clear that such experiences do affect them in many other negative ways.
 
I never said talking about underage experiences made them a pedophile as a general rule. I said it gives zoophiles a very negative reputation as crazed valueless perverts from the outside world, especially when people start talking about literal prepubescent shit. And If you pay attention to the people who do brag about such things, it's very clear that such experiences do affect them in many other negative ways.
As this isn't the Dumpster Fire I'll leave this statement as-is.
 
I never said talking about underage experiences made them a pedophile as a general rule. I said it gives zoophiles a very negative reputation as crazed valueless perverts from the outside world, especially when people start talking about literal prepubescent shit. And If you pay attention to the people who do brag about such things, it's very clear that such experiences do affect them in many other negative ways.
Does most zoophiles here believe the only reason why your acts are criminalised is because of pedophile, what they say is the same for both groups.
 
Does most zoophiles here believe the only reason why your acts are criminalised is because of pedophile, what they say is the same for both groups.
Zoophilia is scorned by the general population for a multitude of reasons. However, the association of zoophilia with pedophilia is making the hate on zoophilia more pronounced.

And what I'm trying to tell people is that this partly our fault for not batting an eye on the amount of messed up individuals here glorifying the sexualization of children. And yes, it is sexualization when you try to spin it off as a fun thing that everyone else should do. And examples of this are rampant throughout the site with people giving such shit dozens of positive reactions.
 
Last edited:
Zoophilia is scorned by the general population for a multitude of reasons. However, the association of zoophilia with pedophilia is making the hate on zoophilia more pronounced.
Have you never heard antis asking pedophile if animal can consent to sex if they rely on the owner to provide for them, both are associated by antis it's not one way blame.

And what I'm trying to tell people is that this partly our fault for not batting an eye on the amount of messed up individuals here glorifying the sexualization of children. And yes, it is sexualization when you try to spin it off as a fun thing that everyone else should do. And examples of this are rampant throughout the site with people giving such shit dozens of positive reactions.
Saying a teenager can consent or acts sexually is not glorifying pedophilia, individuals saying this at best glorifies hebephilia which prevalent throughout every communities regardless of legislations. There is an existing topic in dumpster fire if you wish to continue this discussion.
 
Have you never heard antis asking pedophile if animal can consent to sex if they rely on the owner to provide for them, both are associated by antis it's not one way blame.


Saying a teenager can consent or acts sexually is not glorifying pedophilia, individuals saying this at best glorifies hebephilia which prevalent throughout every communities regardless of legislations. There is an existing topic in dumpster fire if you wish to continue this discussion.
I'm thinking he's referring to the ones that go younger than teenagers. I've seen those too. ?
 
I'm thinking he's referring to the ones that go younger than teenagers. I've seen those too. ?
I am unaware of any that glorifies pedophiles except for my own which is mostly to inform about misconception. I have however seen people describe their experiences as children with animals which does not receive any hate, if that counts as glorifying sexualisation of children.
 
I am unaware of any that glorifies pedophiles except for my own which is mostly to inform about misconception. I have however seen people describe their experiences as children with animals which does not receive any hate, if that counts as glorifying sexualisation of children.
I'm not sure sharing experiences makes it glorified - it's simply things we engaged in. However, some of those posts I have to question as they seem too embellished... (and do seem to do exactly as you describe).
 
I read an article the other day that says acceptance of LGBT acceptance/tolerance is beginning to erode seeing 5-10% drops year over year. I could speculate why I think that is. But if a life style as monolithic is starting to lose support. I can't imagine that there is any ground to be gained in this arena.


This is the story by the way.
 
I read an article the other day that says acceptance of LGBT acceptance/tolerance is beginning to erode seeing 5-10% drops year over year.

