A word from our sponsors...
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Hello all, Since at the moment I have an ample amount of time to waste I spent most of the day surfing the net plodding my way through the endless enquiries of Yahoo and googgle. Somehow I came upon numerious newspaper articles posted by various newspapers from around America and the rest of the world. I found something that disturbed be greatly. An uncountable amount of reports of individuals being caught having sex with animals, or various individuals illuding police and local folks who have not been caught yet. An example of one artical from an South African newspaper of a stable hand who repeatedly had sex with a very well known race horse. Finally the individual was discovered only after he killed the horse by inserting a broomstick handle up the mares vagina rupturing her internal organs. This crackhead got what he deserved, he's now spending time in a South African prison. I hope someone behind the brickwalls shoves a broomstick up his a**! Another example is a unidentified individual somewhere in Utah is randomly having sex with various horses. He has been caught in the act more than once but still has elluded police and angry horse owners. Over and over I read one dissapointing story after another. The ironic thing is that every story I read the person who caught was having sex with SOMEBODY elses animal! So the question remains... What is going on here? I don't think its been five years if I did the same search you wouldn't find story one. I picked up a local newspaper a couple of weeks ago and again I read of a person in my own town who was caught! (I wish I saved the artical but I didn't. And no I don't know the individual.) This is not right and I fear it is getting out of hand. I'm desperately affraid that soon witch hunts will start and innocent peoples lifes will be messed up because of the sillyness of people who lack common sence and people who were at the wrong place and the right time. Just take the time and go to Yahoo or Goggle and type in: "Man accused of having sex with horse" or "Man caught having sex with horse" Or any varient of the topic. I think you will be worried too. Thanks everybody, be good!
To me, this only underlines the importance of keeping your personal life PRIVATE!! Doing the dog in the front yard is going to get you in trouble, and doing the neighbors horse is certainly going to eventually get you caught. Use common sense, and always be aware of who you're talking to, and where you engage in certain activities. What you do in your own home, or on your own property, BEHIND CLOSED DOORS is your business.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Its the same old argument, zoophile verses beastialist! A zoo would never do this, would never just 'have it off' with any animal. A zoo needs to feel some kind of emotional connect with the animal they are intimate with. With their animal.A beastialist just gets their rocks off with any animal, which most zoos agree is an abuse of the animal's rights. i too agree with this. If they are so unfeeling enough to attack someone else's aniamal (and i consider it an attack) then they deserve to get caught. i understand not everyone can have the animal they are aroused by, living with them - lets face it a horse just doesn't go in a modern uptown apartement! - but that still gives no-one the right to just 'take' one if they want.bitch
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
uuuuuugggghhhhhh ok -it must be me -so I must be confused -so I just have to get this straight in my mind...zoo = loving exclusivebeasty = loving non-exclusive (likes humans too) ??????I am so tired of hearing of beasties refered to in a negative light -so maybe it's me who doesn't understand the correct definitions?is zoo exclusive -or is zoo refer to both exclusive and non -but both loving?or is it as I though - a zoo is exclusive and beasty is loving but not exclusive -exactly what is it that we are calling non-exclusive animal LOVERS who do not abuse?I already know what to call broom stick weilders -but I'm sure it will get me banned if I say it! thanX for the clarification - I feel like I'm going nuts here...
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
We've had this debate sooooooooo many times here, and the actual definitions have been posted. This thread was NOT started for the reason of pitting zoos against bestialists........I believe it was started in good faith as a warning to ALL who come here to be aware of what they're doing and who might be watching.I too am tired of seeing the bestialists portrayed negatively on this board. The picture that bitch_in_heat has painted is incorrect and quite frankly, insulting. Let's try to remember that both zoos and bestialists are welcome here, equally. One is not better than the other.
I don't know, definitions just really suck. This ecology-related class I was in this semester was dominated way too often by this one guy arguing definitions and semantics. Sure, maybe it's important but this guy basically argued himself right out of even believing there was technically such a thing as the words we were discussing, in which case what good is the word? I'm quite happy to just use the words and assume people will get what I mean.My impressions of the words areBestiality/ist: Includes everyone that has sex with animals. Good, bad, loving, exploitative, you name it. Including Zoophilia. It's just a general term like "sex", which we all know can include a lot of acts and attitudes.Zoophilia: Means "love for animals", and because of that doesn't even have to include sex although it pretty much does these days. However, it does imply a strong emotional connection with the animal. I don't think it means you have to be exclusive, but I think it does mean that you won't, say, have sex with a mare just because she has a sweet you-know-what and she's available. Even if she likes it. The definition of Zoophilia implies an emotional connection beyond sex/lust. Not that there's anything wrong with a bit of sex and lust. So I don't even care what words people use. I use Zoophilia here on the forum, because that's what I mean about myself and what I assume about the other members, but bestiality is fine too. It just leaves room for a broader interpretation. Again, just my opinions.
