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.
Rules of EngagementNeed to Know information for people whom wish to build a Loving, Stable Relationship with your Equine or Canine.First Things First. You need to ask yourself are you looking for a quickie or are you looking for a Loving Relationship.QUICKIES: There are three things wrong with quickies. First is an issue of safety . Engaging in sex with a strange animal can be dangerous. For you will have no idea how the animal will react in a giving situation. This uncertainty can lead to pain, injury and or death to you and or the animal. Second reason I don’t like quickies is the sexual fulfillment tends to be one sided. And third it tends to leave your companion with the feeling that you may not care for them on an emotional level. Animals are not sex toys. They are living, breathing, creatures that have feelings. They are capable of Unconditional Love. All they need is our love, care and protection.RELATIONSHIPS: Before building a relationship, you must first build a foundation on which to build that relationship. You need respect and trust to build that foundation. Respect and Trust is never giving, It is earned. It takes time to earn their Respect and Trust. Once you have their Respect and Trust you will earn their Love. Remember, Lovemaking / Loveplay is a benefit of the relationship. NOT the Purpose of it. Love them as you would want to be Loved. Care for them as you would want to be Cared for. Love them, DON’T Use Them. The more stable the foundation, the more rewarding the relationship.TIME: Give your companion time to get to know you. Take time to get to know them. The more stable the foundation, the more rewarding the relationship. Any relationship worth having, is worth taking your time.REJECTION or OBJECTION: If for any reason, if your prospective partner Rejects you or Objects to your advances, you should back off immediately and without delay. They have as much a right to say no as you do. By backing off immediately and without delay you show them that they not only have that right but you respect that right. By backing off immediately and without delay you not only will earn their respect but you will be well on your way to earning their trust. After you have their trust, you will be well on your way to earning their Love. NEVER, EVER, force yourself onto an animal. NEVER, EVER force them to accept you. You do, then you are not an ANIMAL LOVER, You are a ANIMAL ABUSER. Respect them, They will respect you. Don’t hurt them they should not hurt you.FENCEHOPPING. I don’t recommend Fencehopping (Engaging in sex with an animal that is owned by someone else). Even if the animal in question welcomes your advances. If you get caught, You may be told to leave. You could be Blackmailed. If you work there, you may get terminated (Fired). The police could be called, you could get arrested, you could go to jail, or worse, prison. In some areas, the law allows owners to protect their livestock by any means. They could shoot first, and ask question latter. In some countries lawmakers are trying to pass laws that would treat us Animal Lovers like other sex offenders, meaning that we may be required to register as sex offenders wherever you live. Fencehoppers makes us all look bad if they are caught. Fence hoppers get caught new laws are written. We all suffer. There is one way and only one way not to get caught, DO NOT do it. Fencehopping is bad.SHARING: Something I am not comfortable in doing. Though STD ( Sexually Transmitted Disease ) is not easily transmitted from animal to human or human to animal. It may be possible to catch a STD from another Human though the animal. Respect your companion. Don’t Share them. They should be your lover, not something that is freely giving to another to use. CAREING: Animals need a great deal of care, medically and emotionally. They need our love. If you can not properly provide for an animal, if you can not give them the care that they need to live long, happy, healthy lives, then please DO NOT take on that responsibility.BONDING: When they are sick, stay with them, comfort them.Care for them when injured.Protect them when they are threatened.Shelter them when weather is bad.Love them as you would want to be Loved.Care for them as you would want to be Cared for. Love them, DON’T Use Them.Respect them, Trust them, Love them.The more stable the foundation, the more rewarding the relationship.LASTLY: Their are two types of people in the world of bestiality. There are the Animal Lovers, the Lovers of Animals, and there are Animal Abusers. It hurts me emotionally and physically when I read a story in the paper or I hear a story on the news how someone injured or killed an animal or how someone sexually abused an animal. It hurts me when I think that those outside our world are looking on us Animal Lovers and Animal Abusers under the same light. I fear till we as Animal Lovers can separate ourselves from the Animal Abusers of the world we will never win our Fight for Acceptances. Be An Animal Lover, Not A Animal Abuser.
a solid ten. good job!
hmm i truly enjoyed reading your post and you certainly can tell how much you love and respect animals! ive always had the utmost respect and reverance for animals. More so than humans a lot of the time. Ive devoted my life to saving what is of this planet, much of it because of the organisms that live on it. That said, its hard for me, because I guess i dont consider myself neither a beast nor a zoo.Although I admire, respect and cherish animals as much as if not more than humans, I cannot take that extra step to becoming a zoo. I cannot love only my animal, kiss it in the mouth, have it sleep in my bed every night, not get angry at it, and I can only anthropomorphize it's actions to a certain exent. I have a hard time believing that when a dog or horse ejaculates it is showing little more than its animalistic instinct to breed, that love and gratefulness somehow exist between human and animal partner. It is still an animal in my eyes and it can not provide the emotions for me that human love does.It is because of that animalistic nature that i find dog sex so appealing. The raw, natural, and uninhibited nature of the situation is what turns me on. The thought that this animal is horny, and wants to breed NOW. I find nothing sexy about the situation, just so animalistic its extremely arousing.Just thought id give my view. I agree with everything that is said, im just trying to see where i fit in in this community.
QUOTE (offtopic @ Mar 25 2006, 05:57 AM) Just thought id give my view. I agree with everything that is said, im just trying to see where i fit in in this community. You my friend are an Animal Lover, You just Not a Lover of Animals.
Yessss! You put it in words that everyone can understand, and understand the basic problems about sthe sexual relation between human and animal. And state thet we either do not accept any sexual action towards animals, like abuse and fencehopping. Most out in the world do not know us, all they see of us are caught fencehoppers, or abused animals left back by sexual criminals.In fact there is more to it than that, if we could show out who we are - live one week in the Big Brother house - folks may get anothe rlooks on us, though most of them will never understand. There are still many folks out there, who do not understand same-gender love, even if they (may) have realized that all mhomos not need to be child offenders, or rapers. I think your description deserves to get read outside this forum too. Must remember to vote you a ten
Well said! Although, why limit this to just love for equines and canines?It is just as important to build a loving, stable relationship with your bovine, and treat them with all the respect, love and admiration they deserve to be treated with. It is bovines in my case that my heart beat extra for. I admire them and adore them.So... whichever species you love, be always sure to only do things that they want to do,always treat them with respect, always be there for them.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
a very well worded essay on what its really about, thanks for postingHB58+10 for ya
Well done, and easy to understand, greatly laid out & said.
Another vary well writen post! Thanks again for your time in writeing them.10/10 from ManDingo!
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
i commend you rac very well said
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Thank You Rac, so very well written. 10 From CBMX
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Very good advice / directions. Well said.All with animals should read your writings.a 10 coming your way
Another well written post Rac Thanks for sharing it with us
Excellent post!! Thank you very much to take the time to write it for us. This is something I hope lots of newbies will read and find guidance from.Well done
And state thet we either do not accept any sexual action towards animals, like abuse and fencehopping. Most out in the world do not know us, all they see of us are caught fencehoppers, or abused animals left back by sexual criminals. Im not sure how comfortable I am with the spooning around of those labels. Especially when lumped in the same sentence. By definition, I am a fence hopper, I guess. If I meet a dog and often, its 'owners', and I get to be so lucky as to get to know the dog (I get to walk it, visit, etc) and somewhere in that relationship tug-o-war drifts into wrestling and that drifts into arousal and sexplay, am I a bad guy? If you 'have' your 'own' pal that you 'bought' , ultimately, to do as you please, do you think that you have (ok, here we go) the right to tell other people what they can and cant do with willing 'animals' that they befriend? Why is it I can play tag with a dog, and that is all well and good; but if he and I want to play beyond that, ive got to give it all up for the integrity of those who 'have' their 'own' dogs? Yeah its true, people OWN dogs and other 'pets' and thats just the way it is. One mustn't commit a crime against someone elses PROPERTY. But according to many state laws 'owners' shouldnt be 'committing' sexual acts with 'their' 'pets' at all. (In the UK its LIFE in prison. 'Owner' or not.)So exactly how does 'ownership' grant entitlement to have exclusive sex with 'your' animal? I'm not saying the 'owner' doesnt have the right and responsibility to care and look out for his/her pet. And Im not saying anyone should have sexual access to even MY willing dog. But Im not going to blame the newspaper boy for giving my dog a hand-job for all the woes of zoosexuals and beasts.Well, hammering this sh*t out is all part of what this site is about.ALL due respects. And Im damned serious about that! The greatest part about all of this is how much we ALL care about our 'animal' pals.SDI'm not advocating that people should be able to go fiddle around with any animal because they are 'into' it. But I do feel a little harshly judged for the great friendships I HAVE had with some dogs, that strayed into the sexual, and that I had to "fencehop" to be with. I "fencehop" a lot, (gasp!) with the VAST majority of the time of it being NON-sexually inclined. And when I do it for SEXUAL (ooh there's that word!!) reasons, its because of previous experiences with a pal that Ive gotten to know, but 'belongs' to someone else. I'm sorry, but it seems to me that your being 'caught' with your 'own' animal is as much a threat to my loving experiences with the individuals i meet, as apparently my 'acts' are for you. I know this is a dicey issue, but please, lets not start spooning around lables as if there is only a few types. Many situations are unique, and Loving, even if outside the realms of "ownership." Im not saying I have 'right' to access 'your' animal. But i find the 'ownership' excuse just as specious. If you invoke 'love', so can I. And I mean it as much as you. The time I spend in 'sex' with a dog that I do pet beyond the flank, is so minimal compared to the time that we do so many other things that Im more than a little offended by the blanket term "fence-hop". And then in the same sentence you talk about the "abused animals left back by sexual criminals."The nature of how we treat and respect other animals is the prime issue for me. Not your efforts to gain recognition for your sexuality. Sigh...nuff saidSD
DANG!! I apologize for some of the tone of my last post. It was in the wee hours of the morning and then the Forum took out its moment to 'optimize'. I ALMOST always type up my FEELINGS first, then stop, think and edit. Damned if I didnt only post it, but then lost the editing privelege when the site went off-line. So, please, accept my point as is, but accept my apology for the attitude. (Boy, let THIS be a lesson for me and those who meet my fate!)Looking over the thread again, I felt it important to add a point relating to this fine quote as a means to refine my point one last time."LASTLY: Their are two types of people in the world of bestiality. There are the Animal Lovers, the Lovers of Animals, and there are Animal Abusers." Certain we are of the very last type. A pox be upon them.Regards the rest; I think I see the point being made that: All Lovers of Animals are Animal Lovers. But not all Animal Lovers are Lovers of Animals. Thats Right. I agree. But some of us are. Huh? Yeah its a little circular. But once you rinse it off it says; Hey! Its not totally black and white, there are many varied situations out here! Even if you disagree, I think its worth a ponder. You sure have set me to a ponderin'. Thankyou! and to ya!Singing Dog
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE Fencehopping is bad.I am so sorry if this statement offended anyone, that was not am attempt. I too wish I could go back and change that. I got caught up in the moment. I had just read a story about a fence hopper that not only got caught, but the animal that he was with had to be put down due to severe internal injuries. Again, I am sorry if anyone was offended.Please forgive me.