I think this is pretty relevant to another conclusion I have made in a different thread:

In my humble opinion, I see two possible stable far futures in which society is both fully informed and decided about zoophilia:

  1. A new movement revolving around the idea of free love emerges whose main philosophy is to remove all the societal stigma and norms around sex. All forms of sexual expression that don't revolve around physical force or coercion become accepted. Zoophilia becomes one of the accepted accepted forms of sexual expression. Eventually, breakthroughs in science and genetics allows the possibility of inter species pregnancy or hybridization.
  2. Society eventually settles on a hardline set of morals and laws that revolve around a certain religion or philosophy. Genetic engineering and trans-humanism is used to replace normal humans and permanently expunge any deviance from the new society. This may or may not include Zoophilia. Future generations will abide to these rules faithfully until the end of time due to the fact that they are hardwired to do so.
Or conversely, humans will stay stupid and hypocritical, which will likely not bode well for our species as a whole since terrorism and war will be increasingly able to create a large scale global genocide or extinction as tech and AI advances.
 
I read an article the other day that says acceptance of LGBT acceptance/tolerance is beginning to erode seeing 5-10% drops year over year. I could speculate why I think that is. But if a life style as monolithic is starting to lose support. I can't imagine that there is any ground to be gained in this arena.


This is the story by the way.
Honestly, I have never had warm feelings for LGBTQ myself. Please don't misunderstand me though—I do not think negative of gay, lesbian, bi, transgender and probably not about whatever queer may refer to. What I don't really get is why they are all thrown together into one initialism, into one group.

It feels a bit confrontational, too, because it gathers a lot of different people together ... except for hetero men and women whose genitals match their gender identity. LGBTQ sounds like freak show vs. normal people.

Asked for LGBTQ acceptance, I'd feel a bit weird. Asked for acceptance of lesbians I can imagine a lesbian and say that I'm perfectly fine with her loving women. But I can't imagine a person that is L, G, B, T and Q. Such a person does not exist. It's an impersonal collective positioned against a norm.

I wouldn't want to be thrown into this as another letter Z. I am both zooey and I am a member of the whole population. I don't see a point in defining myself as abnormal, which an initialism like LGBTQ basically does.
 
Lol what battle? No one's fighting for us except a lunatic fringe. The Overton window continues to shift towards authoritarianism throughout the world. If anything we should batten down the hatches.

Honestly, I have never had warm feelings for LGBTQ myself. Please don't misunderstand me though—I do not think negative of gay, lesbian, bi, transgender and probably not about whatever queer may refer to. What I don't really get is why they are all thrown together into one initialism, into one group.

It feels a bit confrontational, too, because it gathers a lot of different people together ... except for hetero men and women whose genitals match their gender identity. LGBTQ sounds like freak show vs. normal people.

Asked for LGBTQ acceptance, I'd feel a bit weird. Asked for acceptance of lesbians I can imagine a lesbian and say that I'm perfectly fine with her loving women. But I can't imagine a person that is L, G, B, T and Q. Such a person does not exist. It's an impersonal collective positioned against a norm.

I wouldn't want to be thrown into this as another letter Z. I am both zooey and I am a member of the whole population. I don't see a point in defining myself as abnormal, which an initialism like LGBTQ basically does.
I have a lot of issues w/ what you're saying here and unfortunately I don't have time to get into the history of my people & why queerness as a collective exists but I do agree with you on one thing: queerness and zoophilia are NOT the same thing & should NOT be equated w/ each other. There are plenty of queer zoos but our zoophilia isn't what makes us queer.
 
I have come see in the past few years many countries intensifying the criminalization of our sexuality. In general the disposition of many online communities "furries therians otaku ect" seems to be becoming more puritanical and explicitly anti zoo.

This stuff really depresses me . I check zoo twitter often and I feel like the momentum that anti zoo activism has is snowballing partly spurred on by the aforementioned anti zoo legislation.

I think the torrent of internet backlash originated with the whole kero the wolf situation. He was a monster and his monstrous actions painted our community in a monstrous light as a consequence.
While I definitely have seen some more zooactivism as of recently I feel like it is to little to late perhaps?