FWIW...Outside the cloister of people who have sex with animals, there is no distinction between zoophilia and bestiality. They're synonyms for 'someone who has sexual intercourse with an animal'. Ask the Man In The Street to differentiate, and he'll call you a pervert in any case and have you locked up for something...Inside the internet community of people who have sex with animals, there is a distinction which, depending on who you talk to, is either very fine, or very wide.Some animal lovers who call themselves 'zoophiles' define zoophilia to be a strong emotional connection with their animal partner, which may be expressed as a sexual relationship. They would consider the relationship to be in the manner of a marriage. Some in the zoophile group define bestiality as the use of an animal for sex, with little or no emotional component - the same way people use cows to get milk, and chickens to get eggs - the animals are a means to an end.However to some other people, having fun with your pet dog, with all the love and care you would shower on him could be defined as bestiality if the person is generally oriented toward sex with humans, but enjoys the occasional romp with an animal.One of the safest set of definitions I've seen here would be to consider a zoophile to be 'sexually oriented toward being attracted to animals', and a bestialist who, while they enjoy sex with animals in whatever capacity, are generally sexually oriented toward human partners.Note that being zoophile under the above definition does not exclude someone from having human partners as well as animal partners. A zoophile may consider their primary attraction to be toward animals, but still enjoy sex with a human partner, in the same way a bestialist may enjoy sex with animals but still be primarily oriented toward humans.It is unnecessary to include the concept of force, or unwillingness on the part of the animal, or disregard for the welfare of the animal to encompass 'bestiality'.I expect this board primarily caters toward bestiality - most of the user-base here would be people who are generally attracted to human partners, but enjoy seeing other people have sex with animals, or may dabble in it themselves.I hope that's muddied the waters some.
Urgh. You're right - sorry Neece. I type slowly, so missed your response.And now I can't delete my reply. Sorry to be the sadomashochisticnecrobestialist (flogging a dead horse).
The bottom line is that ALL are welcome here.....regardless of the "label" they choose. Thank you all for expressing your thoughts.Let's all remember too, that this thread was started to point out what the member thinks is a growing problem within our community. Either it's a growing problem, or it's simply getting more publicity.......but, either way, a reminder to everyone to keep the shades drawn might be in order here. The labels we choose for ourselves within our own community are only important to those who choose them.....not to the general public. As it was pointed out, the general public will consider the act of sex with an animal to be perverted and unnatural. So, keep the shades drawn and the doors locked.
<- = me in response to neeceI know this wasn't a definition thread, but one more thing: It sounds like a lot of people try and separate these words into orientations rather than acts. Kind of like gay vs homosexual. Unfortunately, no dictionary or court of law is going to admit that one can be oriented towards animals. So if people want to use the words to define or group themselves, that's fine but really it's like me saying I'm clearly a mndjfikgjuer while you are a nichsmef, you despicable scoundrel. Making up words or definitions for your exclusive club. Which again is fine if it makes you happy. I'll stick with mine, which is Bestiality = sex, Zoophilia = emotions, neither one excluding the other.And for the original topic, one of the Arizona posters just mentioned a case involving a man and a young dog, although the 2 news reports were inconsistent and unclear. Hopefully it won't get enough publicity to get bestiality, zoophilia, and all other forms of sex with animals explicitly outlawed in AZ (they aren't as of now, but they always find some indecency/cruelty law to charge people with).
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Phew... Thanks Neece and Akitas. I read bitch's reply and just fumed.. And as we all know...posting when pissed..wheter drunk pissed or mad pissed, is not a smart move But after reading your posts...there is really not more to add Cept; if I EVER read you trying to belittle our members cause they dont live up to your "standards", Bitch.... You will find your a** banned so fast that your zoophilian head will SPIN.LadyR
thanX for hashing this over -I know this has to be an aggreviation for this topic to get hashed over again and again -but not as much as it aggreviates me to watch people sling mud at our members -and I guess with this subject reoccuring several days in a row on different threads -they even had me double guessing what I felt like it should be... I just didn't want to put foot in mouth if my perception of the definition was incorrect...
