There are apocryphal tales of both men and women putting peanut butter (or similar) on their genitals and then having a dog lick it off.
Is this bestiality, and ought it be illegal?
For me the answers are “yes” and “no” (for where is the harm done).
Thus, not all acts of bestiality should be illegal.
I don’t think any acts of bestiality should be illegal. I think cruelty to animals should be illegal (and is). If you are hurting an animal, that’s wrong. We kill and eat animals, who cares if you have sex with them? I think it’s ethically wrong, though. And also gross. But I don’t think it should be illegal.
I hope I am not forever remembered as the chick who likes having sex with dogs or something now.
Edited to add: I think having a dog lick peanut butter off your genitals is (obviously) bestiality.
It should be illegal.
I agree with miss elizabeth. If the animal willingly reciprocates and you are careful not to upset or harm them, then there are no grounds for legal punishment, even if you are a sick bastard.
Why?
Another vote that I don’t care enough about people shagging animals to deem it illegal. I understand the reasoning behind it being generally illegal, and I don’t have a vested interest to lobby for this change in our general legal state, but that would still be my vote.
And yes, having an animal lick peanut butter off your naughties is a form of bestiality.
If you have to ask it probably is.
But seriously, how did I know it was going to be about this before I opened the thread?
I don’t think there’s anything wrong. I doubt the dog sees it as sexual. They probably just think, mmm, yummy peanut butter, the same as they would if it were on your hands, feet, or asshole. Blechy and gross but not unethical, IMO.
I say it is unethical because I think it is unethical to gain sexual satisfaction from a sentient being who has not (or cannot) consent. Although there is a little bit of a gray area. I don’t think it’s unethical to masturbate while thinking about someone who hasn’t consented to being your fantasy stand-in. But, for example, I think if you have a sneezing fetish, I think it’s unethical for you to put a lot of pepper in someone’s food to make them sneeze so you can get off, even if they don’t know you did it. Maybe I think it’s unethical to trick people into doing things you think are sexual when they don’t know about it, can’t consent, etc. I need to think about this more…
Well, I mean I definitely agree that you shouldn’t gain sexual satisfaction from those who can’t consent…like a child, obviously. But a dog or cat seems different. I don’t they see sex as we see it. They seem a lot more polymorphous perverse–if it feels good, it IS good. (Licking food off of someone, no matter how gross, is good.) If it feels bad, it IS bad. (So, painful forced sodomy would fall into this category.)
Kids often feel the same way though. Let me give you an example. I have a daughter, and she is adorable and she loves to dance around in her underwear. I think this is hilarious, and sometimes I will even put on music to see her do it (seriously, she is a great dancer. She does this awesome snake move thing). Now, I get no sexual gratification from that. Obviously. Ew.
But let’s say one day Cesario comes over :eek: and he puts on music for her, and watches her shake her groove thing. And he is turned on by this. Now, my daughter doesn’t know she is doing anything sexual, in fact, in her mind, she isn’t. It feels good, it IS good, right? But I think a pedophile putting on music to watch a little girl dance for his sexual gratification is wrong (unethical) anyway. Just because she doesn’t know, or just because the dog doesn’t know, doesn’t make it ethical.
No, you need to think about this less. Or pics, whatever. 
ETA I mean the pepper thing rather than the more serious points you are making in this thread. Mmmmmmm Lovely sneezy pepper snouts…Atchoooo
If you allow an animal to have sex with you, which entity has committed an immoral act, and what act would that be?
Well, that’s definitely a grey area. I’m not sure how I feel. It’s creepy, sure. But what if it’s a film. Like, not one made for prurient interest. Let’s say a pedophile gets a hold of “Little Miss Sunshine” or “Toddlers and Tiaras” and jerks off to the little girls in those competitions. Not really unethical since there’s no child porn element (well…not legally anyway).
What about a pedophile who went in person to a child pageant and got aroused watching the girls? Not visibly aroused–but feeling the exact same way that a heterosexual man would feel at a strip club?
Actually, I think a more interesting question is “How?” as in how such an act, assuming it was made illegal, would be investigated, prosecuted and punished? A law like this is like a law banning people from making obscene gestures when alone. If it’s not happening in the view of others, it effectively doesn’t exist.
For the record i recently saw a story in the news about a man who blew pepper into a cashier’s face, but instead of sneezing like he wanted, she inhaled the pepper and was hurt by it (somehow). He was arrested for assault. So, that’s why I thought of that. Ahem.
Ok, look. I was worried about this. I am not the world’s best debater. And, looking around more, maybe the word I want here is immoral, not unethical. AND I want to say that I think people do immoral and unethical things, and that I don’t think we can (or even should) make them illegal. But I think it is immoral (or unethical; I’m having a bit of trouble sorting out the difference) for a pedophile to go to a pageant for sexual gratification. For one thing, those things are usually closed to people other than parents and family, so he (or she) would probably have to lie or something to get in anyway, which is a problem in itself. Tv and movies are harder. There is a certain implied consent when you put yourself on film, because you know lots of people will see it and some of them are sickos. I’m sure the parents of these kids realize creeps will see their kids, and for whatever reason they accept that risk. But, are the parents capable of making that decision for their kids? The kids probably don’t understand that weirdos might watch their videos for gross reasons, and even if they did, I believe their age makes them incapable of consenting to that anyway. Huh. I don’t know. Anyway, we are pretty far off topic.
My point is, I guess, that the ignorance of the victim to what you’ve done doesn’t make it ok. I don’t see how you can legislate it, and I don’t think we should try. But using sentient beings for sexual gratification when they cannot or did not consent is wrong, in my opinion. And people do it, a lot, but that doesn’t mean it is ok.
Serious question, not directed specifically at miss elizabeth: Why should sexual satisfaction be a special case? Is it unethical for me to ride my horse because it pleases me, even when it’s not her idea of a good time? What if I go in the paddock to pet her nice, soft nose when she’d rather be grazing? Consider, too, that if she opposed either activity (riding or petting), she’s quite capable of withholding “consent.” She could toss me off her back or walk away, and there’s not a lot I could do about it. That she does neither of these implies consent, although it does not imply any significant understanding of anything beyond “it feels good/bad at this moment.”
I think this is an important difference versus the hypothetical “what if Cesario came over” situation that you described. Even though no physical harm occurs, the child might look back on the situation later and feel embarrassed or exploited. A non-human animal, on the other hand, isn’t likely to feel that way (indeed, it may be incapable of feeling that way) if no injury, pain or distress was involved.
It should not need saying, but I do not have, nor do I desire to have, any kind of sexual interaction with anyone other than my human, very adult, partner.
Let me just note that this by no means apocryphal, though I have no idea how prevalent it is. A girl I knew from WoW had some sort of condition that her body was unable to form sufficient muscles for her to be able to do much more than occasionally crawl to the bathroom and back to bed. She would spread something (butter?) on herself so that her cats would lick her.
This could possibly be the closest she’ll ever get to having a sex life.
Shouldn’t you use penis butter?
Because it promote immorality and is sinful and people who do it are possibly mentally ill.