Yes, oppression is a moral concept. I believe in free will, as long as you're not causing physical harm to someone else, or violating their autonomy, or now in more modern times, even restricting their ability to improve their socioeconomic class. So I guess that's at least part of my definition of oppression.
So you have already decided where the line is, the answer to your question is: you decide.
In a world without objective morality, guns=right. No objective, just the enforcement of the subjective.
Two problems:
Ya? Which side got the real money to make it happen? Don’t matter if 5 nobodies are ok with it. The ones with cash and power matters.
Just wear the right shoes
This is the hard part - Deciding to not hide any longer.
If by legally have, you mean in countries where it is legal or potentially protected (like germany); yea go ahead. If you're talking about places where it is definitely illegal I won't stop anyone from martyring themselves, I'll even agree it could make relatively large impact. It won't be me though, and if I won't volunteer I won't ask others directly or indirectly.
The assumption that zoosexuality has been similarly taboo or illegal continuously in all cultures for the last hundred thousand years is baseless. There is substantial evidence to the contrary. That doesn't prove much in regards to the future, but to believe the opposite is indicative of skewed perception which casts doubts on predictions of the future.
Tell me, how does one become a zoo martyr?
Then post the evidence. Let's see it. Supporting my statement, we have cultural mores handed down since the dawn of writing, quite a few of which represent thousands of years of oral history passed downthrough each successive generation before writing existed.
Indeed, and the kind of people most likely to be caught make poor martyrs (fence hoppers, drug addicts, etc...).
www.zoovilleforum.net
So what we need is a Jesus figure for the zoo types?Indeed, and the kind of people most likely to be caught make poor martyrs (fence hoppers, drug addicts, etc...).
Mr. Hands isn't the best example, but death makes people notice, and the fact that he was a productive member of society did cause some cognitive dissonance.
The perfect zoo martyr is moderately wealthy, has a positive public profile, is educated, and isn't caught but comes out as zoo while there is no evidence against him/her. He/she does not admit to illegal acts but does admit to the sexual attraction and advocates for decriminalization.
They are a martyr because despite no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt they will still be destroyed.
Even better would be a zoo family (with kids, no I don't mean the kids are zoo too), who no longer have any animals but come out of the closet.
It's fighting instinct with instinct, people hate seeing families destroyed.
Zoophilia in history
I wanted a thread to free post snippets, pics or accounts of zoophilia in history. This includes governments, religions, past customs and anything else related to zoo history from the past. I think it is good to see how peoples over time have views on zoophilia have changed.
Check out the whole thread if you have time.
We do have a lot of history, and zoosexuality figures almost as prominently as homosexuality; both in the appropriate extreme minority to the heterosexual family unit.
Raising the dead would change a lot of minds, but my money is still on propaganda.
Beating the mind is more effective than beating your body
Too late - Already been done back in the mid 90s. With both dogs and horses. In both the US, and in Britain. Look up "Mark Matthews" AKA "Hoss Topper" AKA "Hossie". Made for a "too whacked to actually be broadcast" (But if you nose around in the right places, you can find it, either online, or as a DVD) episode of Jerry Springer. Keywords "I married my horse" should help.
Pretty sure anyone who fits that description wouldn't want to martyr themselves, as they already have everything. It would have to be somebody who has nothing left to lose but life itself.
Never said anyone wanted to martyr themselves.
I don't think you know how bad homosexuals are treated in some places.
Perhaps, that is certainly not what I have encountered trying to apologize for it from a purely rational point of view on debate sites. I also did not find 100% opposition either. There was a significant segment (10-15%) who would, for one reason or another, publicly declare tolerance.
I know how bad homosexuals are treated, but there are plenty of countries where bestialists are killed as well. But to be frank, I mean specifically in western countries where homosexuality is mostly accepted. In these countries, if you were to openly express yourself as a zoo, you would likely lose your job, your friends and be shunned by your family. The people around me are pretty liberal, but they still consider bestiality as a heinous crime, as bestiality for the most part is associated with fence hoppers and rapists. Good luck changing that.
They called that "The Domino Theory" for a lot of years. Whether or not its true matters little. What matters is how people see it, and how they react when it comes onto their radar. There will be those who see legalization of it as a major invitation to other problems. And they could even be right.
