In passing, and not specifically. I didn’t think to take it literally.
The dog bit is itself contextually irrelevant, as far we’re concerned, if you intend only on discussing her mental health - what’s far more interesting here is that she brought home a relative stranger and then chose to reveal her such an oddball hobby in such a dramatic way.
It wasn’t a date, in the sense of there being any romantic component.
She was that way each time I’d met her. That said, I didn’t edit every well, as I agree the post, as written, reads as if I’d met her then for the first time, as opposed to having spent maybe six hours total with her in person over the previous few years, but otherwise having a relationship consisting of correspondence and phone conversation.
At any rate that’s immaterial to the point of the thread. Persons like Kath, considered abstractly, seem to be mentally ill to me; but the concrete Kath seems anything but, except for this bit of, ah, variant behavior, and I’m wondering what I’m missing.
Looking over what I’ve written thus far, I see a danger of being misinterpreted another day. There’s not a few persons in the world who would equate bestiality with homosexuality, calling both of them abominations in the sight of God or evidence of mental defect. I certainly don’t mean to imply anything like that about homosexuality, but of bestiality I cannot be so kind; I just can’t imagine how cross-species sex can be anything but evidence of instability or maladjustment. But as I said I have my own kinks, and it’s hard for me to justify thinking ill of Kath without thinking similar ill of myself.
Funniest post I’ve read all week. And I really try not to laugh out loud at work for no discernable reason; it raises eyebrows.
Heh. I wasn’t going to go there. Actually, I didn’t think about it, but I’m glad we got a nice body blow to the dignity of Hal in there, though.
Have you seen this post:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7473922&postcount=13
Cross-species isn’t quite bestiality. I mean, just because we know of no equally intelligent alien, say, doesn’t mean there aren’t any. And I wouldn’t have a problem with cross-species sex if the intelligence level was closer.
But other than that I am with you on having sex with animals or having sex with children*. Both of them show some sign of mental disability in my opinion, that you would choose to have a sexual relationship with someone who doesn’t understand in the first case and most likely doesn’t want to as well in the second case seems unhealthy.
*I am speaking of children. Not teens. I don’t consider that pedophilia.
It’s pretty literal; I am told that the mere proximity of a dog makes me visibly upset, and certainly it raises my tension level. Petting a dog is beyond me, and her warning me not to interfere was unneccessary; only if a dog were threatening one of my nieces or nephews can I imagine trying to restrain one. That’s part of the reason I mistrust my feelings on the issue: it seems to me that I may be projecting my own feelings.
My impression is that I had finally annoyed her enough to do it; remember, we’d had endless conversations on this and other subjects. Also her stories tend to involve exhibitionism, and I think taking the risk turned her on. So I suppose we mght discuss whether the combination of exhibitionism and bestiality, as well as either component considered separately, is necessarily indicative of being unwell.
“Mental illness” according to whom? The DSM is only one taxonomy. There are many ways to parse “okay/not okay.” For example, Freud talked about differences of aim and object in regard to sexuality.
Obviously YOURS–or whoever else wants to proffer an opinion.
I don’t get the Hal Briston reference, but I do think the absence of Evil Captor is conspicuous in a thread about kink. 
You have to be the only Doper who missed this thread Licentious Ectomorph
Careful. A similar remark got me smacked around by a mod once.
As for Hal Briston, do a thread search for his name and the word “sheep.” It will teach you not to leave your work computer unattended while surfing the Dope.
One could say that this relationship with her dog prevents her from developing a meaningful relationship with a human being. Would a feeder/feedee relationship be deranged even if the two people involved are gainfully employed and happy with their fetish?
I’m not a psychologist so I can’t comment on this woman’s mental state. I don’t think bestiality should be illegal. But if I had a relative or friend who was into this you better believe I’d be calling the guys in white coats on them. Hypocritical? Maybe. But I really don’t think that the analogy with homosexuality holds water. This is a “relationship” that is inherently unequal, and even if she didn’t recognize how sick it is I wouldn’t want somebody I know to be caught up in something like this. Especially since she has obvious exhibitionist tendencies (as shown by the fact that she brought you into her house and showed it to you, something a person with normal boundaries would not do).
Skald, what did you do right after she fucked the dog?
P.S. I remember a “Dear Abby” column where an elderly man admitted to fucking his elderly sister and Abby recommended they knock it the hell off and get counseling since their relationship stopped them from connecting with someone else in a healthy, equal relationship. I don’t know what Abby’s creds are/were (she’s dead right?), but seeing as how she had a reputation of being a tolerant person that’s saying something.
Perhaps that’s why he’s staying out of it. Just a thought.
Does the scenario imply mental defect? Not the way you describe it, no. I would say there is a problem though.
But if the dog were FEMALE, and it were GAY bestiality sex, well, then, yes, they’re BOTH insane! :eek:
I could be wrong but I thought it was illegal to fuck a dog…something about it being like having sex with a minor because a dog can’t really consciously make the decision. Still if someone I know fucked a dog in front of me, I’m sorry…I’d think they need help.
Not even the image of her and the dog in bed smoking an afterglow cigarrette makes this seem okay to me.
Id don’t believe it. I think you invented the prose in the spoiler to arouse the prurient interest and thus generate interest in your post/topic/prose.
:incredulous:
Currently, not in Tennessee (link requires subscription). Coming across this article is what brought the thread to mind.
So it’s okay to kill animals, but not to fuck them? :dubious:
As to dogs consenting, I might observe that male dogs regularly hump the legs of both people they know and strangers. (At least I see this joked about on TV and in movies; obviously my phobia prevents me from putting myself into situations where that might happen.
I’m trying to reach a logical reason for that position, though. The closest I’ve come is the argument that her relationship with the dog prevents her from having a vital relationship with another human being. But that presupposes that having a vital relationship with another human being is necessary for mental health, and I’m not sure that’s true. And, as I said, she’s doing well in life–certainly better than me, financially–and she doesn’t do anything to harm the dog physically that I’m aware, or abuse drugs, etc.
Answering this question, by the way, brings something else to mind. In at least one significant way Kath is better adjusted than me: she lacks my great phobia of dogs. I was nervous merely being in the presence of hers, though it was very well-behaved, and I’ve found myself trapped in coffeehouses because another patron left a dog tied up outside and I could not summon the will to pass so close to the dog without its owner nearby, no matter how well-behaved the beast seemed. I have foregone going home with women because I knew they had dogs; my non-erotic and fear-filled attitude towards ALL canines is obviously far more debilitating than her non-fearful, eroticized attitude towards ONE.
It also presupposes that her obtaining physical gratification from the dog somehow prevents her from having a healthy relationship with another human being. For all we know, her perspective could be that getting off with the dog is no different (or not much different) than using a vibrator. She may still very much enjoy relationships, sexual and otherwise, with other human beings. If she actually equates her relationship with the dog with relationships with other people, then there’s a problem, but I don’t recall reading anything in this thread so far that would suggest that is happening.
So long as the dog is not being harmed (and Anaamika, I’d like to hear more from you about why you feel that a higher level of intelligence on the animal’s part would make this more acceptable; if the animal is acting on an instinct and receiving gratification in that manner, is that wrong?), I don’t know why there would be any implication of illness on her part.