Sweden to ban bestiality

[The Brain]

But really, where is the state interest in keeping people from fucking animals at their discretion, provided it doesn't infringe on some other kind of animal rights.  It seems like there is a consensus against torturing animals for sexual gratification (if not "bovine agriculture"), but I don't see how bestiality on the face it = torture or even the unnecessary infliction of pain.

I have never understood how the "consent" argument against bestiality is persuasive.  Animals are incapable of giving consent to almost any human action.  Did meine kleine kätzchen "consent" to an indefinite custodial agreement in which he spends 24 hours a day in a sordid three-decker apartment?  Obviously not.  My roommate just selected him and put him in a box.  (Though of course he is pleasantly plump motherfucker, is showered thrice-over with the affection he demands, and lacks for nothing.   ) 

And of course the cliched argument: does the chicken consent to being transformed into "gallic agriculture" by sub-minimum-wage Mexican workers in North Carolina or Delaware plants?  [The question of whether the Mexicans really "consented" to that either is for another  day...]

The idea of consent seems intimately linked to the idea of autonomy.  Without autonomy, how can you consent?  And conversely, without the ability to consent, how can you be autonomous?

Animals in "our" society are generally treated as living creatures lacking autonomy.  If anybody wants to make the case for bovine autonomy, let him.

Why do we have laws against animal cruelty?  I'm not sure there's one consistent rationale, or if there is any comprehensive reason for it.  A lot of it is emotional, obviously, but I'd guess that the main reason for the prohibition is the deleterious impact that animal abusers probably have on human society.

I think the real question is whether having sex with animals is per se animal abuse.  I'm not convinced that it is.  Surely some kinds of animal-fucking are cruel and should be prohibited, but there may well be others that really aren't cruel when looked out without prudery.

There is indeed a bunch of animal sex stuff that a serious person cannot claim is cruel.

[Capetan Mihali]

I was living in Phila. when Michael Vick got done with his 18 months in Leavenworth and the amount of signage (usually in storefronts) decrying his reentry into his career in society (professional football player) was amazing.  The gist of the (white, middle-class) consensus was that his crime was so horrendous that he should never be able to participate in civil life again.

Maybe we should just accept the obvious fact that household pets (or animals usually employed as pets) are fundamentally different than other animals in human life.  Sure, it's not biologically sound, but it seems to be the clear view of the overwhelming majority of human beings. 

Why not legislate with this explicitly in mind?  E.g. prohibit fucking or killing domestic dogs and cats rather than animals as a whole.  Just because of the historical/cultural/emotional importance of those animals. In a non-commercial/scientific context, of course, since we can't interfere with the triumphant march of the free market.  Maybe include higher-level primates, since they are our whacked-out cousins.  There's an argument for leaving the bald eagle unfucked as it is a symbol of our country.  Americans love horses for sentimental reasons and because there hasn't been a serious food crisis in a long time.  Maybe horses should be in the category of presumptively fuckable but only killable for cause.

[Martinus]

"Today it is very easy, on the internet and other places, to encounter animals for sexual intercourse and there are also many more reports of this happening," said Eriksson.

There are dating websites for animals? 

[Martinus]

BDSM won't be criminalized.  Relax.

Explain the mechanism by which it would.  You can't make the same "think of the <sub>" argument because of its transactional nature.

I suppose you could assume duress or a lack of capacity, but I doubt this would fly very far in the face of obvious adult, functioning human beings opposing it.

And isn't the BDSM community becoming increasingly politicized and conscious?  I admit I'm putting this together from fragmentary information (i.e., I occasionally read a feminist sub's blog and some other various shit), but that was my impression...

As for the present issue, shouldn't they criminalize murder before rape?

Edit: is anyone else seeing the text resizing randomly and weirdly on the board lately?</sub>

Paying for sex is also "transactional" and "between consenting adults", yet Swedes found a reason to ban it.

And yeah, I fully agree with you about the murder/rape thing. If we are concerned so much about an animal not liking a potentially pleasurable sexual intercourse with a human, then why don't we stop butchering them and turning them into steaks and handbags first.

Like banning of incest, this is a typical yuck factor in action. Who would have thought the feminist and other leftist types, who used to fight for sexual freedom, would turn into such allies of the puritanical religious types.

[Martinus]

Really? I don't share your optimism. When a person of the kind that made buying sex illegal sees a video of a harsh BDSM session (provided the man is dominant and the woman is submissive) their thoughts won't wander into "oh this is like a blowjob" territory.

That's another thing that annoys me about the moral panic surrounding "women protection" laws like this. Ok, fine, but keep it to your breeder types.

Afraid that your incestuous sex will breed retards? Fine, but don't ban my gay threesome with twins.

Afraid that women are objectivized or depicted as submissive in BDSM porn? Fine, but stay out of gay BDSM porn.

Same goes for paying for sex - unlike hetero prostitution, most male prostitutes are freelancers anyway.

[Martinus]

But really, where is the state interest in keeping people from fucking animals at their discretion, provided it doesn't infringe on some other kind of animal rights.  It seems like there is a consensus against torturing animals for sexual gratification (if not "bovine agriculture"), but I don't see how bestiality on the face it = torture or even the unnecessary infliction of pain.

