Yes, I am a veterinarian. Many years ago I saw a male Husky that was dropped off for an enema. At the time I worked in a big hospital, with 8 veterinarians on staff. One of the technicians was concerned about the case and approached me.
Basically, the dog had been dropped off about once a month for enemas over a period of several years (always on a Friday, if that means anything) . There was no real medical reason, other than the initial visit where the owner claimed the dog had constipation problems. The original veterinarian was no longer working in the practice.
After the first enema, the owner continued to call and schedule monthly enemas and the case “fell through the cracks”. The dog was admitted, given enemas, and then was picked up late that day by the owner. Over two years of monthly enemas and no exams/etc other than the initial visit.
That evening I approached the owner to ask [why this was going on. He blushed and stammered, unable to answer my question. Then he left, never to be heard from again.
I have also over the years seen cases where “sexual abuse” was a strong possibility.
Eeeeew. Every so often I read a thread and then run
face first into a situation that I can share.
Just saw a lab puppy for vaccines. The owner is about
12 months pregnant (huge, ready to drop any moment).
She asked me if the dog can tell that she is pregnant.
I talked about dogs sensing a variety of medical
problems. Some dogs can tell when an epileptic owner
is going to seizure long before the actual event, for
example.
Well, it is an interesting topic and I talked for a
bit about it. She then floored me with, “Yeah, I think
he knows. He keeps trying to nurse.”
But I don’t see how you can’t see the difference between being penetrated and being the penetrator… Like it or not, there is a difference. One is necessarily passive, the other is not. I mean, I’ll give you that an erection is a natural reaction, and not always controllable - but she isn’t holding the dog down, it’s penetrating her.
I’m not clever enough with words to explain what I am saying properly…but I know you get it.
Of course there’s a difference. But we’re discussing, among other things, whether a female animal is capable of actively seeking penetration - which seems to be the case - and actually has to be “held down” any more than it would be in the normal course of events (I mean, a tiger holds a tigress by the scruff of her neck in his teeth, doesn’t he?). And really, it’s not much of a defence to say that female-on-male can’t be abuse because he has to, y’know, get an erection - not when you’re also acknowledging that said erection may be popping up quite without the owner’s say-so.
No, I thought we were discussing whether male animals can be raped or not. And I never said males can’t be raped, only that it is a different situation and the fact of penetration has to be taken into account.
Do you consider the dog in the OP’s situation to have been raped? How about an eager 16 YO male who is having sex with, say, an 18 YO? Is that truly rape? We arbitrarily mark off these dividers - 18 and younger than that you can’t consent - but there’s even a special name for it and it’s just not the same as being held down and raped. I don’t consider statuatory rape on the same lines, and if the dog was subject to any kind of rape it was statuatory only - we think the dog is not informed enough to give consent, therefore he can’t.
The only one I can think of that’s pretty much taken to be a sign of mental illness is playing with human feces. Digust for the excrement of one’s own species is an important evolutionary adapatation protecting us from bacterial infections etc. As such, it is so ingrained that to deviate from that disgust is considered a sign that something is very wrong.
As for bestiality, I’d say it probably depends on motivation. Is she realistic about what she and the animal are deriving from this relationship? If so, then she’s probably not mentally ill (although creepy is another thing). However, if she’s talking about how she and her dog are in love, or other unrealistic assessents of the situation, it could be a sign of a deeper problem.
After reading this thread with some interest, I had a question. Sorry if it has been answered, but I missed it after three pages.
Was the dog neutered?
I quoted the vet because the way I read this thread was that this woman had trained her dog to have sex with her. Absent that training, the dog would not be engaging in sexual relations with her or anyone else.
Yeah, (unaltered) female dogs go into heat, (unaltered) male dogs leak spooge, but mounting (people, other dogs out of heat/male) is a dominance thing, nothing more, and all of the comments about how the dog seemed to be having a good time is anthropomorphizing the dogs behavior and nothing more.
Doesn’t mean that the chick is crazy, but there is no way (absent a Vulcan mind meld) to truly know what is going on with the dog.
I assume not, but given my phobia I’m obviously not going to get close enough to look. Here’s what I know, spoilered again so as not to be needlessly gross:
He was very obedient and didn’t move at all till Kath told him too; I don’t know if such meekness is necessarily a sign of being neutered. Also there was a definite ejaculation, which I assume is not possible with a neutered animal; but again, I don’t know diddly about dogs, so I could easily be wrong.