Very thought provoking from both of you. A little emotion does no harm if taken the right way and is not disrespectful.I give you both a 10 for effort & sincerity!
With all due respects to all concerned, I mean not to offend anyone with my statements and or beliefs that follow. QUOTE ~Why limit this to just love for equines and canines?~Well that’s easy, My Knowledge and Experience is limited to Equines and Canines. I have nothing against Bovine, Bison or any other of natures living creatures, but I can only speak of that which I know.I do not believe that all fence hoppers are animal abusers. Nor do I believe that all fence hoppers are Bad. Some do believe that what they feel is love toward their prospective partner. I am not here to dispute that believe nor will I dispute that believe.But I will ask this, 1, Do you care for them? 2, Do you care for their feelings?3, Do you respect them?4, Do you respect the Animals right to say No?5, Do you go out if you way not to hurt or injure them?6, Do you bond with them? If you have answered yes to these questions, then you are not an Animal Abuser, You are an Animal Lover. And yes it is possible to be An Animal Lover without being a Lover of Animals.QUOTE ~I'm sorry, but it seems to me that your being 'caught' with your 'own' animal is as much a threat to my loving experiences with the individuals i meet, as apparently my 'acts' are for you.~No your acts dont offend me.Yes I do believe that if an owner of an animal is caught loving one of his animals, he can get into some serious trouble. But the chances of him or her getting caught goes down because they tend to control the area around them a little better.I believe that when fence hoppers are caught loving animals, they tend to get into more trouble then an animal owner getting caught doing the same thing for the simple reason that the outside world believes that not only the animal was abused but so where the rights of the animal’s Owner.I do not agree with the outside world, but that is there Belief, and we all know that no one is perfect.I do not believe that all fence hoppers are bad, Nor do I believe that all fence hoppers are Animal Abusers. All I am saying is that they are taking a grater risk at getting caught. The outside world just dose not understand us. They look at us Animal Lovers, Lovers of Animals and Animal Abusers under the same light. I fear till we as Animal Lovers can separate ourselves from the Animal Abusers of the world we will never win our Fight for Acceptances. I hope that I did not offend anyone here with this statement, these are my Opinions and as such is open for debate.So, by all means, if you agree with me, post a reply, tell me why. If you disagree with me, post a reply, tell me why. I am open minded to new ideas and I look forward to hearing them. I believe that the mind is like a parachute, unless it is open, it dose no good to have it.So weather you agree or disagree, Lets debate.
thank you for the insight
QUOTE (racoolman @ Mar 29 2006, 12:01 PM) QUOTE Fencehopping is bad.I am so sorry if this statement offended anyone, that was not am attempt. I too wish I could go back and change that. I got caught up in the moment. I had just read a story about a fence hopper that not only got caught, but the animal that he was with had to be put down due to severe internal injuries. Again, I am sorry if anyone was offended.Please forgive me. I was not offended, don't change a thing......and thank you for this Topic
QUOTE (racoolman @ Mar 29 2006, 06:01 PM) QUOTE Fencehopping is bad.I am so sorry if this statement offended anyone, that was not am attempt. I too wish I could go back and change that. I got caught up in the moment. I had just read a story about a fence hopper that not only got caught, but the animal that he was with had to be put down due to severe internal injuries. Again, I am sorry if anyone was offended.Please forgive me. Fencehopping is bad, what do you need to apologize?Animal keepers do not keep their animals as a fre service for those who just go for amusement, even if they manage not to hurt the animal. They are the ones to apologize for the bad omen the give us all. Each discovered case of fencehopping, no matter if the intruder gets caught or not, raise 10.000's against us. There are some folks among animal lovers who work hard to make the public understand us, and open their minds. It is a hard work, and only small steps can be taken. Fencehoppers destoy in minutes what we make in years.
Racool, Well Im glad I didnt post the sampler. Its been the entire "Fence Hoppers Unite" thread and few hundred thoughts later (or few thousand, it depends how you index them). I just about when I read what happened with those mares. I also was admittedly clueless about how sociopathically thoughtless some "fence-hoppers" are. Not the out and out sadistic abusers who hurt those mares, but just those arrogant self described fence hopping jamokes who are so selfish and self-centered that apparently evolution (via "Hot lead Poisoning" or a horse-shoe impression on their foreheads) is going to take them 'out' of the 'game'. ( oh thats a bad pun) Please read my post at that thread. Im still interested in exploring aspects of the subject, but consider me wizened. Its been a steep learning curve, one might say 'epic'.(To our viewers at home: I dont recommend you read the whole Fence Hoppers Unite thread in one sitting) I concur <(so many bad zoo puns appear when you are tired!) with the last posts, you neednt apologize. Thanx Racoolman,And many thanks to rololover for recognizing our process. Singing Dog PS For posterity Ive decided to post this 'reply' on your thread.PSS! This was my 100th post! I can vote!
At first I was not going to comment publically on the fencehopping issue in this thread, since I thought 99.99% of everything Racoolman wrote in the Rules of Engagement was very well said, and I did not wish to distract from those really well-composed thoughts. But since the subject of fencehopping was brought up in this thread, I'd like to say how I feel about it.The issue of wheter fencehopping is okay or not, is not a black and white and simple issue in my book. Fencehopping can be really bad, but fencehopping can also be good IMHO. I probably have a lot of you against me, just by saying this.A lot of what I find important is mentioned in my post in this thread: http://www.beastforum.com/showtopic-62417.htmlIt's about my views on what is important when you are being intimate with cattle. It's all about respect, affection, care, patience. All of this applies, wheter you own the animals or not. The wellbeing of the animals must always come in the first place.I feel fencehopping is bad anytime the fencehopper is breaking any of the other Rules of Engagement: Quickies, Relationships, Time, Rejection or Objection, Caring, Bonding. I feel fencehopping is also bad when the owner of the animal sees the animal as part of their family or valued friend, because that animal will be attached to their owner in a way that we should not interfere with.But not all animals are kept by owners who sees them as part of their family. The animals may not be badly kept as such, even though in my opinion, they often are.To a lot of farmers, cows are just part of their income, and if the milk-cows don't produce enough milk, they are being sent to slaughter. Other cows only purpose is to grow as fast as possible, to become meat. No one misses them, no one cares about them as individuals.It is the same with horses. Some people has like 15-20 horses in huge pastures. The horses are never groomed, no one rides them or trains them. Someone comes to fill up their water and check the fences now and then. The horses are there only for grazing, and then they get sent to be slaughtered.Animals like this, who does not have any emotional attachment to any human, will only benefit from having careful, sensible people coming to spend time and interract with them, if it is done carefully, so the horses/cows will trust and enjoy the company of the people visiting them.If no one else really cares about the animals, I feel it is only good if someone who is kind and caring can come and be nice to them.Never fencehop for a quickie, never fencehop just for sex. Only fencehop to form long-lasting relationships with the animals, and come back to make sure they are doing well, as often as possible. Take care of the animals, even if they are not yours. Of course, this would mean that only sensible and respectful people are allowed to fencehop.It's also important to only fencehop in really safe places. If there is no building in sight, if the pasture is surrounded with forest, if the fence goes into the forest, etc. Since the cows and horses often enjoy to be inside among the trees, those places are safer than other places. Fencehopping should never be done where there is a public road, or a house right next to the pasture.I have never fencehopped in a place where it would be illegal to be, because that would be wrong IMO. And even so, I have preferred to be in the pastures where public footpaths are leading right through, or where there would be stone-age or bronze-age graves inside the pastures, the owner of the animals does not think it is strange that there are people visiting the graves, since usually those places have steps leading over the fence, so that tourists can go inside the pastures to look at the graves, even when there are animals there.99% of the times I've fencehopped, it has only been to interract with the animals, to pet them, or scritch them. Occassionaly, I would also pleasure them by giving oral, or by fingering them. I've never had intercourse while fencehopping, and would not do it. However, I am not against those who do have intercourse while fencehopping. There are cow-loving people I know well IRL, and I have seen them interract with cows many times. They adore cows and value them just as highly as I do. I know they would never do anything the cows wouldn't be happy with. They fencehop to interract with the same individuals on a regular basis, and they are trusted by the cows. Often the fencehopping just leads to cuddling, but sometimes also to intercourse.None of my cow-loving friends, including myself, support keeping cows for industrial purposes. Therefor it is also a little trickier for us to get a herd of cows, because we cannot expect to ever gain any kind of income from keeping cows.Other people can easier buy a herd of calves, let them grow, and then sell them. They've had their pastures grazed, and they get income from it, and have no animals to worry about after selling them. I am not going to buy cows of my own until I know all things in my life situation is settled so that I can keep them for their entire life, hopefully 30+ years. In the meantime, I feel it is important that I can give happiness to cows during the unfairly short life-time they usually get, and I know most of my cow-loving RL friends feel the same about this issue.The wellbeing of cows, is in my opinion, more important than anything else. If the wellbeing of cows (or horses for that matter) can be accomplished through fencehopping in safe places, then I see fencehopping as being a good thing.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (Svansfall @ Mar 30 2006, 03:59 PM) 99% of the times I've fencehopped, it has only been to interract with the animals, to pet them, or scritch them. Occassionaly, I would also pleasure them by giving oral, or by fingering them. I've never had intercourse while fencehopping, and would not do it. However, I am not against those who do have intercourse while fencehopping. 99 % of what you mention woul dnot be what most here understand with fencehopping. If just petting and scratching makes a fencehopper, then many more of us are, together with a lot of non-zoos.Most animal owners would take it easy when others scratch their horse behind the ears, when it leans over the fence. They may dislike that you food ther animal, sometimes with good reason. If you read here that some folks bring a bucket, and some other stuff, and go by night, feel sure that they do not use the bucket for collecting muschrooms or whatever. This is what most animal owners takes less easy.