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE Cept; if I EVER read you trying to belittle our members cause they dont live up to your "standards", Bitch.... You will find your a** banned so fast that your zoophilian head will SPIN.where exactly in my post did i belittle anyone? my reply was made directly to the post made and i do believe the point i tried to get across is that anyone who takes liberties with a strange animal deserves what they get...Now where did i specifically attack anyone? Like the way you seem to be attacking me here. go ahead and ban me if you wish, i could not stop you if you wished and it would only serve to show you have more power than i do, i mean i couldn't exactly reply to it now could i?Seems to be a double standard going on here. Most genuine zoo people i have met do understand there is such a thing as a difference. It seems to me only the wannabes and pretenders want everyone classed the same. i would NEVER abuse an animal i did not know personally. And since most of these people being caught are men, makes one wonder if it isn't rape!Yep, i'll be banned now, but who cares. i'm sick of the hypocracy that goes on. Only small people stamp their feet and threaten to ban cause they can. Adults allow others to discuss and debate things like ...adults.Oh and where i come from we don't have an ass, that's an animal. bitchWe have an arse
QUOTE (bitch_in_heat @ May 4 2005, 01:30 PM) QUOTE Cept; if I EVER read you trying to belittle our members cause they dont live up to your "standards", Bitch.... You will find your a** banned so fast that your zoophilian head will SPIN.where exactly in my post did i belittle anyone? my reply was made directly to the post made and i do believe the point i tried to get across is that anyone who takes liberties with a strange animal deserves what they get...Now where did i specifically attack anyone? Like the way you seem to be attacking me here. go ahead and ban me if you wish, i could not stop you if you wished and it would only serve to show you have more power than i do, i mean i couldn't exactly reply to it now could i?Seems to be a double standard going on here. Most genuine zoo people i have met do understand there is such a thing as a difference. It seems to me only the wannabes and pretenders want everyone classed the same. i would NEVER abuse an animal i did not know personally. And since most of these people being caught are men, makes one wonder if it isn't rape!Yep, i'll be banned now, but who cares. i'm sick of the hypocracy that goes on. Only small people stamp their feet and threaten to ban cause they can. Adults allow others to discuss and debate things like ...adults.Oh and where i come from we don't have an ass, that's an animal. bitchWe have an arse So...bitch.. you have axcess to all "beasties" heads, moral codes, and ethics? Interesting...And you would never abuse an animal you didnt know personally? Meaning you would abuse an animal you did know personally?Get of your high horse, Bitch. Using different terms on you and on others does not make you morally better: infact it makes YOU the big hypocrit. AND a biggott. And yeah.. you DO have an arse... Too bad your head is in there on this subject.LadyR
zo·o·phil·i·a (zō'ə-fĭl'ē-ə) also zo·oph·i·lism (zō-ŏf'ə-lĭz'əm)n.Affection or affinity for animals.Erotic attraction to or sexual contact with animals.Biology. A tendency to feed or grow on animal tissuebes·ti·al·i·ty (bĕs'chē-ăl'ĭ-tē, bēs'-) n., pl. -ties.The quality or condition of being an animal or like an animal.Conduct or an action marked by depravity or brutality.Sexual relations between a human and an animal.