I have never understood how the "consent" argument against bestiality is persuasive.  Animals are incapable of giving consent to almost any human action.  Did meine kleine kätzchen "consent" to an indefinite custodial agreement in which he spends 24 hours a day in a sordid three-decker apartment?  Obviously not.  My roommate just selected him and put him in a box.  (Though of course he is pleasantly plump motherfucker, is showered thrice-over with the affection he demands, and lacks for nothing.   ) 

And of course the cliched argument: does the chicken consent to being transformed into "gallic agriculture" by sub-minimum-wage Mexican workers in North Carolina or Delaware plants?  [The question of whether the Mexicans really "consented" to that either is for another  day...]

The idea of consent seems intimately linked to the idea of autonomy.  Without autonomy, how can you consent?  And conversely, without the ability to consent, how can you be autonomous?

Animals in "our" society are generally treated as living creatures lacking autonomy.  If anybody wants to make the case for bovine autonomy, let him.

Why do we have laws against animal cruelty?  I'm not sure there's one consistent rationale, or if there is any comprehensive reason for it.  A lot of it is emotional, obviously, but I'd guess that the main reason for the prohibition is the deleterious impact that animal abusers probably have on human society.

I think the real question is whether having sex with animals is per se animal abuse.  I'm not convinced that it is.  Surely some kinds of animal-fucking are cruel and should be prohibited, but there may well be others that really aren't cruel when looked out without prudery.

I completely agree with you. If an adult man fucks a hamster that's probably animal cruelty, as the hamster's anus will likely burst and cause pain to the animal. But when the animal is not being tortured (as in, causing the animal pain), I don't see a problem, as long as we continue butchering animals for food and leather.

[DGuller]

So, does that mean that dairy farmers can't fondle the cow's tits anymore? 

[Richard Hakluyt]

So, does that mean that dairy farmers can't fondle the cow's tits anymore? 

It is fine as long as they hate their job. If they are careless and mention "job satisfaction" then they will be imprisoned.

[alfred russel]

are there seals and other large sea life in the antarctic? if not then the polar bears would probably starve.

Yes, there are seals, but there are also no land predators.. which might be detrimental to penguins, should they be introduced.
But note, there are no leopard seals or any equivalent predator... but then again there are no penguins.

Most penguins don't live in the antarctic, and some of the larger penguin colonies are exposed to land predators such as pumas. Though a lot of those colonies are also on islands.

[Neil]

Really? I don't share your optimism. When a person of the kind that made buying sex illegal sees a video of a harsh BDSM session (provided the man is dominant and the woman is submissive) their thoughts won't wander into "oh this is like a blowjob" territory.

That's another thing that annoys me about the moral panic surrounding "women protection" laws like this. Ok, fine, but keep it to your breeder types.

Afraid that your incestuous sex will breed retards? Fine, but don't ban my gay threesome with twins.

Afraid that women are objectivized or depicted as submissive in BDSM porn? Fine, but stay out of gay BDSM porn.

Same goes for paying for sex - unlike hetero prostitution, most male prostitutes are freelancers anyway.

The Ick Factor comes into it there, because gay sex is disgusting.

[Valmy]

I was living in Phila. when Michael Vick got done with his 18 months in Leavenworth and the amount of signage (usually in storefronts) decrying his reentry into his career in society (professional football player) was amazing.  The gist of the (white, middle-class) consensus was that his crime was so horrendous that he should never be able to participate in civil life again.

Man why does everybody hate the middle class so much?  I guess people should be happy it is dissappearing.

[Razgovory]

I was living in Phila. when Michael Vick got done with his 18 months in Leavenworth and the amount of signage (usually in storefronts) decrying his reentry into his career in society (professional football player) was amazing.  The gist of the (white, middle-class) consensus was that his crime was so horrendous that he should never be able to participate in civil life again.

Man why does everybody hate the middle class so much?  I guess people should be happy it is dissappearing.

Dunno.  I was a bit struck when Yi and Sheilbh gave completely different impressions of middle class society.

[Malthus]

I was living in Phila. when Michael Vick got done with his 18 months in Leavenworth and the amount of signage (usually in storefronts) decrying his reentry into his career in society (professional football player) was amazing.  The gist of the (white, middle-class) consensus was that his crime was so horrendous that he should never be able to participate in civil life again.

Man why does everybody hate the middle class so much?  I guess people should be happy it is dissappearing.

It's been the sneering straw-man target of choice for the vaguely leftish for decades. Everyone can see in it all the shallowness, all the blandness, all the oppressiveness and repression, that they wish to see. Add "White" in the bargain and you have a perfect mix - only bettered if you make it "male" as well as "White"! (Though you can mention "soccer moms" if you want to sneer at the breeders).

[Martinus]

I was living in Phila. when Michael Vick got done with his 18 months in Leavenworth and the amount of signage (usually in storefronts) decrying his reentry into his career in society (professional football player) was amazing.  The gist of the (white, middle-class) consensus was that his crime was so horrendous that he should never be able to participate in civil life again.

Man why does everybody hate the middle class so much?  I guess people should be happy it is dissappearing.

Dunno.  I was a bit struck when Yi and Sheilbh gave completely different impressions of middle class society.

I don't understand your post. Are you saying that they define it differently, or they are both middle class but completely different people?

If the former, then it's hardly surprising, because it means something quite different in the UK and the US.

If the latter, then it's also hardly surprising since neither Yi nor Sheilbh is middle class (Yi is lower class, Sheilbh is upper class).

[Razgovory]

Please don't respond to me Martinus.  I don't want want to insult you right now.