QUOTE (racoolman @ Mar 25 2006, 05:40 AM) Rules of EngagementQUICKIES: There are three things wrong with quickies. First is an issue of safety . Engaging in sex with a strange animal can be dangerous. For you will have no idea how the animal will react in a giving situation. This uncertainty can lead to pain, injury and or death to you and or the animal. Second reason I don’t like quickies is the sexual fulfillment tends to be one sided. And third it tends to leave your companion with the feeling that you may not care for them on an emotional level. Animals are not sex toys. They are living, breathing, creatures that have feelings. They are capable of Unconditional Love. All they need is our love, care and protection.RELATIONSHIPS: Before building a relationship, you must first build a foundation on which to build that relationship. You need respect and trust to build that foundation. Respect and Trust is never giving, It is earned. It takes time to earn their Respect and Trust. Once you have their Respect and Trust you will earn their Love. Remember, Lovemaking / Loveplay is a benefit of the relationship. NOT the Purpose of it. Love them as you would want to be Loved. Care for them as you would want to be Cared for. Love them, DON’T Use Them. The more stable the foundation, the more rewarding the relationship. Umm I have to step in and say that animals don't love or care about the sex, it's a reproductive thing for them and we humans just enjoy the animals for our own ends. Sry, you must be delusional if you think the dog or whatever somehow enjoys sex or whatever. And the sexual fullfilment is always one-sided.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
I promised you, my cool friend, that I would sleep on my reply, and then what happens: Hambletonian bumps an associated thread, I see Singing dogs warning too late, and I,ve just waded through all 6 pages in one sitting. My brain is now mush, and this is the most difficult post I've tackled.First, let me point my own finger at myself and cry "Hypocrisy!" to save you all the trouble.Fence hopping seems to be the controversial meat of this thread, but as always, definitions can be rather grey as we've heard. For simplicity I'm taking the literal definition - going onto another's property and interacting with their livestock, whether sexually or not. I have to exclude Svansfall's situation as apparently this would not be trespass, and therefore not a crime, in Sweden. Remind me never to buy property in Sweden. I am against it, and I have done it.For all the reasons already stated elsewhere, it is wrong.For my part I fell in love with the entire equine species literally overnight and have never recovered, I'm happy to say. I gazed at them in fields in awe & wonder, imagining what their coats must feel like. Initially, it was a matter of slipping through the wire when they were just out of reach to stroke them, without anything sexual occuring to me. It slowly grew, until I found myself walking 3 miles at 3-30 am hoping to see a mating in a herd of flea-bitten gipsy ponies (and I did). I knew I was in great danger, but the attraction was too strong. I also knew it was wrong - I was trespassing, and the animals weren't mine, but told myself I would do no harm. I was lucky. I didn't get hurt or caught. But I can't agree with Svansfall. You can't say "only sensible and respectful people are allowed to fencehop". Either it's right or it's wrong. And it's wrong.I have been lucky enough to have my own horses for 40 years now, but I fear that if I was in that situation again, with no equine contact, the lure would be too strong again. But it's still wrong. I believe we must dis-associate ourselves from fence hoppers. The only hope we have of any of our activities being accepted by the public is of a little sexual involvement with our own pets in private.I think the public is totally unaware of the size of the "problem", as they would see it, as regards the numbers of us, and I think we should keep it that way. Fortunately, we are regarded as an amusing minority - increasingly comedians make jokes about sex with animals, and this is good. It is not the case with child abuse, so don't lets rock the boat. If they realise how many of us there are they will recoil in shock and horror, and we will suffer a serious backlash. This phrase "Fight for Acceptance" bothers me. If we are to make any progress it will be gradual, by stealth. A full frontal assault will cause an earthquake.My only other comment concerns animal sharing, and I have to disagree with your rule. You may feel an exclusive bond with your animal, and so do I with mine, but although your pet undoubtedly develops a deep love for you, I can't agree that your animal will see this as exclusive. In nature dogs and horses do not bond exclusively to one mate. A mare or bitch in heat will accept almost any male, and a dog or stallion will serve any female who will accept him. Therefore, I would have no problem sharing my beloved (great word!) with someone who the animal trusted and liked. I believe dogs and horses would be happy with any number of lovers if the circumstances were right, even if that special bond was missing.Last line - I think your "Rules of Engagement" (if amended slightly) are a great ideal to strive for. I'm not so sure many of us can always measure up, but we'll try!Thanks for a great subject.rololover
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Oh, yes, and congrats on your 100 Singing Dog!
Sorry, don't want to monopolise, but i've just seen your reply Hmmmmmmm (did I miss one?)What an extraordinary statement! How absurd to say that dogs & horses have no interest in sex, and are only concerned with reproduction. Exactly the opposite! They are driven to sex by hormone fuelled lust, just like us. They know nothing of the consequences of their actions, they have had no biology lessons, they just know it feels great!I'll go now.
QUOTE (rololover @ Mar 30 2006, 07:19 PM) But I can't agree with Svansfall. You can't say "only sensible and respectful people are allowed to fencehop". Either it's right or it's wrong. And it's wrong. It's like saying sex with animals in general is either right or wrong. There are so many different shades of grey, not black and white at all.I don't see how anything can be wrong with neglected animals no one cares about being happy to get attention, and a caring animal lover, being happy to give this attention. If it is done in such a way to make sure the animal's needs always comes in the first place, and if it is done in a place where no one will ever find out.
(Yes this is a long post, it includes a number of quotes, and so I have broken it into smaller sized paragraphs) Wonderful dialogue!Thanx rololover! I think that svanfall may have been saying something different of what you thought, you may have a line he was quoting. I have to say that because I mention his views further on. If I may posit a couple of observations: Two pairs of major aspects of these views: First Pair Regards people who 'visit' livestock, there is the "Friends ONLY OR First" synthesis. (As for those truly disturbed individuals who plan nocturnal quickies with buckets and camo. I think we almost all agree that the 'bucket brigade' are thoughtless cruel exploiters. I dont think anyone with mind or heart would act like this (blew my mind really ) )Who, I am refering to are people, like svansfall, myself, gunslinger and a few others who have technically fence hopped. (Im going by their posts - Im willing to be corrected. Please read them here and in FHU thread) This is the "Shades of Grey" view within the "Friends Only OR First" synthesis. That would make for the SOGFOOF camp! (I KNOW its a serious subject, but Im a believer of whistling in the dark sometimes! ) This synthesis infers that the reasons the SOGFOOFian "hops a fence," if it all, is NOT for Sex first, or at all Second Pair The other pair of ideas is the Black and White, Wrong is Wrong camp. (A totally admirable position of which I totally agree with in places and have creeping shades of grey in others) And within that is the "Go And Get Your Own" point as a solution (ready? The BWWWGAGYO synthesis!!) Yes these are arbitrary categories and generalizations, but I constructed them to help process all of this.Let the processing begin.As I lean 'SOGFOOFy', (not pro-fence-hopping...SOGFOOFic) Im mostly concerned about what the 'BWWWGAGYO-ists' consider the actions of 'SOGFOOFians'. Which, if any or all, of the SOGFOOF experiences listed would you say cross the line into wrong, and which would you say, given whats said, isnt Fence Hopping so much? Wirehair said: " 99 % of what you mention would not be what most here understand with fencehopping. If just petting and scratching makes a fencehopper, then many more of us are, together with a lot of non-zoos. " He mentioned reaching over a fence to scritch, but what if you "hop" too ? Are there circumstances where non-sexual visits to over a fence well out in pasture that would be ok? In these situations, sex isnt planned, companionship is. If eros emerges, THEN does it becomes fence-hopping? What if I know the owner and (s)he doesnt mind me 'scritching' even on his/her property, but probably wouldnt like it if I 'pet beyond the flank?' Im not talking about those delicate expensive horses that have to be put down after a leg injury, that already has a nearest and dearest who brushes, curries, grooms and loves them. Like svansfall, Im talking about field animals. His post describes well how I feel on some of these issues too. Ive never 'fence hopped' and had sex with a field 'animal' , (Ive aroused a few boy horses when working at stables, and OK for the record; a lonely donkey friend that I passed by daily on the way home and visited sometimes. I have literally fence-hopped, a lot, though, to visit socially, scritch and perhaps "cuddle" But the sweet boy-donkey was the only friend with whom anything got 'frisky'. Otherwise, these rendez-vous were all PLATONIC. Sex was not even attempted or desired. And it never came up in our discussions anyway. I definitely felt arousal to have warm friendly contact, but it wasnt dick centered. And these arnt little hobby farms or highly structured stables or turn-outs. These are huge and rough pastures, where the animals have about 5 minutes a day of human interaction. Most of the time its daylight too. Im also unlikely to run from a farmer/rancher even if seen visiting. (Though I might well try to stay out of sight) I let them confront me, I apologize and explain what Im doing. I leave when (s)he tells me. I wont talk back and if they want to hold me till the police arrive for a trespassing fine; I'll do that as well. Its worth the trouble and fine to me; though Ive been seen in fields dozens of dozens of times visiting animals but only been stopped maybe 2 or 3 times. Never a ticket; just a Get Off! But that was mostly in Canada where the sense of open space ownership isnt so aggressively territorial. Also for some reason, Canadians dont go in for such misuse and extreme abusiveness with animals nearly so much as Americans. So maybe thats why they arnt so worried for 'their' 'animals'. And yes, Im talking about per capita and even in highly densely populated areas.* But thats another story. At any rate, farmer's are less likely to be so territorial and gun-happy. (America ever feels embattled!) *{I always argue to my Canadian friends though, that there are more decent, love and life affirming Americans, than there are Canadians all together. So there.} And here's my explanation (not reasons or excuses) for why its worth the risk of troubles and fines;First, I guess Im just un-American when it comes to property rights in certain situations. I love the Swedish model. Some will say that most Americans cannot handle the responsibility with that right. And I tend to agree. But maybe thats because of the mentality of 'private property' to begin with. AGAIN, Im not talking about ALL property. Just like the Swedes arnt. "As Svanfall said: "In Sweden, it is not allowed to forbid people to walk on your property. The law states that the nature is here for everyone to enjoy. There are only two places where people are not allowed to walk: A. Inside someone's garden, right outside their house, and B. In fields of crops. All the rest, forests, pastures, lakes, meadows, etc... are all allowed to walk through." "Somebody got footy prints ALL over MY Desert!" - Yosemite SamIm talking about ranches often 10's of thousands of acres in size. Sorry, but I believe that, at least in this scale "Private Property is Theft." (I must be one of very few anarcho-lefties here! Which does surprise me!) Once again, though, I feel compelled to pre-defend my statements. None of this entitles me to go where I will, but neither do I feel prohibited by a moral sense of right and wrong regards it (again, as in Sweden only in wide spaces away from homesteads, gardens and outbuildings). Below is a couple of small paragraphs describing just where in Hell I get off thinking this way - outside of political discourse - (the forum breathes a sigh of Relief!) (Ive had to write clips, (below) the subject is just too overwhelming for me to create a coherent answer that addresses all of this. So many fine points from others to consider. Im not talking of the Fence Hopper Freedom Fighters Bucket Brigade, (FHFFBB!) They seem to be just animal abusers from what i can tell - their points were just the matches that lit far better Lamps of Illumination. So anyway the clips below may seem non sequitorial or re-emphasizing what I posted before.) Feelings of Specialness or I Just Cant Wait for Swedish Style Land Laws to be Passed Another factor regards the notion of trespass (not sexual use) is that I am an incorrigible Naturalist (not a bloody naturist, a Naturalist! )(I have a graduate degree in Biology: Community Ecology) and explorer/hiker (with the exception of course of areas that are delicate, damaged, or endangered. And, indeed I do do my homework regarding those, as it is my passion!) But scarcely EVER at night. If I do night hiking or naturalist exploration its seldom on someone elses property. And, all sex aside, Im also an incorrigible lover of fellow earth beings. If Im hiking through a 25,000 acre ranch of cattle/horses and while I lunch some of them wander close, I may try to coax an interaction with an apple or some such. (And im not talking about fine animals like hobby, dressage, race or other 'fine' horses that can get collicky from dietary changes.) But I never approach them, that never works anyway(unless they know you well). Unlike Sweden, as evidenced by the frighteningly violent, but candid responses in the other (FHU) thread, I have to be well on my toes, even in day time and know damned well Im trespassing and have the good sense not to disturb ANYthing! (gates especially!!) I always am respectful and apologize if caught, but Ive learned that If I want to pretend America is like Sweden, its easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask permission when just day-using. Platonic Fence Hopping? And WHAT of a lonely or neglected shaggy work horse or someone similar? Someone argued that some farmers treat their horses poorly so he felt justified (not svansfall's). Well, regards the rest of his postings I didnt sense any humane compassion at all. But I would argue that a poorly treated (neglected is more than enough!) horse needs a friend! I dont mean a friend who drops by to use you. A true friend. Ive had animal pals adozen through my life fitting this description. Sometimes the owners know, many of them didnt. Sometimes I do end up trespassing to visit. But Never, for the Love of Petey , did I ever go without permission onto a horsey stable/farm! Not only is it risky to for everyone to be messing about such a highly structured operation, those horses seldom need extra attention anyway, the prisses! ) Im thinking about an old drunken farmer's (Ive known aplenty) horse who he treated like sh*t (his cows, his family, his land) and then 2 years ago quit working with the horse all together and now the horse spends its days alone and uncared for, burred fetlocks and a ratty mane. Im unlikely to approach the old bastard (the farmer!) for permission and I do feel, in some ways, he HAS relinquished his Right of Control with the relinquishment of his Responsibility of Care. This isnt only 'property'; its a unique living individual. It doesnt entitle me to anything. It doesnt make it Right. It just makes the ethical quandry for me a little less problematic. I feel in certain circumstances, spiritually compelled to bring a little love to this kind of horse, cow, chicken, duck, goose, pig, cat, dog, goat, stoat, coatl, fruitbat, wombat or old Gnu. But these were always situational. I dont go looking for it miles away. Ive lived in the countryside most of my life, and I just get to know my animal neighbors, especially the neglected ones. On many a lonely night I have gone for walks and visited animals in the cozy darkness of night as I passed their farms with huge acreage (again: field animals.) Havent any of you besides Svanfall and I crossed apasture before and said Hi to the livestock? Where I grew up, there wasnt a person who hadnt that I knew. I know, thats the same as having sex with them, but its still a type of "fence-hopping" by definition...or is it to us all? With the exception of some dogs (that were not 'mine') (that I knew and they and their 'owners' me, if casually) and a sLastly, these, as I said, are not dearly held cherished beliefs. Im exploring the intricities. Its more of a processional discussion than a stance. Thanks to all for your thoughts and feelings. What a sensitive, big ed, thoughtful bunch this is. No matter most of the points of view, compassion seems the rule: (With the exception of the FHFFBB! ) Here below is Gunslinger's post. I include it for ease, forgive me for the length of my post. Svanfall's notes I think also argue well the SOI just cant, after reading that FHU thread, say 'a little'. It starts with my opening paragraph from the other thread, as I am trying to exceptionally clear on aspects of my (evolving!) attitudes..<><>><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>><><><>WOW!What a terrific thread! INTENSE! Educational. Thought Provoking. Must See. (ok, I know enuff already!)I CANT keep up! I just read the whole thread, I laughed. (I did!) I cried (I did.) (Thank 'the-powers-that-be' for digital storage. I see that the cool Racoolman has had this thread BUMPed up by Hamble (Can I call you that? Im not George 'W', I try not to assume nic-names). Thanks to Hambletonian! I had responded to Racoolman's thread and we've been having a great discussion on this subject. But this thread...is 'de riguer' for further discussion. However, Im a little confused as to what falls under the Fence Hopper heading.As of recently I have made posts which sounded fence-hop defending. The route through which we learn of something often shapes our perception of it. (McCluhan all over again eh?) I had defended not fence-hopping as it is presented in this thread by and large but what i took for fence-hopping as might be described by one poster whose succinctness (a skill I still struggle with! Notice?) said most all of my points of concern. They are not dearly held or cherished by me (nor him it seems) Anyway Gunslinger said: ........................................................................................................................................Like many others ive worked with/around horses for awhile, and yes, ive spent my share of evenings with them both sexually and otherwise. I owned a stallion, and due to my work hours would go riding at night quite often, thus it wasnt uncommon for my car to be parked out by the barn/pasture long after the owners of the stables were asleep. Until i could get him gelded 9that sucked by the way, barn rules though) he had to remain in the stall. Well there were mares on all sides and needless to say the sexual tension in the barn was pretty think between him and the mares. So, one evening i decided that the mare i'd been cleaning up after next to him (got a cut on the boarding rate by doing chores for full boarders) was showing all the right signals, and yes, i responded in kind.So in that way i fencehopped. I dont try to justify it, it happened and thats all there is to it. The only thing i will say is this, never once did i consider tying her up or forcing anything upon her, nor was it simply for the sex, as we had a great relationship for years afterwards with NO sex at all. Though me and my horse played often.I dont believe in trespassing on someone elses property just to get your rocks off with thier horses because you dont have the time/desire/whathaveyou to get a horse of your own, you mentioned the "thrill" well based on that one statement you in my opinion qualify for placement in the catagory of the ignorant fools who cause more harm to both the animals involved (i.e. you [the thread starter of FHU]**LEFT a black painted ladder in a pasture full of horses) and this lifestyle as a whole. Unlike the others who warned you to be careful lest you get caught, i for one wish the horses owners luck in catching you before you hurt one of the horses you obviously care so little about.Id dearly love to spend that type of quality time with a horse again, but until i can once again get my own, i'll do without.Guns .............................................................................................................................................** My, Singing Dog's, addition.Whew! Time for an India Pale Ale!. I feel like I just ran a marathon! Singing DogNext Time: "Thy Neighbour's Dog" by Gay Tail-ease (pun) (Gay Talese was known for his daring pursuit of "unreportable" stories, for his exhaustive research, and for his elegant style. ...(His real book was "Thy Neighbour's Wife." Yes he wrote about sex. Yes thats his real name and no he wasnt gay."Ive only known him for years..and the neighbours know me, they know I play with him...but they dont know that I Play with him. What happens when small 'p' play becomes large 'P' Play with a dog you are allowed to play with." Singing Dog Speaks
singing dog, darling..........carpal tunnel can be quite painful you know
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Offtopic AHA! Thats how it works...once somebody reads your post...its over baby, no more editing priveleges.Canto Canis
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Interesting thread to read.Tell me I'm wrong, but I see this "fence hopping" thing like this:Potential Benefit - sex for you, companionship for the animal.Potential Cost to you - discovery, arrest, humiliation, fines, jail time.Potential Cost to the animal - injury (in the event you are trying to be too hasty, unprepared, clumsy, or just careless), depression (in the event you bond but rarely have time), distancing from its actual owners (presuming you don't know them well enough to know), distancing from other animals (in the event your scent "offends" them)Potential Cost to the community - ridicule, anger, furthering the image of everyone as deviant predators and criminals, passage of increasingly more dramatic legal penalties, classifications, sex offender watchlists, etc...Someone might say the risks are the same regardless of the circumstances, but if you're on someone else's property with someone else's animals... you either see how very different those situations are or you do not.In my opinion, if you don't see the differences, the reason is about 20% honest subjectivity and 80% self-delusion. Too harsh? I do wish you well.
I think it would be real nice if this Topic was "pinned" here in the Zoophilia Forum.........what do you think, Mod's?
Thank You For your Support.
Pariah Dog's last words on the subject: Cohort said: "Tell me Im wrong" No need to say if you are right or wrong from my point of view Cohort. Those are valid points. Particularly within the general context you provided. But I and some others have mentioned scenarios that I think are rather different than your typical stealth animal abuser or even your typical 'fence-hoppers' None of the people I am talking about went over a fence specifically for sex, or had sex at all, some didnt even have to hop a fence, some knew the 'owner', all I refer to clearly, are intelligent (moral/philosophical disagreement is not cause for judging intelligence - its cause for considering ethics) all clearly have a deep and abiding love for animals and life, by the sense of their posts. They are anything but delusional. Their posts were well considered and carefully written. You disagree with the notion; thats great, but a lot of points are being left out and or ignored that these people(and myself) brought up. Maybe you didnt really read very many other opinions. If you had, you might have seen that many many people like yourself have already read the Riot Act regards this subject. And you might have seen that, despite disagreeing with the arguments made in other posts, you might have seen that they were worth addressing like a 'human being'. Maybe not me, but there are others here who are worth treating like a 'human being'...hmmmm... Let me try another tack;Im not vegan, I eat meat myself. And I know this isnt a vegan forum. So I invoke this example as exactly that, an example only. Now suppose this were a food lover's site (comidaphile?). A vegan could come into a thread and wrap our a$$es in knots (not about zoo issues - its a food lover's site, remember?) around the ramifications of what meat eating does to the planet. In short order, if whomever listened, they would realize that their lifestyle has a devastating impact against not only all kinds of and untold numbers of animals and the environment (both on a massive massive industrial level) but also a crime against the third-world and directly contributes to the 30,000 daily(sic) deaths of children around the world. And then there is your health, the medical costs to society... And all those things and loads more are true.Even a cursory study of the material demonstrates beyond all doubt the truths of what vegans say. As a result;We really have no right to do it. Its a threat to all of us. Its a terrible and unethical thing to do. Its inarguable. Its black and white. The Point Now if this were a food lovers site, do you think that pile-driving home generalities into people talking about how they at least try to eat free-range (!) would be considered, if not sanctimonious, at least hostile and thus be ineffective? Most people by now would respond that they are not here to 'please' and 'be gentle' with what they think...errr... Know ...is wrong. But dont you see what happens? The dialogue is gone and ears close. Learning stops. Understanding Stops.Cohort said:"In my opinion, if you don't see [the truth in this]*, the reason is about 20% honest subjectivity and 80% self-delusion. Too harsh? I do wish you well." *(my minor change, see previous 'Cohort' post for exact quote - SD)Not liable to win too many converts in a vegan forum or a zoo/beast forum. And that is what you would like, no? . My and some others views have never been talked about or have been Studiously ignored. Ive been basically shunned by certain members. (I wonder about that; are the experiences described just a little 'too close to home for comfort'? - (ie creeping hypocrisy) or is it that its too close to something somebody could say sounded a little different than fence hopping per se, and that maybe it DID fall into a grey area?) I wouldnt want to think that in such a site some people 'cliqued up' while pretending good faith to openess. I prefer drinks that are thrown in my face to at least contain a drink!Nah, your right I'm Wrong. No Ifs, Ands, or Buts about it; all the strident vehemence around 'fence-hopping' is correct. Just like veganism is.Singing Dognow aka Pariah Dog (For those that need it clear, Im not saying that because some zoos eat meat its ok for other zoos to 'fence hop', - if you think Im saying this, please reread) (note: I also said I eat meat)And, Hambletonian, I dont see a firm need to 'pin' this, not when the prevailing mood is as it is.You could just ask to put up a notice that says: Go Ahead And Make Posts About Fence Hopping Mister, But Around Here, , Fence Hoppers eeiz Fence Hoppers eeiz Fence Hoppers!!! and Deserve "Hot Lead Poisoning!"* and Dont Bother Trying To Have A Sincere Dialogue, Because You'll Just Get The Terrific Cold Shoulder and You Dont Want That Now, Dooo You? No I Didnt Think So" *Quote from Yknot, a sentiment shared by many gun owning posters. (And before anyone jumps down my throat on why this attitude may be justified go read the FHU thread and see why its a really stupid thing to do around 'your' 'animals'.) And being assured this will be pinned; A note to anyone wanting to add to this thread that wants intelligent dialogue on situational ethics around zoosexuality or sincerely discuss your experiences and views around what may or may not be "fence-hopping". (That is, anything NOT of the Wrong is Wrong Principle)..go ahead and try if you want, but you'll be made a monster of and be left with your 'dick hanging out in the wind' And you wont have had to Fence hop to end up that way (see? at least I can maintain a sense of humor(even a poor one), even when Im bummed; its the Irish in me )I still love this site and all, and I still think that everyone here (even the BAWWWGGYO camp) are wonderful people for their compassion towards 'animals', their passionate feelings and the loving way they see and practice sex. (there's a troubled word eh?) But as far as this subject is concerned, and Im sure this will make some folks very happy indeed. Im done.Oh, one more thing... Erleichda! (Quick! Google or Wiki it and see what he just called us!! )See ya amongst the (other) threads!......... ......... ....... ..... .... . ... . . . . ... .. . .. . .. . .