I guess I'm curious to know where you all stand with this. Do you think this new wave of anti zoo sentiment will continue with its momentum? Or am I fixating too much on the negatives?
I would say that it was always pretty bad within the furry fandom, at least on the dumbass websites where the worst of them congregated. The larger and more "public" the website was, the more toxic the culture was. The furries also had a toxic convention culture that was behaving more like a disgusting criminal gang than anything: it's a pity because, back in the old meet-up days, the people that took part in the furry culture and wanted to meet each other were mostly very docile teetotalar types of people, and nowadays, there are so much drugs among the furries that it's getting pretty ridiculous. Among the furries and specifically among the anthros, the whole culture is really getting a lot worse.

What you are looking at is something more like the furry subculture itself going into a cultural decline, and it's their own darn fault. They became obsessed with being publicly visible, and they became obsessed with trying to make their art hobby lucrative. Did I mention that greed had a lot to do with it? The whole ersatz "libertarian" movement, in the fandom, really did them a huge disservice: it turned into, "liberty of the majority," which translated into, "liberty to look at heteronormative anthro trash porn and liberty to beat up anybody that is weird enough to gross out the pretty girls that you come to try to fuck." The convention culture has become a straight boy's bullying playpen, and it's only a matter of time before they take another crack at Burned Fur Jihad.

If you want to get a taste of what furry used to be, you're going to have to look to breakaway cliques that still adhere to the easy-going and Epicurean outlook of the sci-fi inspired counter-culture from which it came.

The paucity of female furries has been a subject of much discussion, and the straight furs have gone on the war-path to try to burn out anybody that happens to scare the pretty girls away. Unfortunately, a lot of the female furries are more conservative than they will ever realize they are, and zoo sex happens to freak them out. They are only "liberal" in the sense that they have bought into "#metooism," which is turning into a prudish majoritarian witch-hunt that is breeding a sexually repressed and self-hating generation.

Insofar as our general culture, we are having a bit of a sexual counter-revolution, right now. It's getting to a point where women are being stigmatized if they DON'T call out someone they had sex with as a "rapist." They are creating a cultural milieu where it seems like women are forbidden to think of themselves as anything besides victims that need to enter into any potential sexual encounter with extreme caution, lest some vile "rapist" monster might infringe upon their sexual purity. This is eventually going to escalate into a situation where women who really had satisfying sex with men they actually love are getting bullied into throwing the men of their dreams under the bus, and they will eventually revolt. We are a few years out from that, though, and I am pretty certain that Generation Z is going to turn out to be one of the most sexually repressed and self-loathing generations we have had in an entire human lifetime. If you put your ear to the ground, you can sense some reverberations indicating the raw beginnings of a new revolt, but it's not yet on the horizon. Any push-back against it is going to be in narrowly defined, quite frankly bitter niche subcultures, very much like the proto-goth and proto-punk Beat Generation.

Anyhow, us zoos are not the only people that are suffering, right now. Our entire culture is entering into an era of sexual repression, and it's going to get a lot harder for everybody, not just zoos. Everybody is going to suffer, and it's going to suck for everybody, not just us.

Something that really sucks, though, is that this entire prudish movement is getting blamed on feminism, even though it really constitutes the opposite of sexual liberation, and this is largely because the straight boys have not yet fully come to terms with the fact that the feminist movement itself has...and has always had...a conservative wing. In fact, if you look back at the history of feminism, the first-wave feminists often belonged to conservative Christian groups. There was also a feminist anti-gay and anti-transgender movement that really made a truly heroic effort to try to strangle the gay rights movement in the cradle. They saw male homosexuality as a misogynistic war against the female sex, yet they were noxious prudes that would have had women stuffed unwilingly into a hijab. The lack of understanding about the feminist movement's very old and very bitter sexually repressed conservative wing has led people to think that feminism itself is nothing but sexual repression, so the people that have started to chafe under the #metooist sex-negative idea of feminism are misguidedly championing an openly misogynistic party line, and as long as they continue getting suckered into the idea that all feminism is made equally, anybody that attempts to criticize the growing culture of sexual repression is going to get labeled "misogynist" whether that label is deserved or not.

