Salty, your thread being taken down had nothing to do with this thread so far as I know. I asked Floofy about your thread after I noticed it was missing, Floofy having already independently taken down your thread, and he responded with the details.
Again... 1) That was from 2020, not just 2020 but January of 2020, the first month I created my account here. 2) with more information I have changed my opinion on the matter as compared to nearly 4 years ago.
As stated, most breeders will NOT breed a dog on her first heat. While she's able to be impregnated, the risks to her are astronomically high. She is not of breeding age, as specified by the rules.
I see no reason to do so as mentioned in my other post. 1) It's a HIGHLY controversial subject. 2) One of the other mods wasn't even sure if she was 11 months old. (Something that is taken merely at face value) 3) This type of activity should be discouraged, as I've seen this type of thing blow up in people's faces. 4) The thread was soon becoming a dumpster fire. If it wasn't @amorousdog5 that said something, someone else surely would. And I'm not going to sit there and delete every single objection just to protect you engaging in highly risky behavior. As, many zoos agree, this is risky behavior you're engaging in. I don't care how much experience you think you have. You're putting your golden in unnecessary danger by having sex with her before she's even a year old. Before she's fully matured. Before her immune system has fully developed. Before her vaginal walls have fully developed.
I'd like some clarification on this point. I never reported Salty, and never mentioned his thread within this one until after it had already been taken down. @FloofyNewfie Are you referring to my harsh denunciation of Salty within his own thread while it still existed? If so, may I ask if your attention was called to that thread by Salty reporting me?
Nope, someone else also took offense as well and reported it. You weren't the only one that was upset that he didn't wait for the second heat. My comment above was addressing SaltyDog calling for me to restore the thread, delete your posts in his thread, and tell you not to post on it.
I for one would love to know how and who is determining what is a good age to start copulation. As per every situation in life what works for one doesnt always work for all. As per the human race..... just because some person gets placed in a position of power it doesnt mean that they know what they are talking about. Look at our political scene as a perfect example. Everyone who is in a position of authority and power big notes themselves and implements rules and regulations to control the masses of people. These rules makers are only working on assumptions and general rule of thumb and what they believe themselves and dont take into consideration the exemption to the rule. They dont like variations and never see outside the closed box that they create for all to abide by. There is never any allowances for the exception to the rules. I thought the threads here was for open discussion so we can all determine what is general consensus and if ones scenario falls outside of the general consensus then dont we have the right to know how to deal with that scenario/situation in our own person lives. Arent we all equals here and have a right to help each other along without condemnation. I believe that comments should be removed if they are defamatory/threatening or aggressive in nature. Deleting post because its open discussion and doesnt fully conform to one persons rules or thought pattern which are left open to interpretation is just wrong. If we are expected to follow rules then close the room for error by being more specific in the terms and conditions and clarify to the fullest extent of what we can and cant comment on and how we can and cant post on this site. I appreciate that administrators have a place on these forums but I have seen so much verbal abuse that it disgusts me. Funny how those posts dont get removed. Im sure that everyone here would like to know what experiences people have had and what has and not worked for them. We cant just judge one person and delete their post because they have decided to share with us what success they have had and continue to have. Sharing your experience and having it deleted because one person/reader finds it unacceptable because of jealousy or their own personal failing is a form discrimination. If this is how we judge people the in theory ZV shouldnt exist at all which would be a shame as it fully closes the door of communication for all ZOOs. Do we really want this to be the way for ZOOs. I for one say lets be adults about this and lets listen to all experiences and make an informed decision for and on our own personal situations based on what information is shared in good faith. How can we be proud ZOOs if we out each other in a forum like this. I dont think SaltyDog deserved to have his posts removed as his experience/s werent offending and he does seem to care for his new companion and he has taken all steps to make sure that she is comfortable and willing to participate in copulating with his girl. If this is as bad as what one individual has made it out to be then I for one am very disappointed with this site for deleting his posts. There is enough discrimination against ZOO in society. Please dont allow that to creep into ZV as well. This is meant to be a safe space for all of us. Just for the record I DONT condone cruelty to animals. There is so much of it in general society. 2 consenting and willing participants isnt cruelty and shouldnt be judged as such. Chill and stop attacking each other as we all have the same common interests here.Yes, it is. But this thread doesn't actually judge about your actions, from what I've read?