I just want to make it clear, regarding my last post that NONE of this is laid at Racoolman's feet. The thread maker. The feet of those folks I do 'lay' it at, I believe are well known to the individuals who own them.
Oh, wow, what a bummer that was! Even if you won't reply Singing dog, I know you'll read this. I'm really upset that you feel that way, and I can't see what caused all that anger. We were having a great discussion, and you were getting your views across so well. Maybe something has happened I haven't seen, but I see nothing that offensive in the posts.I may disagree with you on philosophy, but I respect you and your attitude.I'd like to continue the debate, but in another reply.This one's for Singing dog. rololover
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (Svansfall @ Mar 30 2006, 08:24 PM) QUOTE (rololover @ Mar 30 2006, 07:19 PM) But I can't agree with Svansfall. You can't say "only sensible and respectful people are allowed to fencehop". Either it's right or it's wrong. And it's wrong. It's like saying sex with animals in general is either right or wrong. There are so many different shades of grey, not black and white at all.I don't see how anything can be wrong with neglected animals no one cares about being happy to get attention, and a caring animal lover, being happy to give this attention. If it is done in such a way to make sure the animal's needs always comes in the first place, and if it is done in a place where no one will ever find out. I think the root of our disagreement here goes beyond sexand even beyond animals. It comes down to respect for peoples rights. I just can't accept that it is ok to go onto someones property and interact with their animals in any way without their permission. I love your desire, Svansfall, to bring comfort and a degree of happiness to neglected animals and I admire you for it, but why not ask the owners permission? If your aim is to help the animal would he say no? If you asked me face to face I would know you were an honest and caring person and I would have no problem with it - and I'm very possessive of my animals! If they are happy so am I. It goes back to what I said in my last post about sharing. But if I found you, as a stranger, in with my animals without my permission I would not be pleased!!!And if he said no, then don't go there because it is his land and his animals and he has the right to say no. I'm afraid I still see no grey (but my eyesight isn't what it was).I don't feel happy to argue points in Singing Dogs post when he's not here to reply, so I guess that's about all I have to say really - till next time anyway. Thanks for a great subject Racoolman. Sorry if it's got a bit sidetracked. And thanks for a good argument Svansfall, you're a gentleman!
QUOTE (rololover @ Mar 31 2006, 07:05 PM)I think the root of our disagreement here goes beyond sexand even beyond animals. It comes down to respect for peoples rights. I just can't accept that it is ok to go onto someones property and interact with their animals in any way without their permission.I must admit I was 20 years old before I even knew that in some countries, it was not allowed to walk anywhere you wished. I thought this was the same all over the world. In my view, you can 'own' property in a sense, but you cannot really own the nature. Forests, meadows, lakes and the entire ecosystem does not let itself be owned. It is there for all of us, and even though someone may officially 'own' the area, they still have to treat the nature with respect, as does anyone else wishing to walk through the nature.In the way I see it, when owning a piece of land, you have a contract which means you are allowed to sell trees to make money from this piece of land, but you are also obliged to plant new trees (this is in the Swedish law), and you are also forbidden to ruin the land for whatever reason you desire.I was talking to an old man who owned a large concrete-making company. He bought two entire (large) islands in a lake close to where I live, to dig up all the gravel and use it in concrete. The government intervened, and now those islands are a nature reserve due to housing rare plants and fauna. A tiny bit of one island is dug up. He still owns the islands but cannot destroy them further. He's pissed off, but I am cheering, and so are 99% of the people in the county because the lake is one of the most visited lakes by tourists that gain income to the entire area. So money in the pocket to all of us, instead of money in the pocket for one greedy man.I own forest and pastures, and so does my mother, and I used to spend a lot of my childhood on the farm my mother (partially) owns. But we were always used to the fact that, even though we have a lot of land, it is not really ours. We're just borrowing it from the rest of the eco-system. All the moose, deer, foxes and other animals living in our forest have the right to live there, and any other human can come and pick the fungus. It has always been so natural to me, that I've never felt anything else.Also, where I live, there is a lot of nature, and there is very few people. The population density is 12 people per km2, and that is taking into account that 25% of the population in the area lives in the biggest town, and 15% live in other small towns, and since those are counted into the statistics, it is even less densely populated around me, since I live in the middle of the forest. So we've never had lots of people running around anyway, it's never been a problem.So, respect for walking on other people's property, I have not. I will freely admit that. I have respect for the environment, the nature and the ecosystem, and I will show that respect, just as much, wheter I am walking on my own property, or someone elses.I've been to England a few times, and while I was there, I admit I was terrified of walking anywhere at all, since I did not know wheter it'd be allowed or not. Wheter it was public or private. So, I did not run about on anyone's property where it has not been allowed. I do not like to break laws.QUOTE why not ask the owners permission? If your aim is to help the animal would he say no?Yes, he would. A lot of farmers have the attitude of: "I know best how I take care of my animals, and no one else is going to come and tell me how to do it, or even imply that I don't treat them well!" I believe there is a slim chance that there would be a good reaction from an uncaring animal-owner if someone asked them. Now, if the animal owner would come up to me as I was petting his animals, in the pasture, the worst I could do would be to run. The best I could do, would be to stay, and when he asks what I am doing there, I would simply answer: "I was walking past, and your animals came up to me, so I decided to pet them." There is seriously nothing suspicious at all about this. He will not know that I was actively planning to meet them to pet them, whereas if I asked him before, he knew it'd be my active choice, and it would be suspicious, or seem like an insult to him.I did approach a farmer once, after having noticed a calf having a bad leg injury, limping badly and being left behind, not able to walk as fast as the others. So I got up to the farmer's house and spoke to him, telling him about the calf with the limp. All he said was that: "Yeah, I know. If he stops gaining weight, I'll send him to slaughter." If I hadn't been a calm person, I would have probably done something really nasty to this farmer, for this blunt statement, so obviously only caring about the calf having as much meat as possible, to gain income for the farmer, and not caring at all wheter the calf is in pain or not, not bothering to call the vet and having to pay vet bills to have the calf's leg looked at.*sighs angrily in rememberance* But this is all too common, unfortunately. In the farmer's defence, I have to say that it is almost impossible to make a living from farming here anymore, with short summers and not too prosperous harvests, and with the payment for meat and milk constantly getting lower due to the EU having complained that Swedish food prices were too expensive.QUOTE If you asked me face to face I would know you were an honest and caring person and I would have no problem with it - and I'm very possessive of my animals! If they are happy so am I.To start with, I would never even consider to be with your animals, because as I passed by your place, I would see your animals were well cared for, and I would assume that they probably belonged to someone who cared about them. I would assume there's a great possibility that they have a good relationship with their owner, that I would not wish to get in the way of. If you saw me, you would not know that I was a zoo, and that I admire animals in the way I do, and you probably would not trust me if I asked if I could pet your horses. Also, I wish to get to know animals well, and any owner of animals would be highly suspicious of someone like me wanting to spend a lot of time with his animals so often.I have a lot of neighbours who have horses, who take good care of their horses, and it shows. But I will not ask any of them if I can pet their horses, because it would just be too suspicious. One thing that I am not good with, is to hide my thoughts and feelings, it shows in my face expression, and in the way I speak and act. I would not be a good poker player, people can read me like an open book. I am aware of this, and therefor I am scared of interracting with someone's animals when they are watching, because they would see I loved them "too much", even while just petting them.QUOTE But if I found you, as a stranger, in with my animals without my permission I would not be pleased!!!And again, I would not be found with animals who seemed likely to have a good relationship with their owner. I would not wish to interfere, and possibly mess up a good relationship. It'd be very bad for the animal, and for the owner.I do have respect for an owner who treats their animals well, and basically, a lot of owners do.I thank you for expressing your thoughts in such an excellent way, Rololover. It made it easy to understand how you feel, and I understand your reason for feeling the way you do on the topic of fencehopping. Although I still feel exactly the same about the issue as I did before. But it is interesting to debate it. You're saying a lot of kind words to me, and I thank you for that, although I am not sure I feel I deserve them, but I certainly consider you to be a gentleman also. I apologize for my post being so lengthy, I had to stop myself from making it even longer. I am not as good with expressing myself clearly and briefly, as you are.
QUOTE (Wirehair @ Mar 30 2006, 06:16 PM)If just petting and scratching makes a fencehopper, then many more of us are, together with a lot of non-zoos.Most animal owners would take it easy when others scratch their horse behind the ears, when it leans over the fence.I guess our definitions of what exactly fencehopping is, may vary a bit from each other. In my opinion, fencehopping is when you are on the same side of the fence as the animals, without the approval of the owner.I define it as fencehopping, wheter you are being sexual with the animal or not. Sometimes the fencehopper may fencehop without the intention of having sex, but the encounter leads to sex anyway, if the animal would initialize it. And often, I would guess a fencehopper would have in mind that there might be a sexual encounter, but then again there might not be. So, if a fencehopper would be defined only as someone who fencehopped for sex, would a fencehopper be defined by his actions, or by his intentions?As I said before, I believe that many cases of fencehopping are wrong, and I believe non-sexual fencehopping can be bad also. For example, an inexperienced fencehopper with the intention of getting to know a herd of cattle, may make the entire herd unncessarily stressed, by not being slow and patient enough, and by not learning their body language.I am not saying that I believe fencehopping is always right, I am saying that I believe fencehopping is sometimes right. I agree with most of you here on what you say regarding careless people who are out with buckets just to get their rocks off. It is definately very wrong.