At some point, pro-sex feminism will start to make a comeback, but it's going to start small. It's going to start in rebellious and socially maligned niche subcultures. I don't know for sure where it's going to start, and it's impossible to tell for certain when it is going to start. It WILL start making a comeback, and they will eventually initiate a reawakening of the sexual revolution.

Right now, the Sexual Revolution, IN GENERAL, is just very much on hold. We zoos are not suffering alone. We've got company.

The illusion that this is a specifically anti-zoo movement is really a product of our paranoid, egocentric imaginations. It's not just anti-zoo: it's anti-sex. It's not just affecting us: it's affecting everybody.

The chickens are coming home to roost, though. People's self-loathing is driving them to rampant opioid abuse, and they are dying in droves from overdose. They could fix the problem in a very short amount of time if they just learned to love themselves again.
 
At some point, pro-sex feminism will start to make a comeback, but it's going to start small. It's going to start in rebellious and socially maligned niche subcultures. I don't know for sure where it's going to start, and it's impossible to tell for certain when it is going to start. It WILL start making a comeback, and they will eventually initiate a reawakening of the sexual revolution.

Right now, the Sexual Revolution, IN GENERAL, is just very much on hold. We zoos are not suffering alone. We've got company.

Are you sure you are a supporter of the original Sexual Revolution? Because there's ALOT of things that were on their agenda.

Or do you just want zoophile rights?
 
Are you sure you are a supporter of the original Sexual Revolution? Because there's ALOT of things that were on their agenda.

Or do you just want zoophile rights?
I am a gay man (demiman if non-binary identities mean anything to you), and I consider the fight for women's liberation to be adjacent to the fight for gay liberation. I subscribe to the liberationist, sex-positive view of feminism, and I reject the more paranoid and defensive view of feminism because it is not worth the constant sexual repression of both sexes and the culture of distrust, contempt, and fear that has taken root over that paranoia. Many women have declared a sort of "war on rape," and it's worse than the original illness. It is undoing the past half a century of women's sexual liberation and turning otherwise mentally normal women into paranoid trainwrecks that are barely able to make a relationship last at all. I am wholeheartedly a feminist, and I also think that it's time for the women's liberation movement to fall back in love with falling in love.

As a matter of fact, I do have a right to speak on this issue because paranoia is being weaponized against us zoophiles, and their misguided rage against us does not make me ashamed of being a zoophile: it causes me to want to violently attack them with a hatchet, and if you do not feel the same, then you do not have enough respect for yourself to be worth anybody's time. We DO have a right to complain about the paranoid and defensive branch of the 21st Century's iteration of the feminist movement, and we must complain as long as they continue taking out their misguided bitterness on us.

The sex-positive branch of the women's rights movement is, from my point-of-view, more noble and inherently better in every possible way. They are not just better feminists, but I also regard them as more feminist. They also have higher intelligence and a better adjusted moral compass. I think that zoos and sex-positive feminists ought to be aligned AGAINST the paranoid and hateful and prudish lunatics that are setting back the cause for women's rights and making them more of a public nuisance than anything useful. I think that zoos and sex-positive feminists are natural allies, and once we have overcome initial misunderstandings, I think that we will come to reshape our society.

Sex-positivity means that sex is good and should be good, and as a consequence, zoo sex is good.
 
Last edited:
I am a gay man (demiman if non-binary identities mean anything to you), and I consider the fight for women's liberation to be adjacent to the fight for gay liberation. I subscribe to the liberationist, sex-positive view of feminism, and I reject the more paranoid and defensive view of feminism because it is not worth the constant sexual repression of both sexes and the culture of distrust, contempt, and fear that has taken root over that paranoia. Many women have declared a sort of "war on rape," and it's worse than the original illness. It is undoing the past half a century of women's sexual liberation and turning otherwise mentally normal women into paranoid trainwrecks that are barely able to make a relationship last at all. I am wholeheartedly a feminist, and I also think that it's time for the women's liberation movement to fall back in love with falling in love.