QUOTE (bitch_in_heat @ May 4 2005, 12:30 PM)where exactly in my post did i belittle anyone? my reply was made directly to the post made and i do believe the point i tried to get across is that anyone who takes liberties with a strange animal deserves what they get...where? the first line of paragraph 3 of this quote -and I will re-quote: "Most genuine zoo... " this statement in itself is belitting -in that your suggesting that if the rest of the members don't live up to your idealistic views that seperate zoos from beasies then they are inferior.Now where did i specifically attack anyone? no you didn't attack anyone -you went way beyond that -you are attacking MASSES of people.Like the way you seem to be attacking me here. go ahead and ban me if you wish, i could not stop you if you wished and it would only serve to show you have more power than i do, i mean i couldn't exactly reply to it now could i?*I will address this further down -since you seemed to have the need to repeat it...Seems to be a double standard going on here. Most genuine zoo people i have met do understand there is such a thing as a difference. It seems to me only the wannabes and pretenders want everyone classed the same. Once again you are belittling -that if our members don't live up to your standard then they are wannabees and pretenders -there are a lot of people who are very serious about zoo here who don't have the opportunity and situation to be active -they are hardly wannabees! The fact is that most of them wouldn't dream of doing exactly what you are screaming about -taking advantage of someones pet -so they remain wannabees because they are good people who LOVE animals -not just sex with animals. You are CLUELESS to what each members personal situations are -it is insulting that you place judgment! i would NEVER abuse an animal i did not know personally. And since most of these people being caught are men, makes one wonder if it isn't rape!Men are ALWAYS more pron to premiscuity because of plumming -it is much easier for men to have a quicky -thats why men are more pron to do so -sex with females is more complicated and time consuming... but never the less how dare you judge these people again -you don't know thier hearts! I will site a little story right now: there is a member here who has an absolute heart of gold -and has fallen in love with an animal that isn't thiers and that they can't take home -they mentioned to me that if the opportunity presented themselves that they would like to play -to pleasure the male stud -it has nothing to do with thier own needs other than providing an expression of love -YOU HAVE NO IDEA of what the mindset of an individual is -once again -how dare you place judgement!Yep, i'll be banned now, but who cares. i'm sick of the hypocracy that goes on. Only small people stamp their feet and threaten to ban cause they can. Adults allow others to discuss and debate things like ...adults.*back to this issue... hmmm LadyR gave you a WARNING -and trust me it was out of kindness -we don't like to see people get banned because we know there is NO PLACE on the net to go like here -and for a "genuine" member -that would be devistating. We watch them come back and back again with different aliases because there's NO PLACE LIKE HOME -so warnings -firm ones -are given -in hopes that members will see the light -apparently you have not -and after this little tangent I have no idea why you are not banned! Go spend a few hours on the other zoo boards where there are 6 people online at the height of primetime -and the only one talking is an echo off the wall and maybe you will realize what your kicking in the mouth... Oh and where i come from we don't have an ass, that's an animal. bitch We have an arseerrrrrr so here's another tuff love warning.... STFU!@#!
QUOTE (MarcusBrutas @ May 4 2005, 01:16 PM) zo·o·phil·i·a (zō'ə-fĭl'ē-ə) also zo·oph·i·lism (zō-ŏf'ə-lĭz'əm)n.Affection or affinity for animals.Erotic attraction to or sexual contact with animals.Biology. A tendency to feed or grow on animal tissuebes·ti·al·i·ty (bĕs'chē-ăl'ĭ-tē, bēs'-) n., pl. -ties.The quality or condition of being an animal or like an animal.Conduct or an action marked by depravity or brutality.Sexual relations between a human and an animal. hiya MB! the definition you submitted for beastiality doesn't work for THIS site -there are member here who consider themselves zoos and members who consider themselves beasties -but the only members here that "conduct or an action marked by depravity or brutality" are the ones that haven't surfaced to the top and been banned YET -and we don't call them beasties... as stated -there are already working definitions for this site in place...
I think we got a weeee bit off topic here. In case anybody interested in reading more about what I am talking about go to the site http://www.pervscan.com/category/bestiality/ thanks and have a good day.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
boy some people get into this zoo vs.bestialty thing i really dont know what i am i guess i will just stay neutral
I have been a zoo since I was a teenager. I grew up with parents who did the same thing. We owned a farm and loved our animals. One night my father caught someone in the barn raping our house, and yes I think that is rape. She was upset and going nuts. My father shot him in the leg. I still agree with what he did. I know many people who love animals but I do not agree with the abuse of them. That is when people get caught. We actually saved a dog that was being sexually abused, he was never touched sexually in our home. We gave him a life without that, it was what he needed.People who rape animals are the reason why we have to hide. It is sick.