QUOTE (hmmmmmm @ Mar 30 2006, 06:51 PM) Umm I have to step in and say that animals don't love or care about the sex, it's a reproductive thing for them and we humans just enjoy the animals for our own ends. Sry, you must be delusional if you think the dog or whatever somehow enjoys sex or whatever. And the sexual fullfilment is always one-sided. Well then. With all due respect, I think that you are wrong on most of what you have said. QUOTE ~animals don't love or care about the sex, it's a reproductive thing~ First, Yes it a reproductive thing, But they do enjoy it.Males, weather Human or Animal, do get pleaser out of mating. Most, not all, human males could not care less about reproduction. They do it because it feels good. Male Animals, though they are driven by instinct, are also doing it because it feels good. They are not, for the most part, are not thinking about reproduction, instinct dose play a roll on it, but there is pleaser to be had, and this is also a driving force behind mating. Case-in-Point. I knew of a painted stallion. The owner believed that the greatest way to maximize his earning potential was to have a vet come by and draw Semen from him by hand so that she could sell the straws to prospective breeders. The vet would hardly slow up on the same day or at the same time. But without fail every time the vet pulled up into the drive, the stallion would become very aroused, knowing what was to come. According to you, I guess that the stallion was under the belief that he was reproducing with the male vet.Note: to think that this stallion was never to know the joys of covering a mare, talk about curl. Now, females can and do feel pleaser when properly stimulated. All the times that I have been with my mare, there have been times when I have brought her to Orgasm. I also have been able to bring my female canine companion to Orgasm. There is nothing that you can tell me that would convince me that they did not enjoy it. Just because you may have not been able to do it, does not mean that it can not be done. As far as relationships, one of the things that I love about animals is they have a greater since of relationships then we humans. Unlike animals we humans have the tendency to throw away relationships when they no longer suit us. Like when a woman runs off with the pool boy or a man runs off with his secretary. In some ways animals care more about relationships then us.There are many spices out there that mate for life. Some wolves, huskies mate for life. The alpha male will only mate with the alpha female and vise versa. Most Whales mate for life. Eagles, penguins are but a few bird spices which mate for life. There are many different animal spices that mate for life.Dolphins, they are a very intelligent spices. They are well aware of there environment. They will have sex for other purposes other then reproduction. Females will have sex in and out of her cycle, and with multiple males, and even if she is pregnant. Male dolphins will have sex with multiple females, even when they are not in their cycles, and they will also have sex with other male dolphins. And dolphins, to my knowledge, is the only mammal that will knowingly seek out man for the purpose of having sex with them. don’t get me wrong, they enjoy the friendship and companionship that they can get from us, but dolphins do enjoy sex. To them it is a social tool used to bond them to the pod.QUOTE ~we humans just enjoy the animals for our own ends~Maybe you do, but I and many others here, really care for our companions and the joy that we can bring them. We care for their emotional well being as well as their physical well being. QUOTE ~And the sexual fulfillment is always one-sided~ I am sorry that you feel this way, but mostly I feel for any woman that you may have been with in the past. I, and I know that there are many others here that will back me up on this, but I believe in bring my companion just as much if not more pleaser then I can get from them.Hope this Helps.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
well hasn't this just spiraled -err spiraled somewhere I thought I could get away with skimming this thread - but it's obvious I can't - it is being temporarily locked until I read it thoroughly and digest.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
well - everything checks out ok in here -ummm kinda....just a few notes...this topic - although very poised - will not be pinned (at least not by me) because it is too opinionated (errrr based on opinions and not facts -there are no facts - this subject is totally subjective-at least as it has been presented) this thread was designed to discuss 'approaching animals in a nurturing way" -and everyone from the very get go -all the way to the last post -has deviated from that -and that is this threads biggest shortcoming... I am not saying that there isn't a place for a pinned thread on this subject on the forum -or that the original poster isn't qualified to create one - what I'm saying is that because A. this one is based too much on opinion and not facts and B. everyone got sidetracked -that it doesn't meet my personal expectation of fitting the bill and serving as a useful GUIDE - although certainly it does serve the community everyone has the right to voice thier views -HOWEVER - lets stay focused here folks - there is no need to drag similies of vegan or any other unrelated subjects into a already complex discussion -stick to the topic please -which is NOT fence hopping -there is already a fence hopping thread where you are more than welcome to discuss (doesn't that sound a lot nicer than debate ) the issue (and in which apparently needs a review to see whats going on in short - discuss the nurturing ways to approach animals in this thread - and discuss unrelated topics in the threads that were designed for those topics - thank youuuuuuuu
Thank you southflorida for keeping this thread open and your friendly reminder for everyone to stay "On Topic"
Thanks South, and thanks again Red for the spirit of the starting post of this thread
Yes, Thank You southflorida for keeping this thread open.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Any advice on what I should get my "stablemate" for her birthday? Muffin will be 22 years old on April 13th! .....errr, is that post "on topic"?
I think that she has all she needs, Your Love.
QUOTE (racoolman @ Apr 2 2006, 12:44 PM) I think that she has all she needs, You. Great minds think alike I was going to say "your time"
Well, Your Love, Your Time, Your Care, But Surely I need not tell you this.
QUOTE (hambletonian @ Apr 2 2006, 03:17 AM) I think that about covers it.
QUOTE (hambletonian @ Apr 2 2006, 03:12 AM)Any advice on what I should get my "stablemate" for her birthday? I can only second what the other people have said. Give her your affection, which I am sure you do every day, Hambletonian. I also would like to add, that I think Racoolman's reply to hmmmmmm was a very well worded post.And then I would like to apologize for jumping on the bandwagon and continuing the fencehopping discussion in the wrong thread. It is a shame that it ended up here, distracting from the original post, which was an excellent post.I also hope people have not misinterpreted my views either.Thanks to everyone for being civil.
Sorry Racoolman. We got kinda carried away. It's an emotive subject.
Don't a problem rololover. it was not your fault.Well, if the debate is over, are there any other things that we Animals Lovers can Talk about?
Thank you for the advice I do not have a pet lover yet but hope some day to have a lover thats dose more than watch tv and blech
Regarding our relationships with our animals, I would like to raise a subject I haven't seen mentioned on the forum, though I may well have missed it.That is the danger of us endowing our pets with human qualities they do not posess in our efforts to establish a one to one bond.I'm sure we have all seen on tv people who grossly over & wrongly feed their animals, dress them in human type clothes, and carry them around to save their little legs, in short, killing them with kindness. Is there a temptation for zoos to make their pets substitute humans, denying their true nature? Each species is different, and to deny that difference, including their sexuality, could amount to a form of cruelty. I love my dogs as, and for being, dogs, and my horses likewise, but there is always the temptation to imagine they have more human characteristics than is really the case. I think we need to give serious thought to a proper understanding of their true nature if we are to form a genuine relationship.
QUOTE (rololover @ Apr 3 2006, 11:55 AM) Is there a temptation for zoos to make their pets substitute humans, denying their true nature? What you mention is seen more and more, but I do not think that it is an expression for bein zoo, or that zoo's do it more than others. In fact most of thos I know, either by IRL konowledge, or http:// friendship make their efforts to learn about the animal's real needs for life, behaviour, feeding, etc.The people who keep dogs or other animals as cuddle toys, and dress them in designer clothes are often not happy with themself. Reasons why they do may vary, my guesses are: Lonelyness, making the animal a substitute fr the family/child they never got - The need to catch attention in society - They are the victims of designers ho stand ready to create just what they alwas were made thinking they needed - Boredom?. There was a case with someone from Detroit who had a white shepherd with painted toenails, toerings, armbands, and pierced ears. The strange thing was that he was a quite ordinary fella himself. In my mind, the pierced ears was one step too far, but if the other stuff does not harm the dog, and te dog has a good dog's life -get excercise, attention, and brainwork, it would be OK with me.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE I think we need to give serious thought to a proper understanding of their true nature if we are to form a genuine relationship. Yes, I agree.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Anyone has any Ideas?
Ok Im going out on a limb here,The rules you posted are so complete that its a challenge to do more than appreciate it or to contest some of its points...but there is something outside of those that concerns me and the theme if not the letter of this thread. Its simple. I agree with much of the thread head (is that what its called? If there isnt a word "I want DIBS!") I share the concerns that poor and exploitive attitudes towards animals, hurt them. Its with this in mind that Im a little concerned about some of the wording of certain advertizing of other sites. One of the Premium sites says this, permanently, at the top of my screen. 'AnimalJuice.comHardcore Animal F*cking. " Now personally Ive never liked talking about sex like that (Im not a sweethearted romantic either though ). BUT...you know, consenting adults and all. Wait they arnt BOTH human. Were the animals happy with the "Hardcore Animal F*cking"? At least in my vision "Hard Core Animal F*ucking" is unlikely consensual. Maybe it is. Maybe its just the language and the site is fine. But it sounds awfully objectifying still, it doesnt sound like there is a relationship between the person and the animals at all. Or compassion or even an interest to please or treat the animals kindly. It sounds like use/abuse of an animal to my sensibility. And sure folks might say " Well its how you define 'hardcore f*cking'." I suppose it is. But the first image that it calls up in my head isnt a pretty one. But maybe Im a But Im not offended by "HOT sex with animals" or "Wild sex with animals" even isnt so harsh to my heart as Hardcore. Sounds like it hurts. Humans have the privelage to explore extremity in sex, exploring perhaps amongst other things the Pain/Pleasure intersection. (Franky Ive done 'pain'...going for ecstacy only now...and hopefuly I deliver the same) But they dont have this privelege with animals. I just cant see where HardCore comes in in a reasonable way with animals.What do you folks think about, if not this example, other examples of possibly exploitive/abusive language around the advertizing and promoting of animal sex sites and recordings?Well I realized I should really have a look at the site, and it turns out to be a lot more of the same. Some of it is consensual probably...but they were thrilled to tell us they have eels and snakes. Some at least is out and out animal abuse* (and if turns out that they arnt inserting them in orifices its still playing that prurient appeal...if anyone finds that appealing). At the least its not going to sit well with the general public, if not us.* At least to me that is.Thoughts?SDPS If this isnt an appropriate thread for this, consider it a BUMP for Racoolman
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
well it borders on the topic it is about approach - and thiers doesn't suit me personally...sometimes we can get complacent and forget just how lucky we are to have this COMMUNITYbut with that said let's also think about it positively - we all had to find our way here -and for MANY if not most of us - that started by typing something pretty graphic into a search engine hopefully it's just a pitstop until they find thier way home...