There was a Quora post which a person asked the difference between sex positive and sex negative feminism. I suggest you read the response from from Franklin Veaux and Madsen Zimbric:



The other thing I would like you do do is to read the conversion in this thread from post #481 to the last post:

Now consider which type of feminism you would want to expose your hypothetical son or daughter to?
 
Last edited:
Now consider which type of feminism you would want to expose your hypothetical son or daughter to?
Sex-positive. I think that anti-zoo hysteria is sex-negative. I think that the idea that sex is inherently harmful is sex-negative: when anti-zoo bigots talk about "consent," they are talking about "consent" as if consenting to any kind of sex at all were on the level of consenting to euthanasia. This is not really true. As a general rule, sex is good, and sex is healthy unless proved otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt. Sex is good for your health and good for your spirit. Sex makes you a better person.

If someone attempted to evangelize sexual repression to anybody that I was related to, then I would have them shot.
 
However, our society has become very hostile toward sexual liberation, and even many LGBT have become very hostile toward sexual liberation. We have produced one of the most aggravatingly prudish generations in modern history. The current generation is so uptight you could not drive an eight penny nail through their ass with a 10 pound sledge hammer.

I think that this is affecting everybody, not just zoos. People today are more sexually repressed than they have been in generations, and I think that this cannot possibly be healthy. I think that such a generation cannot possibly be emotionally or physically or mentally or spiritually healthy. Repression is a spiritual cancer.
 
However, our society has become very hostile toward sexual liberation, and even many LGBT have become very hostile toward sexual liberation. We have produced one of the most aggravatingly prudish generations in modern history. The current generation is so uptight you could not drive an eight penny nail through their ass with a 10 pound sledge hammer.

I think that this is affecting everybody, not just zoos. People today are more sexually repressed than they have been in generations, and I think that this cannot possibly be healthy. I think that such a generation cannot possibly be emotionally or physically or mentally or spiritually healthy. Repression is a spiritual cancer.
Tell me what your ideal societal attitude towards sex would be?
 
Tell me what your ideal societal attitude towards sex would be?
Positive.

Our society has come to treat sex the same way they treat euthanasia and abortion...while I would not deny someone the right to do either, sex is not in the same category, but even so, the way that people talk about sex, today, could lead you to believe that consenting to the act of sex is just as serious as consenting to be put to death or consenting to be beaten to within an inch of your life with a cane.

Sex is good. Sex is healthy. Sex makes you a better person.

Right now, our society has a disproportionately negative view on sexuality, and I think that this can only lead to social unrest and general unhappiness. We are more sexually repressed, now, than we have been in generations, and there are riots in the street. Businesses are being destroyed. I think that this is undeniably connected. I think that there is an undeniable connection between sexual repression and the fact that our culture is at the brink of a civil war.

Sex is good! I think that the burden of proof should be on anybody that says otherwise.
 
Furthermore, I think that us zoos should stop thinking that the sexual repression that is going on, today, is about us. We are one of many stakeholders that have been hurt by sexual repression, but everybody is suffering, right now, because we have produced a sexually repressed generation. It's not just us. I think we should stop thinking that it's just us. Our culture has become overbearingly cynical toward sexuality, and I think that this is demonstrably unhealthy.

I don't think that zoos alone are losing. I think that this sexually repressed age will ultimately hurt everybody.

I think that our problems are disproportionate, but just because the canary in the coal mine croaks first does not mean that everybody else is safe. When the canary croaks, it is time to change course. It is time to turn around and try going another way.

Our problems are the canary that should tell rational members of society that something has gone wrong. If we, one of the most patently harmless sexual minorities that exist, are being beaten down, then everybody should be worried.

And give the fucking canary CPR, so it will be there to be your scapegoat again in the future. If we were not there to get nailed to a cross every time society goes into reverse back into the Dark Ages, then someone else's neck would be on the chopping block.

The reason why you ought to take care of your minorities is to make sure someone else is there to be thrown into the volcano instead of you.
 
