# Bestiality: Always wrong? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 5, 2010, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597 "2010-07-05T12:40:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2010, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/21 "2010-07-05T21:42:45Z")
I’m all for beastiality if it keeps the pervs away from humans. If you have sex with animals, you’re missing that moral compass that is characteristic of all serial killers, and I’d much rather have them abusing animals than kidnapping children. humans4life ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/22 "2010-07-06T03:52:35Z")
A classic argument- It’s cruel to have sex with animals, but acceptable to kill and eat them? I think animals can show their lack of consent just fine. Dogs growl, snap, attempt to move away etc when you do something they don’t like. I assume horses do similar things. I agree that bestiality is illegal just because of the ick factor. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/23 "2010-07-06T04:14:43Z")
Is the sheep cute? Wouldn’t want an ugly one. ---
**Author:** ![Mekhazzio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b38774/32.png) [@Mekhazzio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mekhazzio)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/24 "2010-07-06T05:42:25Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And as an aside, if we take the “animals can’t consent therefore bestiality is immoral” line of thought seriously, a direct implication is that if a dog humps your leg you are sexually assaulting him. After all, he can’t consent so the fact that he wants to do that is irrelevant. Indeed. If you follow the elaborate construction of social standards for “consent” farther down the train of thought, it becomes ridiculous even for human interaction. Saying that a pair of horny teenagers who are happily going at it are capable of consent one day, but weren’t the day before, is nothing but a convenient legal fiction. For that matter, the entire fuss about educated consent is assuming there’s some innate property of the act of sex that necessarily makes it a long-term commitment. That argument only holds water when a child might come out of the act. Once a barrier to procreation is in place, be it contraceptives or a species divide, sex really is just sex and the “educated” part of consent ought to disappear entirely. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/25 "2010-07-06T09:31:28Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > I do think it’s a bad idea because it’s a good way to introduce new and interesting diseases into the human population. Well, unless you cook the animal before having sex with it. I doubt that. Most people already let dogs lick their faces and hands, feed them from their hands, clean up their urine and feces etc. If the dog has a zoonotic illness, chances are you’ve already got it too. ---
**Author:** ![willthekittensurvive](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/91b2a8/32.png) [@willthekittensurvive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/willthekittensurvive)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/26 "2010-07-06T09:51:58Z")
> [@Superhal](#): > > I’m all for beastiality if it keeps the pervs away from humans. If you have sex with animals, you’re missing that moral compass that is characteristic of all serial killers, and I’d much rather have them abusing animals than kidnapping children. > > humans4life And if it is just a gateway for human rape? Don’t most serial killers start with hurting animals and when they no longer find satisfaction htere they move on to humans? but mostly ick! ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/27 "2010-07-06T12:40:01Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > No, because the slave really did object. As I see it, consent in the human meaning of the word is simply a nonissue with most or all animals; they simply don’t have the mental equipment for it. To consent, or to not consent. They enjoy things, or they don’t, or they are indifferent; but they lack the self image and conscious purposes that make consent in the human sense meaningful. IOW, in the case of the slave (and the minor, the employee, the student, etc.) : _submission_ is not equal to _consent_. I agree, animals can suffer pain and distress, but are not themselves moral actors. The “immorality” of bestiality would _not_ be based on it being lesive to to the _animal’s_ dignity, but on a notion that sex may _ **only** _ legitimately happen between moral equals and thus the human is acting wrongly (which may be just a fancy expression of an ancestral legacy of a species mating only with its likes). I can’t get too worked up about it, really. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/28 "2010-07-06T13:28:29Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > I doubt that. Most people already let dogs lick their faces and hands, feed them from their hands, clean up their urine and feces etc. If the dog has a zoonotic illness, chances are you’ve already got it too. Dogs aren’t the only animal around. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/29 "2010-07-06T20:06:35Z")
I see bestiality as a bit like pedophilia. To be discouraged as it annoys the object of “affection.” But I think there’s also a philosophical argument to be made that bestiality is using a living thing for a kind of masturbation, & is thus symptomatic of an selfish sexuality. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/30 "2010-07-06T20:44:58Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Dogs aren’t the only animal around. Preach it brother! damn, I probably shouldn’t have said that ---
**Author:** ![Stoneburg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@Stoneburg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoneburg)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2010, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/31 "2010-07-06T20:55:58Z")
I agree with everyone else, ie: “Ick… shouldn’t be illegal” But there are positive effects too! For example, the Swedish minister of Agriculture talking about it in the parliament. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/IBrybugODSA/hqdefault.jpg "Jordbruksministern säger för mycket") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBrybugODSA) When he said “Let me give you a few examples…” That just has to have been the most awkward moment in the parliaments history. (The clip is in Swedish, sorry) ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/32 "2010-07-07T09:09:12Z")
> [@Icarus](#): > > Ask the same questions about bestiality with un-domesticated animals and I think most would agree that you could not get past the animal defending itself violently. So, what makes it different for domesticated animals? That they don’t object? Of course they don’t - they’re domesticated! Franckly, I don’t see the difference. We kill both domesticated sheeps and wild lions, so I’ve no moral issue with people fucking either (and want to watch the movie in the second case) > [@](#): > > This is the key objection for me. Just as in human law, the unequal power element is very germain to discussions of rape (it’s about power), and sexual harassment (he’s my boss/teacher/uncle, I didn’t want to get fired/flunked/he threatened me). Domesticated animals may not have cognition of it but it is inherent in the structure that the human has ultimate power over the animal. Think of the slave owner who thought of their slaves as domesticate animals, was it OK for them to have sex with their slaves as long as the slave “didn’t object”? But _why_ should the unequal power element matter for sex when it doesn’t for other things? Having slaves work in fields was wrong, even if they didn’t object, but we don’t think having oxes working in fields is immoral. The problem here is that you make a special case for sex that doesn’t apply to anything else we do to animals or have animals do. ---