Thank You SouthFlorida for your support. My Reason for starting this Topic was to help people see Animals as more then Just Animals. They have feelings, and rights just as we human do.Maybe I stepped on some toes, That was not my attempt. My concern was for the Animals that we Love.
South florida Said:"well it borders on the topic laugh.gifit is about approach - and thiers doesn't suit me personally...sometimes we can get complacent and forget just how lucky we are to have this COMMUNITYbut with that said let's also think about it positively - we all had to find our way here -and for MANY if not most of us - that started by typing something pretty graphic into a search engine ohmy.gif hopefully it's just a pitstop until they find thier way home..." friends.gif (Thank you SoFla for that)(and your moderation in all senses!) Racool, I think that South may have been refering to my post about my concerns related to language style in advertising and was reminding me that, though He sympathized with my feelings on the language himself, that i may not want to be too hasty in judging its presence. That likely even the best amongst us may have found their way to this site and a wiser sensibility owing to their having stumbled on those 'other' sites.His last line; "hopefully it's just a pitstop until they find thier way home" I think this thread is a pretty good roadmap to the home he's talking about.I dont think you stepped on any toes. Your thread is great. It seems to me you have every right to have your thread reflect your feelings. I regret having made my first post in this thread in the manner I did. ALL subject matter aside, I am the one ultimately responsible for toes being stepped on in this thread. I dont want to see this thread languish on my account...So, let me try to "think about it positively" and turn my last post inside out... In what way can 'we' as zoos relate animal erotica to responsible relationships as a means of experiencing it? How do we create a 'draw' from the 'get my jollies' sensibility to a more intimate approach? What ways can we make "Hardcore Animal LOVING", more appealing than "Hardcore Animal F***ing"? How can we make 'loving sex' compete in the market place of sexual ideas? How do we get more folks to read this and other similar threads? I mean BESIDES Beastforum and threads like this. And Im not just being nice (shudder!) As if this forum and its folks havent had a profound effect on me already. Ive said it before and it bears repeating over and over as far as I am concerned. Ive been Human long enough and surfed the sex soaked internet long enough to be knocked to a knee over the kind of loving sexuality I see here. There's no group of people who so consistantly consider their partners well being and experience. There's no group that so consistantly expresses love for their partners. In some senses it is so ironic, as zoosexuality is so thought of as a personal obsessive fetish. But really, so obvious, because people who love their animals, love them whether they are having sex with them or not. So Im sorry if I go on about this, but after the human sexual jungle, this place sure is a nice meadow.SDThis is the in the area where I live. The grass is green in winter and spring and goes golden in summer fall. The Pacific Ocean is in the distance. The meadow is primeval...over 10, 000 years old (serious!)Native folks kept them clear for thousands and thousands of years. Those are Redwoods tucked in the ravines which edge the meadows
By now, most people here know me to be a little obsessive... but especially as a Biologist I have to make the self-correction that "the trees edging the ravines" in my previous post's pic, are in fact, by and large, California Live Oak and some non-native Acacias...and I cant tell from here, but maybe, just maybe, a few Redwoods. SD
If I could vote, this would be a 10! Love animals, don't use them! *goes to hug his doggy*-Balto Wolf
QUOTE (hmmmmmm @ Mar 30 2006, 06:51 PM) Umm I have to step in and say that animals don't love or care about the sex, it's a reproductive thing for them and we humans just enjoy the animals for our own ends. Sry, you must be delusional if you think the dog or whatever somehow enjoys sex or whatever. And the sexual fullfilment is always one-sided. Funny thing is that we tend to think that we have sex for different reasons than for animals. I've said it before: castrate a human and he'll lose most if not all interest in sex. Sex for us is just as much an instinctive act as it is for animals; even if nobody ever explained sex to us we'd still be doing it. But that doesn't mean that we can't enjoy it and the same goes for many animals. Sadly, not everybody always cares for the animal's needs and feelings; even on this forum. I'm not going to point at members, I'm not a moderator and I don't make the rules, but it does sadden me sometimes, especially when such behaviour is being encouraged by other members. Then again, the community thankfully also rises up against certain things such as fencehopping. As for what goes and doesn't go, just consider if what you want to do will hurt anyone (that could be the animal, but also possibly the owner) in any way (and hurt isn't just physical, it can also be emotional) or creates a situation in which this is likely to happen. If you take fencehopping as an example: this often makes the animals anxious, you run a high risk of being discovered and that could result in emotional hurt for the owner. That's why, in my eyes, fencehopping shouldn't be done, besides trespassing just being against the law even in countries where bestiality is legal.
QUOTE (racoolman @ Mar 25 2006, 12:40 AM) Rules of EngagementSHARING: Something I am not comfortable in doing. Though STD ( Sexually Transmitted Disease ) is not easily transmitted from animal to human or human to animal. It may be possible to catch a STD from another Human though the animal. Respect your companion. Don’t Share them. They should be your lover, not something that is freely giving to another to use. I myself, see nothing wrong with sharing my k9 lover. I've let another woman be with my black lab, and I've been with her dalmation. Both dogs are well cared for, and enjoy having sex with either of us.
Hey I have a question, I have been working on a addistion to the fencehopping Section, where would the best place to post it?
You can check out the Fence Hoppers Unite Topic and see if your post will fit in with what was posted in the end of that thread....or maybe open a new Topic if its a long post and you want to start "fresh" with this Topic.
: This was an ecellent thread! You did a mighty good job with it and THANK YOU for taking the time to share and write down what was going on. And it gives a lot of excellent tips( for the uninformed) and info. You explainined in Very explicite English to be loving and caring!!! Thanks... Abig 10 for you
harrowthefurrow, I think you for you support. hambletonian, I will be getting with you again before I make My next Post. I thank you for your Guidance.
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,Well, I read as much as I could till my eyes crossed, I got through page 3.Hmmm, well, my first thoughts are on the origination of the post.After reading your "Rules of Engagement" I find myself perplexed. I am somewhat new to this, having only experienced "some" contact throughout the years with canines. I am generally an individual who does not classify others with titles to describe any sexual preferences. It is my belief that everyone has a social/outside life and a private/sexual life (whatever that may entail), and THAT is no ones business but theirs. To me, no matter who or what the joining pair, human/human, human/animal, animal/animal, it should be comfortable and enjoyable for both. And abuse is abuse no matter what form or fashion it is.I do not believe there is any distinction between Animal Lovers and those who Love Animals. Those are one in the same. Either one has a good heart or they don't. Simple as that.I will say that I also agree with some comments from all posters. I do believe that animals should be loved, just as you would a human. But, animals are not humans and I do consider them pets, I do not consider them equals. Do I love my cat more than my children? NO. But, I care for her just as I do my children. I love her just as I do my children, and I scold her when justified just as I do my children.I do belive that most animals have a stronger instinct towards sexual encounters, canine's being one of them. And, I do believe that through thousands of years of socializing canine's they have it within them to form bonds with their owners or families they belong to or others they come in regular contact with and not just of a protective nature. You describe steps to ensure prevention of the canine from eventually becoming or feeling dominant. This statement alone contradicts your own statements of the love/partership bond between you and your dog. Why? Because with a human it would not be necessary to teach or train them when and where it was appropriate to have sex. Because, plain and simple, they are pets for a reason. They are not equal to us as humans. Please keep in mind, that is not to say that we should treat them any less than we would another human. The reason I was so perplexed is because though I do feel a sexual desire, and a sexual desire only, to have sex with a canine, and I do love and care for animals and would never cause them harm, I would never consider a male canine my lover, as that status is reserved for the human men in my life, or the occassional couple or group I engage with. I have a very strong sexual drive and desire which can not be fulfilled at times, even by several men, and sexually speaking I need and want more. Canine intercourse does arouse and intrigue me and that is my reason for pursuing it. It is my belief that canine's do have a strong sexual drive and I don't believe that if a male canine is willing and there is no abuse, that it's wrong unless I don't consider them my lover and mate. A canine can never achieve the level of lover or mate as they are an inferior breed than we are.I do agree that everyone who has posted an opinion has a right to whatever they believe. Even if I or anyone else does not agree with another. That's why we're humans, because we can and have the ability to conceptualize. On the subject of Titles, whether someone is a Zoo, Beasty, Gay, Lesbian, White, Black, Yellow, Orange, Mentally fit, Fat, Thin, short, tall, Bald, Old, or whatever title people choose to put on anyone else, I don't believe in them and have taught my children that there are no titles, we are all humans, no matter what any of our attributes may be, it is wrong to classify a human being based on any other fact than the fact that we are humans and there is not one of us who is better, less, more important, inferior, or superior to another, period, end of story.Now, I know some of you will dissagree with me, and hey, that's just fine, I appreciate all points of view. This is just mine.I will not comment on the fence hopping issue as I have no personal experience with this or know anyone who's done it, and have never seen or heard a story about it in the news. All I will say is that all humans and animals should be treated with respect and kindness.Love Knots to all, KnottLust.