As far as the original question is concerned, i ask you to consider this for a moment.If you were to search the archives for news stories involving human/animal sex up to about 15 yrs ago, you most likely wouldnt find that many reported (doesnt mean they werent happening) Then enter the internet, where MOST of us (at least here in the states) realized with some astonishment that "Wow, theres others that feel the same way i do about this" and viola, forums began, chat rooms appeared and we connected with people that we never would've known existed.... fast forward a few years, Mpeg's and jpg's become commonplace for anyone to find and all of a sudden what was passed around the office as an "oh my god look at these sick freaks" gag helped to create and foster a new kind of issue, the fetish seeker/vouyer, some of whom have no direct interest in animals at all (and yes im generalizing a bit here) most of which were/are male and only want to see a woman with his dog, for some ive seen this was enough, for others it evolved a bit further into what i term as "animal pimps". These people use thier dog/horse whatever to specificly gain access to women by offering her something she might be curious about, but wouldnt try on her own, MOST of the time this is done in the hopes that he will "get some" himself. Then there are those that simply dont want the "hassle" that comes with having an animal of thier own, for them the shortest route to getting what they want/desire/are curious about, is to fencehop and use someone elses animal IMO (and remember its ONLY my opinion) these people are only out for thier own pleasure for the most part and often cause harm to the animal (intentionally or not) that they are messing with. There was a story i read awhile back about a man that had to tie a mare(someone elses no less) to a fence in order to have his way with her and she ended up strangling herself trying to escape. Now im sorry if someone disagrees with me here, but how is that any different than rape and murder? The effect that the internet and its easy access to damn near anything has turned what was more or less a hide in the shadows group of people into a cash crop for some and a venue for all types of people who have an interest in this subject of one sort or another. And though the intentions might have been good, those that have "come out" in the name of equal treatment for "zoo's" have done nothing but turned the spotlight on everyone (example, Hossie and the BBC documentary, caused missouri to pass new laws against sexual contact with animals as well as other states) Once something that was hidden becomes exposed, people start looking for it without even realizing it, a vet friend of mine who is violently opposed to this type of behavior will actually inspect an animal for signs of sexual contact, all because of what he's seen/heard about on the internet.In the end, its your decision whether or not the rest of the world knows what you think about/do, you post pics or videos of yourself in the act and your next door neighbor might stumble across it, if that happens you've just ruined not only your life, but put your animals life in jepordy as wellGuns
Sorry to jump in on the O/T discussion...What really is wrong and right? Some things that are condemned in 'our' Western culture are considered normal in other cultures, such as arranged marriages. What some consider to be something worth capital punishment others don't have a problem with. I have my own idea of what's acceptable and what's not. What counts for me when it comes to sex with animals is that the animal is treated with due respect and care. Also, I personally wouldn't trespass - I mean, NOBODY here would like a stranger walking around on their property (especially no stranger that has sex with your animals) so why is it acceptable for me to do just that just get satisfied? Even if you treat the animal oh-so-nicely you are still on someone else's property. This thread makes it clear that not everybody feels the same. A while ago, someone on the chat got banned because he said he liked calf blowjobs, yet threads with the same content are allowed in the swap section. So I don't even know what the official 'limit' of what's acceptable is on this board.On topic:If you have sex with animals, but keep it private and it never leaves the bedroom - chances are minimal that you'll get caught. And being caught in your own bedroom with your own dog is 'better' than being caught standing in someone else's barn behind someone else's pony with your pants down. In the first case, chances are much smaller for you to ever be reported to the police. Also, you increase your chances of getting caught by spreading your own pornographic material.
SF, if you notice there is three seperate definitions on the sublect, not all one meaning, words will always mean different things to different people, and different in how we use them.if you notice in both, one of the definitions is sexual activity with and animal, so in that context and meaning the words are the same and either can be used.The Beastie Boys probably didnt mean that they were having sex with animals, or that they were depraved, probably more that they looked beast like.To myself, i dont see any difference in the words, they describe an activity that we either fantasise about or engage in, isnt it just that one of the words sound that little bit fancier than the other.In the definition for zoophilia it states a tendency to grow or feed on animal tissue, in that text all meat eaters are zoos, we could go on and on in so many posts on which is what and who is what and all just keep arguing, does irt really matter what the difference is between the twomy point from it was that the both words are very close in meaning, and to tell you the truth, i found the bitch very insulting.