The discussion was based on the individual thoughts of users in this regards.
It's an open poll reflecting the opinions of users.
If there's an interest in clarifying the rules specifically in regards of "numbers", it's easy to open up a poll with numbered amounts of months, each user can vote once and leave a feedback in regards to a clear numbered minimum age.
If it ends in the rules, who knows?! At least it could reflect the minimum age users have in their mind regarding dog-human sexual interactions.
That would be the precise variant of this one, I assume.
Edit: Why M/F copulation? Nah, dog / human copulation. Why differ between sexes?
Veterinary professionals. Google it. You might claim, "Well they only say this because they're talking about breeding, and the big danger is the female getting pregnant too early!" The problem with that idea is that the minimum recommended age for male dogs is also about 1.5 years. Bottom line, it is risky for the health of your dog to breed them too early due to the fact that they have not fully matured yet, and so we should try to discourage that sort of behavior.
Sorry I'm coming back to the party late.
Opinion. But the rules do not reflect this.
No one here is asking you, or anyone else to "...turn a blind eye to..." anything. And you're right, we all are "...only human...". All the more reason why the rules must be clear, eliminating misunderstandings and misinterpretations.
And I am floored to learn that the average Joe here is expected to actually lookup or otherwise know on his/her own that you are referring to the term "breeding age" to be defined as what a breeder or veteranarian would define it as. To the average Joe (and this is what your site is aimed at guiding and helping) it would be very easy for them to believe that her being in heat, satisfies the criteria of the term "...of breeding age...". They are being guided by this site, so the rules must be very clear. And I remember quite a lot of rants, especially from the mods, about no-one understanding the rules. Gee, I wonder why? And, if you remember, I was one of the people that advocated for the rules to be placed prominently. I am happy to see that link on the top of the browser window.
And if all references were removed, there would be no "HIGHLY controversial subject" to deal with.
And I have clearly offered to send you legal documentation, proving her age.
I actually agree with you on this one. This is why I posted my honest and heartfelt apology on this. I should never have posted such things. I was caught up in the moment, and completely unaware of how the rules were being defined.
I agree with you on this point as well, now that I have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. Keep in mind, if the questionable posts I made were never posted, nothing in the rest of the thread would ever be characterized as dumpster fire material.
No body, not even myself, is asking you to "protect" me.
And this is one of the many reasons why I regret ever sharing any of this. I now realize the harm in sharing any of this kind of activity to the general public here at ZV. Again, I was very stupid. And again I offer my apologies.
For a dog related organization sexual activity actually resembles the high "risk" or in this relation "wished outcome" for "offspring".
I think most are missing my point here. I have never advocated for anyone to do what I did. What I am advocating for is to have the rules clarified in the actual Rules section, so that others here in the future don't unknowingly make the same mistake that I have made. I'm thinking of the membership at large here.For a dog related organization sexual activity actually resembles the high "risk" or in this relation "wished outcome" for "offspring".
They would never include or describe sexual activity separated from this. Why, you might ask? Because they exclusively describe dog-dog-intercourses (which mostly establish in heat, as such with predictable outcome) and in no case dog-other species which are deemed inacceptable.
This does not resemble that the only risks described by setting those recommendations are in terms of bearing offspring or comparable. It resembles all sorts of potential risks which are combined in recommending an acceptable breeding age.
Actually, I'm all for this as well. I've always seen Salty's positivity as a good thing. Conflict only arises for me because one of the reasons he is here is to impart his 51 years of wisdom to other dog owners, which is a problem when he is giving out or acting on wrong information. For example telling some poor fellow that a female dog expects him to last 15-40 minutes inside, and that he needs to do training so that he can properly satisfy her (real example).
Okay - not sure where that was written, but.. my experiences with female dogs nowadays with minimum > 2k copulative activities over the years taught me that at least my partners don't expect 15-40 minutes of humping.
I don't know him in detail and am very careful saying something in regards of "what others might do", as you can only go wrong most of the times with such projections.
www.zoovilleforum.net
Great advice!