MY sexual performance is quite normal. YOURS is different, therefore weird. If it is REALLY different, it is perverted. :dubious:
Remember, folks, that it wasn’t too long ago that (human) homosexuality was defined in the Pschology Pharmacopea (or whatever the Holy Book is called) as a sexual deviation. Nowdays, it is not. So what changed? Only society’s (or psychologists’) opinion of it.
On a slight hijack, I always used the verb “to fuck” in a one-sided way: He fucked her, as in he penetrated her penile/vaginally. Yet some posts in this thread have used the verb to mean the same act, but “she fucked him”. To my way of thinking, this is impossible unless she has a penis and he has a vagina. He fucked her, but she was fucked by him is the way I would put it. So has the usage of “fuck” become more equal with the increased equality of the sexes?
For the record, I have never fucked a dog or been fucked by one.
So, because the dog was so obedient, do you think that he was trained to behave in such a manner? Seems to me that if he was trained to do what he did, then your friend is exploiting her pet for her own gratification. Obviously, a trained animal is not capable of giving consent, so she used him to get off. Which says a lot more about her mental status (and the fact she invited you to watch) than fucking the animal.
Did she give him a doggie treat before, during or after? Did she compliment him–“good dog,” that sort of thing? People can train their dogs to open doors, ride skateboards and all sorts of goofy stuff. Doesn’t surprise me that they don’t also train them to be animated sex toys.
I don’t know enough about dogs to have an opinion. Bear in mind that, because of my phobia, any canine behavior short of running away from me is apt to seem threatening, so I’m not the best judge.
Are you serious? Oh god-is there anything you can do to take the poor animal away?
Since you’re a vet, perhaps you can answer my question-wouldn’t there a be a real possibility of having a “training effect”, for lack of a better term, where the dog would start seeing human beings as sexual outlets, and be more likely to attempt to well, “rape” a human? Or would there be dominance issues, like the dog would no longer listen to his or her owner?
This is obviously far afield of the topic I wished to discuss originally, but that’s my own damn fault for including the anecdote. Anyway, I have a question. I seem to remember reading about search & rescue dogs being injured in the aftermath of 9-11 as they were employed looking for survivors among the Twin Towers. If you feel that Kath’s training a dog to couple is immoral or unethical for the reason you’ve given, how is training search & rescue dogs any better?
I’ve always used it (and heard it used) as a general synonym for “had sex with.” He fucked her, she fucked him, those two girls over there fucked each other, and so forth. If there’s been a shift in the meaning of the word, it happened before I was born, and that was thirty years ago.
Exploiting an animal for unnecessary personal gratification vs. training an animal to save lives? Even if you feel the latter is a form of exploitation (and I can see the argument there), I don’t think it’s difficult to see a difference on a moral/ethical scale. The motivation is not selfish.
I suppose one could argue that the rescue dog scenario is perhaps an example of humanity as a whole being selfish rather than an individual, in Kath’s case. But I still think that, even using that argument, actions taken as a form of self-preservation rank higher ethically than actions taken for personal pleasure.
I think there’s a pretty strong distinction no matter how you cut it.
Yah, but you left me to make the argument 'cos you said you couldn’t come up with the words.
I consider that a dog (or other animal) can neither rape nor be raped, can neither murder nor be murdered, can neither steal nor have its property stolen. As a society we’re at liberty to decide that we will not cause an animal unnecessary suffering, but the animal has no basic “right” not to be killed and eaten, skinned, made into a fur coat or a dozen pairs of shoes, and so on, so I’d argue that it has no “right” not to be used as a sex toy. It all comes down to what our society is prepared to tolerate as acceptable conduct, or not.
The thing is that the question does not revolve around who is doing the penetrating and who is being penetrated; it’s a matter of abusing power and control. How about the eager 16yo male? Well, if we’d call it rape if it were an eager 16yo female with an older guy, I’d still call it rape the other way around. To do otherwise is to make the insulting and demeaning judgment that all males should just be grateful they get the opportunity to use a warm hole to get off in. But this is some way off topic for this thread, and perhaps could use another one (as if it’s never been done before).
Sure it’s selfish. All the benefit is on the human side of the equation; we’re exploiting the dog’s nature for our benefit. I don’t say that to denigrate the use of rescue dogs: I’m not especially concerned with dogs’ rights, other than that we not be actively cruel to them. But it’s hard to see how (considering only the dog’s welfare) training it to be a sexual partner is worse or even as bad as putting its life in jeopardy, or even teaching it to fetch my slippers.I think there’s a pretty strong distinction no matter how you cut it.
[/QUOTE]