Last edited:
If someone attempted to evangelize sexual repression to anybody that I was related to, then I would have them shot.
Let's see, you got the entirety of the Abrahamic religions (which dominate North America, South America, Africa and half of Asia) and several other religions which claim abstinence as "good" and "holy", so you've got a lot of opposition there.
 
Furthermore, I think that us zoos should stop thinking that the sexual repression that is going on, today, is about us. We are one of many stakeholders that have been hurt by sexual repression, but everybody is suffering, right now, because we have produced a sexually repressed generation. It's not just us. I think we should stop thinking that it's just us. Our culture has become overbearingly cynical toward sexuality, and I think that this is demonstrably unhealthy.

I don't think that zoos alone are losing. I think that this sexually repressed age will ultimately hurt everybody.

I think that our problems are disproportionate, but just because the canary in the coal mine croaks first does not mean that everybody else is safe. When the canary croaks, it is time to change course. It is time to turn around and try going another way.

Our problems are the canary that should tell rational members of society that something has gone wrong. If we, one of the most patently harmless sexual minorities that exist, are being beaten down, then everybody should be worried.

And give the fucking canary CPR, so it will be there to be your scapegoat again in the future. If we were not there to get nailed to a cross every time society goes into reverse back into the Dark Ages, then someone else's neck would be on the chopping block.

The reason why you ought to take care of your minorities is to make sure someone else is there to be thrown into the volcano instead of you.
Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I haven't noticed any sexual repression at all. Care to fill me in?
 
Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I haven't noticed any sexual repression at all. Care to fill me in?
I agree with SigmatoZeta there. Prostitution has been outlawed in a few European countries in recent years and some people are pushing for the same change in more countries, e.g. Germany. They are still in a minority here, but this may change over time. Notably, it's not mainly an effort of classic conservatives nowadays, but rather coming from the left, which matches Sigma's description of sex-negative feminism.

The following is only marginally related, but I also see that punishments for sexual crimes are becoming harsher and harsher. Of course crimes—I mean actual crimes with victims—shall be punished! But I don't agree with increasing the punishment whenever a scandal occurs. When people hear about a scandal they apparently think "we've got to do something about it" and increasing the punishments is what they come up with every time. Of course this does not prevent crimes, it does not solve anything except to bring them the satisfaction of "having done something". The same mechanism may occur in other contexts too, but it is most apparent in the context of crimes with a sexual component.
 
I'm making this reply for both of you guys. I know this is going to sounds extremely infuriating, but from what I've seen MAPS/Pedophiles are the only other group of people who seem to support zoophile rights as a majority. And the fact that so many people here post stories and shit about them engaging in bestiality as a minor in light or jest, is probably one of the reasons why people associate pedophiles with zoophiles.

If us zoophiles want to distance ourselves from them, then the very least we could do is to stop taking about minors doing indecent things with animals in light or jest. It's much easier to refute the connection between the two if we start doing that. If you don't respect the boundaries between childhood and sex, then the amount of arguments pedos will have to support their cause goes from 0 to 50.

This is what outsiders probably think: "These people are so fucked up in the head because of their premature promiscuity" And in my opinion it's kinda true. The people here who do brag about their early experiences have certain attributes that I don't want to elaborate on. You can discover zoophilia in a much more healthy and safe manner once you're an adult, as the case with me and many others.

Dunno....I'm STILL trying to figure out what YOU said that I did not, aside from a remarkably large number of words to get it said.
The World would be better off without pedophiliacs, but it ain't gonna happen. In the world we live in, there's always someone to lend a sympathetic ear to even the most hideous among us. In fact for some, it seems, the more hideous, the better. Disassociating with the bastards is pretty much impossible at this point.
As to what outsiders think, that gamut runs from Biblical to Super-hep: that ain't gonna change either...no help there. The only solution to the problem is the same one it has always been...keep it to yourself. Privacy, and the right to it, is the only possible answer at this time. End of story
 
Back
Top