To the original post that more and more people seem to be getting caught, maybe, but i doubt iti think it is more that the cases from all over the world are collected on one internet page, so you can see them all together , if not for the internet would you have even heard of one incident.I admit that is is a danger having sex with other peoples animals, or out in a public place, i know my partner has a fantasy to have sex on a beach with a dog, but also know it would never happen, the risk is just not worth it, most of the people getting caught either dont relise the risk or dont give a damn, which in its self is a shame because it draws light to the others that practise in private, and hopefully it wont lead to the law cruising the net in a similar way they cruise for pedofiles, that could see alot more people getting caught, and maybe just for thier fantasies, not thier actions.
well I'm sorry MB that you found my "bitch" insulting -but I didn't and don't see it as a bitch -I'm not sorry that I made it -but again I am sorry that you found it insulting...the topic of this thread has come down to what "names" and "definitions" are acceptable ON THIS FORUM -if you read LadyR's post -you will see that calling "beasities" depraved and rapist -and pinning labels -is NOT acceptable -and she has also clearly outlined that there are already working definitions on the site -so after going through all the heated conversations correcting the previous posters -you waltz in and add a definition that is exactly what has been deemed unsuitable -in MY opinion -and I speak for myself and not the forum -your definition which included negative components was not timley -it once again went against what the forum JUST SAID was appropriate! Washing down the words in your definition and candy coating them after the fact doesn't change what they stand for -I don't know how else to interpret "conduct or action marked by depravity or brutality" as anything but negative. So, once again I'm sorry that your taking it personally, it wasn't aimed at you personally, I was just once again trying to set the record straight of what I have interpreted as being acceptable to the forum.
The depraved and brutal edfinition of bestial in its proper usage actually has nothing to do with sex (and it doesn't mention sex in that definition). It can be used to describe any violent crime or person for instance. Just one of those words with multiple meanings, sort of like when people describe me as straight pimpin' yo it has nothing to do with sex either. So nothing wrong with posting the definition IMO, as long as it's clear that it does not apply to our activities. As for acting like an animal, well.....
South, I believe he was referring to Bitch-In-Heat's definition.
my sincere apologies if I miss read the intent.:sigh: I'm sure glad I stayed objective and didn't take it personally
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (Akitas4me @ May 5 2005, 12:36 AM) Just one of those words with multiple meanings, sort of like when people describe me as straight pimpin' yo ohhh I thought they refered to you as the guy with big manly unit
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (LadyRottweiler @ May 4 2005, 01:02 PM) QUOTE (bitch_in_heat @ May 4 2005, 01:30 PM) QUOTE Cept; if I EVER read you trying to belittle our members cause they dont live up to your "standards", Bitch.... You will find your a** banned so fast that your zoophilian head will SPIN.where exactly in my post did i belittle anyone? my reply was made directly to the post made and i do believe the point i tried to get across is that anyone who takes liberties with a strange animal deserves what they get...Now where did i specifically attack anyone? Like the way you seem to be attacking me here. go ahead and ban me if you wish, i could not stop you if you wished and it would only serve to show you have more power than i do, i mean i couldn't exactly reply to it now could i?Seems to be a double standard going on here. Most genuine zoo people i have met do understand there is such a thing as a difference. It seems to me only the wannabes and pretenders want everyone classed the same. i would NEVER abuse an animal i did not know personally. And since most of these people being caught are men, makes one wonder if it isn't rape!Yep, i'll be banned now, but who cares. i'm sick of the hypocracy that goes on. Only small people stamp their feet and threaten to ban cause they can. Adults allow others to discuss and debate things like ...adults.Oh and where i come from we don't have an ass, that's an animal. bitchWe have an arse So...bitch.. you have axcess to all "beasties" heads, moral codes, and ethics? Interesting...And you would never abuse an animal you didnt know personally? Meaning you would abuse an animal you did know personally?Get of your high horse, Bitch. Using different terms on you and on others does not make you morally better: infact it makes YOU the big hypocrit. AND a biggott. And yeah.. you DO have an arse... Too bad your head is in there on this subject.LadyR My My,i never lowered myself to personal insults. Seems i have touched some kind of nerve here. And i also know what spell check is for.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
I warned you to STFU!@#! -if you read the rules -which apparently you have not -you will see that we don't correct others spellings on the forum for multiple reasons -but no need -belittleing a mod directly now? BYE BYE!
You are set on being banned arent you, bitch?*smiles* Well, you were warned - on several occasions.. and by several members. But it seems some are just a tiny bit slower than others. (hmm.. understatement of the year. )As for my spelling..I did get thru to you, didn't I? I find it very curious that you didn't reply to any of the other posts, just mine.. Could it be that the shoe just fit a bit too well? Well, we'll never find out. hugs and kisses, LadyR
yes sf, i was referring to bitchiness in heat, but it looks like she has continued until she hung herself.
yes, you try to warn them -but...again my apologies for reading your post out of context.
Last modified on July 5th, 2009 | Zoodestiny.com | © 2003-2005 - All Rights Reserved