**Author:** ![alice\_in\_wonderland](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alice_in_wonderland/32/176_2.png) [@alice\_in\_wonderland](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alice_in_wonderland)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/33 "2010-07-07T13:06:52Z")
Well, gross, no doubt about it. However, a male dog mounting a female human seems to have consented about as clearly as possible, no? Obviously it’s a bit different if it’s a male human penetrating an animal (either female or male); however, given the size of the animal they may not even notice, as has been mentioned. So, from that point of view I guess it’s fine, but really gross. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/34 "2010-07-07T13:11:35Z")
> [@FriarTed](#): > > Yes, always wrong. And in this case, I think the Ick factor alone is a perfectly valid reason to ban & prosecute it. Could you please explain what moral code or religious precepts that position derives from, or is even consistent with? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/35 "2010-07-07T13:53:37Z")
> [@alice\_in\_wonderland](#): > > Well, gross, no doubt about it. > > However, a male dog mounting a female human seems to have consented about as clearly as possible, no? Damn. As utterly repugnant as I find this discussion, and as difficult a time I will ever have interacting with the pro-bestiality folks in this thread going forward, I must say you have a point there. That said, it’s naive to say that bestiality is not animal cruelty in a vast majority of cases. Though a running theme here has been that most large mammalian vaginas are simply inured to their invasion by puny human phalli, [perhaps the most cited news item in Dope history](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/07/29/2009-07-29_south_carolina_man_busted_for_having_sex_with_horse.html) emphatically argues otherwise. There was a similar story out of Indianapolis a few years ago about several men who had sex with a goat; I can’t find it right now, but I understand the goat required serious medical attention. It’s wrong, people. It’s just wrong. ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/36 "2010-07-07T13:56:48Z")
This link goes into a bit more detail about the negative consequences for the unluckiest horse in South Carolina: [HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/04/rodell-vereens-sex-with-h_n_345740.html) ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/37 "2010-07-07T14:28:33Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Could you please explain what moral code or religious precepts that position derives from, or is even consistent with? Thanks. Sure- and it’s one that is pretty much despised here on the Dope, which is why a lot of Dopers can’t raise a real moral objection to “consensual bestiality”- the ban on “Abominations” in the Bible (OT & NT)- the very term “Abomination”, and the Hebrew & Greek corellaries, pretty much means “It’s ICKY!!!” I’m convinced that if we didn’t have a lot of Dopers who were sexually abused as children, there’d be a lot more SDMB pussyfooting about the wrongness of active pedophilia also. We already have a vocal minority who ho-hum about adult consensual incest. ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/38 "2010-07-07T14:32:42Z")
> [@Stoneburg](#): > > I agree with everyone else, ie: “Ick… shouldn’t be illegal” > > But there are positive effects too! > > For example, the Swedish minister of Agriculture talking about it in the parliament. > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBrybugODSA](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBrybugODSA) > > When he said “Let me give you a few examples…” > > That just has to have been the most awkward moment in the parliaments history. > (The clip is in Swedish, sorry) Could you give us an English translation of what he said? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/39 "2010-07-07T14:36:36Z")
> [@StusBlues](#): > > Damn. > > As utterly repugnant as I find this discussion, and as difficult a time I will ever have interacting with the pro-bestiality folks in this thread going forward, I must say you have a point there. Indeed. As \*\*Der \*\*mentioned, the animal reacts as it will to pleasant or unpleasant stimuli. There is no moral dignity to violate (which is a constituent element of the censure against pedophilia, slavery or sex with the impaired: in those cases a human’s normal capacity to be a moral agent is incomplete, denied or diminished even if conceivably physically “pleased”) > [@](#): > > That said, it’s naive to say that bestiality is not animal cruelty in a vast majority of cases. > […] > It’s wrong, people. It’s just wrong. As animal _ **cruelty** _, whereby in our society we believe that we may exploit animals for work, food, research, etc., but we’re expected to do so without inflicting wanton or neglectful pain or distress – it has nothing to do with _consent_. And also there’s the case of a so-called "zoophile"who PREFERS sex with animals and convinces him/herself that it’s somehow “love”: there you have a major behavioral deviation. But as a “malum per se” _independent_ of circumstance? That’s merely the “Ick” factor IMO ---
**Author:** ![alice\_in\_wonderland](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alice_in_wonderland/32/176_2.png) [@alice\_in\_wonderland](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alice_in_wonderland)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597/40 "2010-07-07T14:38:31Z")
> [@StusBlues](#): > > As utterly repugnant as I find this discussion, and as difficult a time I will ever have interacting with the pro-bestiality folks in this thread going forward, Yikes - I hope you don’t think I’m pro-bestiality - blargh!!! And I agree emphatically - if an animal is physically injured either by a stick, or a hand or a penis or being drop kicked off a balcony, the perpetrator is a douche-bag of the highest order. And the ‘but we kill them and eat them’ argument is dumb. I, personally, am a vegetarian; however, even for meat eaters out there - fast, safe, humane ways to slaughter animals for food is big business. I work at a vet school and when we have Temple Grandin visit it’s standing room only (for those who don’t know, she’s one of the primary authorities on humane animal handling in the food industry). Purposefully going out of your way to hurt an animal just makes you an asshole (and yes, having sex with an animal that’s a size where your wang is going to rend it in half is purposefully hurting it.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bestiality-always-wrong/545597.md?page=3)