QUOTE (KnottLust @ Jul 9 2006, 10:40 AM) A canine can never achieve the level of lover or mate as they are an inferior breed than we are. QUOTE On the subject of Titles, whether someone is a Zoo, Beasty, Gay, Lesbian, White, Black, Yellow, Orange, Mentally fit, Fat, Thin, short, tall, Bald, Old, or whatever title people choose to put on anyone else, I don't believe in them and have taught my children that there are no titles, we are all humans, no matter what any of our attributes may be, it is wrong to classify a human being based on any other fact than the fact that we are humans and there is not one of us who is better, less, more important, inferior, or superior to another, period, end of story.does anyone else find these two statements conflicting?why the need to classify a non-human then? why is it that they are "inferior" ? wouldn't "different" "different species" be more appropriate?with that said:QUOTE Now, I know some of you will dissagree with me, and hey, that's just fine, I appreciate all points of view. This is just mine.sure - you more than have a right to express your feelings and opinions - but I do want to disagree...I don't find animals to be my inferior - they are equal - just blessed with different communication skills and lifestyles - we can talk - walk upright ect... but we can't fly - nor do we have the capability of surviving in the desert for a prolong period of time - we can't live and breath under water ect ect... animals DO communicate - and animals adapt to enviroment much better than humans - they are not inferior - just different...all things are equal in southys world - and THAT is MY general rule of engagement -I choose to approach each human in this world - and each animal in this world - as my equal commrade - sometimes there is no match ie: we do not serve to enhance each other in this life - and sometimes we do - but reguardless of wether a meeting is benefitial - and reguardless of wether I personally like someone or some creature - I dearly try to respect that person/animals position in life as an equal - and I TRY to apply the same to mother earth - none of this is ours: other people - animals - earth - even ourselves - they are gifts of -of -errrr something greater _______ (fill in the blank with your own belief) I'm not even sure it's important that we can fill in the blank -just so long as we believe that everything doesn't revolve around OURSELF -that EVERYTHING is BALANCE... and in order for balance - there needs to be equality and mutual respect of every living thing ok - I'm scaring myself - I'm outta here
Southie must have had coffee already this morning. I need to catch up.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
Hi,Love your point of view southflorida. Even if I still believe there is a pecking order between species. That is their way also, each of our lovely animal species has it's own pecking order for multiple reasons. And, except for herbavours, they all eat and or attack each other in a pecking order. That is their way of survival and ensuring their continued success. I'm writing this now as I sit and watch a show on TV of deer and their lives and of their interaction with wolves. And of how the wolves hunt down and eat the deer. At the end it showed a wolf cub and a baby deer playing and frolicking together. Since the wolf cub isn't born with the hunt and kill characteristics, it's taught, as a very young cub it played with the baby deer. That last was just an afterthought as I was watching it.Again, and as always, all views are always welcome.Love Knots to all, KnottLust.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (southflorida @ Jul 9 2006, 01:06 PM) QUOTE (KnottLust @ Jul 9 2006, 10:40 AM) A canine can never achieve the level of lover or mate as they are an inferior breed than we are. QUOTE On the subject of Titles, whether someone is a Zoo, Beasty, Gay, Lesbian, White, Black, Yellow, Orange, Mentally fit, Fat, Thin, short, tall, Bald, Old, or whatever title people choose to put on anyone else, I don't believe in them and have taught my children that there are no titles, we are all humans, no matter what any of our attributes may be, it is wrong to classify a human being based on any other fact than the fact that we are humans and there is not one of us who is better, less, more important, inferior, or superior to another, period, end of story.does anyone else find these two statements conflicting?why the need to classify a non-human then? why is it that they are "inferior" ? wouldn't "different" "different species" be more appropriate?with that said:QUOTE Now, I know some of you will dissagree with me, and hey, that's just fine, I appreciate all points of view. This is just mine.sure - you more than have a right to express your feelings and opinions - but I do want to disagree...I don't find animals to be my inferior - they are equal - just blessed with different communication skills and lifestyles - we can talk - walk upright ect... but we can't fly - nor do we have the capability of surviving in the desert for a prolong period of time - we can't live and breath under water ect ect... animals DO communicate - and animals adapt to enviroment much better than humans - they are not inferior - just different...all things are equal in southys world - and THAT is MY general rule of engagement -I choose to approach each human in this world - and each animal in this world - as my equal commrade - sometimes there is no match ie: we do not serve to enhance each other in this life - and sometimes we do - but reguardless of wether a meeting is benefitial - and reguardless of wether I personally like someone or some creature - I dearly try to respect that person/animals position in life as an equal - and I TRY to apply the same to mother earth - none of this is ours: other people - animals - earth - even ourselves - they are gifts of -of -errrr something greater _______ (fill in the blank with your own belief) I'm not even sure it's important that we can fill in the blank -just so long as we believe that everything doesn't revolve around OURSELF -that EVERYTHING is BALANCE... and in order for balance - there needs to be equality and mutual respect of every living thing ok - I'm scaring myself - I'm outta here I know knotlust is more than capable of answering for himself, but South did ask if anyone else found his 2 statements conflicting. No.If you believe humans to be equal with each other, but superior to other species as Knotlust does,then those statements are consistent and logical.They would only be conflicting if you believe, as South does, that all species are equal.That is also why he uses the word "inferior", for that is his belief.Personally, I go with "different", but find it impossible to label species as inferior/superior, or even as equal. Each species has different qualities. Humans clearly have the highest intelligence on the planet, but are physically inferior to almost every other species. It's like asking which is best, a potato or a banana. There is no answer, they're just different.I would just like to pick up on one thing. "Animals adapt to environment much better than humans". Couldn't disagree more. Thousands of species have become, or are becoming, extinct because of changes to their environment. Man, however, flourishes in almost every corner of this planet. Despite changing environment, be it of our own making or not, our biggest problem is over population. Our intellect has enabled us to cope with everything nature has thrown at us so far. Whether we will in the future remains to be seen.
Hmmm, Another very interesting point of view.But, being a WOMAN as I am, and yes that is my clitoris as my avitar. I'd like to comment on the potato and banana thing. Ummm, lets see, Banana's tend to have more length, but MMMMMMM, can find an awfuly nice thick potato. LOL. Love Knots to all, KnottLust
OOPS! Sorry Knottlust! It's just so long since I've seen a clitoris . . . . . . Must add you to my list of ladies to flirt with.OK, in your case maybe the banana is superior!
Great topic and read!I have some thoughts on this but I am trying to put them in order. I think I will think first post later on this one.
Southys world, I think I would like to have your world bigger. It is a pleasure to read your posts and rololovers. You two keep wrighting like this I will start thinking the world is not half bad.Think first then post I will remember that. Sometimes I seam to for get.R
sage words raccool. but understand that there is another side to the coin and not everyone will agree with you. everyone has their own feelings and opinions on any subject. there are no RIGHT opinions and there are no WRONG opinions.....there are only DIFFERING opinions.thankfully, most WILL and DO agree with you.....myself included.
perfect rules to live by for all those who want to have a relationship with thier animal.
i can see that delving too deeply into things only causes disagreements, conflict, and rifts.so from all this hoo-haa we have gathered that some people are okay with "fencehopping" and others are not, regardless or in spite of their reasons. it's safe to say this is something everybody here ALREADY KNOWS.why continue to run it into the ground?
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (piquantpassage @ Jul 12 2006, 02:57 AM) i can see that delving too deeply into things only causes disagreements, conflict, and rifts.so from all this hoo-haa we have gathered that some people are okay with "fencehopping" and others are not, regardless or in spite of their reasons. it's safe to say this is something everybody here ALREADY KNOWS.why continue to run it into the ground? Hi Piquant.Didn't really understand your comments about this thread. I've just checked back and the last opinion offered on fencehopping here was on April 15. All fencehopping talk was switched to the "Fencehoppers Unite" thread. Who's running it into the ground?
great post realy enjoyed it
Thank you! ^__^I've decided not to get in this debate..
yeah, same here
Id give you a ten if I could. Very well put, its often bothered me that Im lumped in with the likes of David Parker Ray in the public minds eye (who was the NM serial killer who operated satans den), or those people whose Presa was allowed to kill that woman outside her apartment in CA. a few years ago. Its always the rottenest apples that float to the top and make the rest of the barrel look spoiled as well.
Please help keep this site free by visiting our site sponsors - click on the banned below and have a look at their sites.
QUOTE (KnottLust @ Jul 9 2006, 10:40 AM) Hello All,Well, I read as much as I could till my eyes crossed, I got through page 3.Hmmm, well, my first thoughts are on the origination of the post.After reading your "Rules of Engagement" I find myself perplexed. I am somewhat new to this, having only experienced "some" contact throughout the years with canines. I am generally an individual who does not classify others with titles to describe any sexual preferences. It is my belief that everyone has a social/outside life and a private/sexual life (whatever that may entail), and THAT is no ones business but theirs. To me, no matter who or what the joining pair, human/human, human/animal, animal/animal, it should be comfortable and enjoyable for both. And abuse is abuse no matter what form or fashion it is.I do not believe there is any distinction between Animal Lovers and those who Love Animals. Those are one in the same. Either one has a good heart or they don't. Simple as that.I will say that I also agree with some comments from all posters. I do believe that animals should be loved, just as you would a human. But, animals are not humans and I do consider them pets, I do not consider them equals. Do I love my cat more than my children? NO. But, I care for her just as I do my children. I love her just as I do my children, and I scold her when justified just as I do my children.I do belive that most animals have a stronger instinct towards sexual encounters, canine's being one of them. And, I do believe that through thousands of years of socializing canine's they have it within them to form bonds with their owners or families they belong to or others they come in regular contact with and not just of a protective nature. You describe steps to ensure prevention of the canine from eventually becoming or feeling dominant. This statement alone contradicts your own statements of the love/partership bond between you and your dog. Why? Because with a human it would not be necessary to teach or train them when and where it was appropriate to have sex. Because, plain and simple, they are pets for a reason. They are not equal to us as humans. Please keep in mind, that is not to say that we should treat them any less than we would another human. The reason I was so perplexed is because though I do feel a sexual desire, and a sexual desire only, to have sex with a canine, and I do love and care for animals and would never cause them harm, I would never consider a male canine my lover, as that status is reserved for the human men in my life, or the occassional couple or group I engage with. I have a very strong sexual drive and desire which can not be fulfilled at times, even by several men, and sexually speaking I need and want more. Canine intercourse does arouse and intrigue me and that is my reason for pursuing it. It is my belief that canine's do have a strong sexual drive and I don't believe that if a male canine is willing and there is no abuse, that it's wrong unless I don't consider them my lover and mate. A canine can never achieve the level of lover or mate as they are an inferior breed than we are.I do agree that everyone who has posted an opinion has a right to whatever they believe. Even if I or anyone else does not agree with another. That's why we're humans, because we can and have the ability to conceptualize. On the subject of Titles, whether someone is a Zoo, Beasty, , Lesbian, White, Black, Yellow, Orange, Mentally fit, Fat, Thin, short, tall, Bald, Old, or whatever title people choose to put on anyone else, I don't believe in them and have taught my children that there are no titles, we are all humans, no matter what any of our attributes may be, it is wrong to classify a human being based on any other fact than the fact that we are humans and there is not one of us who is better, less, more important, inferior, or superior to another, period, end of story.Now, I know some of you will dissagree with me, and hey, that's just fine, I appreciate all points of view. This is just mine.I will not comment on the fence hopping issue as I have no personal experience with this or know anyone who's done it, and have never seen or heard a story about it in the news. All I will say is that all humans and animals should be treated with respect and kindness.Love Knots to all, KnottLust. Id give you a ten as well if I could!Im one of those who doesnt find a home in either classification of Beast or Zoo.. so I definitely relate to everything youre saying. While I love my animals, care for, and respect them nearly as much as I do people.. I feel that (at least for me) they need to be relegated to a slightly lower status, perhaps I only feel this way because I have people who are there for me if I need them. The saddest part is, is our furred compatriots dont live long (reminds me of Elf and Human love in J.R.R.s writings...yeah, Im a hopeless romantic and corny), and losing something you love is harsh, and almost everyone needs a support group to fall back on.. its just one example, but as much as I love them, my animals cant provide everything I need... however, I can provide everything they need and make their lives as enjoyable as possible.
My 2 cents: I personally could never consider an animal my "lover" but I do believe that animal/human sex is ok if two conditions are met.1. The human respects the animal if he gets the sense the animal doesn't want to do anything, animals make this fairly obvious by shying away, making angry noises, or kicking/biting one. Generally it is obvious when an animal does not want to do things as animals are very honest and a person must respect them if they don't.2. The animal is not physically harmed in any way shape or form. If the following things happen I don't see an incredible problem with animal sex or even sometimes fencehopping. As long as the person is not intruding upon a relationship, hurting the animal, or disregarding it's right to say no, then I don't see where there is a problem.
Last modified on March 13th, 2010 | Zoodestiny.com | © 2003-2005 - All Rights Reserved