Ah, I see.How was your first time with a female dog?
Hey all. 21 male here and I’ve been interested in female dogs for a couple years now lol. My family has a 3 year old lab and she’s the cutest thing ever. Get along great with her and have gotten a little intimate here and there. Mostly will just jerk off and she’ll enjoy licking my dick and...
My girl will typically put an end to things if I haven't finished in 10. Not saying it can't happen that some female dogs might prefer long sessions, but the problem I had was with it being a generalization.
So what you are telling me is that regardless of age or breed that any form of contact with any animal is then defined as cruelty and abuse. This is regardless of whether or not both parties are consenting. I do realise that abusive people use what non abusive people say to justify their cause. I will never disagree with this. So in general or normal society we should then all be judged and pinned as being murderers, sadist or the like because a minority of people that have ill intentions and who are mentally unstable use what us normal people say and do to justify their ill intentions and doings. Sorry but you cant judge everyone by the ill actions of a few. You will never end cruelty or rid it from the face of this planet no matter how hard we try. I think it is obvious by the way people present themselves to determine who has cruel intentions and who doesnt. Who is loving and caring and who isnt. I cant see how we can all fall under the same banner. Theoretically if we are are judged under the same banner then theoretically ZV should be closed down immediately which would be a shame as there are so many genuine people on here with good intentions who are loving and caring towards their animals regardless of species. This is also a place of safety where they can share and learn from each other not to mention be part of a society where they can feel comfortable to be around people who share the same or similar interests. Unfortunately even if ZV bans people from this site they will only return under a different user name. Nothing is fool proof but I think its sad that innocent people have been judged and banned or had their posts removed for following rules which arent clear and concise. There has to be a better way to establish if a person has ill intentions. Maybe the moderators should send private messages to that person request further information before just deleting their posts or banning them from the site. It shouldnt be as simple as 1 person being the judge and exicutioner all in one. Could you imagine 1 person being judge and executioner in a court room. Heaven help us all. This is why we have juries. To try and work out who is guilty of a crime and who isnt. Even with that system innocent people end up inside prisons. Always remember one thing in life. What one person sees as being wrong doesnt always mean that it is wrong. The same goes for someone who thinks something is right but it doesnt always mean its right. Answer this question for me.... Whats the definition of cleanliness? This question was actually raised in a court room here in Australia. The judge determined that what one person views as being clean doesnt necessarily mean that is clean. Thats because we are all individuals and we perceive or see thing through different eyes and have different beliefs. If all of use see everything through the same set of eyes then what a boring and colorless world we would be living in. Not everything is cut and dry and not everything fits inside a square box. One has to look outside the box to find an answer. One has to ask questions before one finds an answer. If we dont experiment with things in life then we will never learn or advance. We need to be more open minded and accepting of people and what they do or say. We cant just pigeon hole people. Show some compassion. There are people here who have good intentions and do things without any malice. Its hard enough with general society crucifying ZOOs without us outing ourselves as well. All Im asking is that moderators/administrators be more clear and concise with the rules of this site and not to just delete posts because one person in the forum decides the post doesnt fit or suit their way of thinking. Thats just closed mindedness by one person. Read through the forum and see what the general reactions towards a post is before deleting it. Have a look at who is contesting the post and how many of the problems are coming from that person who is contesting what was posted. Also look at how aggressive that one person becomes and if they start to slander someones name and start to accuse them of being a rapist (as in the case of SaltyDog). Seriously that person who I wont name should be the one who should be banned or removed from this site. Also the Administrator shouldve picked up on that before deleting posts and shouldve acted upon the slander and accusations in an appropriate and timely manner to suppress and contain the situation. I believe in equality, fairness and for all to be treated with respect and that one person shouldnt be singled out and treated like a criminal especially when they havent done anything wrong. Why not reinstate the posts from SaltyDog and allow people to read what he had posted. See for themselves if he has broken any of the rules or not. Also these people have to read the rules with an open mind and judge for themselves if the rules are vague or not. Maybe hold a vote to get the general consensus if the rules are too relaxed and vague or if they are to strict or ok. Let the people decide and amend accordingly. Then if the posts fall outside of the rules then delete those posts. That sounds like a fare way to determine who is right and who is wrong. I havent commented to cause problems or arguments here. I just think its a shame that we have got to this point because one person complained about something that was posted with all good intentions and in good faith but was taken out of context and twisted to appear to be evil, cruel and abusive. If we have knee jerked reactions on here and our post get deleted that easily then why bother contributing to any forums by replying on what is posted or whats the point of being on this site at all. Even better why have this site at all if people arent allowed to post what they are thinking or what has worked for them. I do agree that abuse and cruelty shouldnt be condoned but where is the line that we shouldnt cross. Its not clear and concise.
Isnt everything generalization including the laws that we live under and abide by?????????? Its all about how one person perceives something to be. It doesnt always mean thats the way it is. What you see through your eyes is not always what I see through mine. Saying that it was viewed by YOU as "generalization" is tunnel vision and I would contest that one person should be crucified because of your personal point of view or your personal belief which is also "generalization" yet Im not crucifying you for your generalization.
I never stated this as a "generalization". I was purely speaking from 2 points of my experiences.
I agree, and have always agreed, with everything as you've stated here. This is why I continue to advocate for the rules to be well defined and clear on these issues. As things stand now, I thought I was following all the rules, in good faith. I can only hope that all the "approved" parts of the thread will be restored for the benefit of our membership, as there was a lot of good content there that can only benefit and uplift us all.
If you keep reading from the link I provided, you very clearly intend it as a general statement. Here is the continued conversation:
If you only intended to speak from your own personal experiences, you would have agreed with me by writing something like: "I didn't intend it as a general statement, I was only talking about my own dogs." Instead you strongly disagreed with what I wrote. So tell me... if you were in agreement with me back then that one can't make the general claim that dogs expect sex to last over 15 minutes, what is it about my statement that you were disagreeing with?
I actually remember this part of the thread. Saltydog is right. That wasnt "generalization" or "what people should expect as rule of thumb" and you (SaltyDog) did state that this is/was your own personal experience and is not to be taken out of context. How this got twisted to being "generalization" is beyond me.I never stated this as a "generalization". I was purely speaking from 2 points of my experiences.
1, most copulation between a male dog and a female dog is not under 10 mins. My parents were professional breeders and worked with the AKC for years. Typically, a tying between two dogs lasts somewhere between 15 to 20 mins and occasionally up to 30 mins. There are rare occasions of more than 30 mins.
2, I have discovered that "zoomies" after sex are often a display that they aren't finished getting their sexual satisfaction from you yet.
Now, I agree with you that this should not be mandated. I was simply trying to illustrate that a number of dogs really love sex with humans and it never hurts to explore to see if your girl wants more, or not. I was giving him encouragement to discover whether this was true for his girl. If you read further down the thread, he states that she was, in fact, responding favorably to having longer sessions with him and implied that her "zoomies" were diminishing.
I'd like to also add that, yes, I do get too enthusiastic when describing things. I should've taken the time to clarify things better. I never meant it as torturing your dog and making her endure you for long periods of time. And yet your objections make me sound this way. Yes, the 40 mins part was an over exaggeration on my part. Please pardon me for being human. And yet nobody in that thread had a problem understanding what I meant, with the exception of you. Yes, I fully agree that I must take more care when guiding others and not get too caught up in my side of things. And I also know that too many guys get locked into racing to their climax and don't spend enough time in pleasing her sexual needs first and foremost. As you read my posts, you'll know that I always focus on what's best for her, and that my "needs" always come secondary. Always.
Salty Loves His Golden...
No. If you give up that easily then thats not my issue. We all have voices and Im expressing mine best I can. I dislike injustice and I feel that has happened so Im calling it out for what it is. Sorry if I bore you. Sorry I dont do one liners. One liners dont explain what Im trying to say or the point im trying to make.
I'm really not sure why you think you can just outright lie when it's such a simple matter for people to read it for themselves... as a matter of fact, that's how we'll settle it. Nobody here has to take my word for it, everyone who is interested please just read the discussion for yourself and reach your own conclusion. Once again, the link:
www.zoovilleforum.net
