- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
I agree with your points and it would make an interesting research paper.
Zoosadist Zoosadism Megathread - Joshua "Kero the Wolf" Hoffman & Friends.
- Thread starter Reality Doctor
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
I agree with your points and it would make an interesting research paper.
n33gr
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2019
Don't know if this been shared yet, but I found this on the @shippershifter vegan animal rap-erm, innocent, non-offending zoophile's twitter
https://docs.google.com/document/d/...Jke7xR9hTdEyeiw/edit#bookmark=id.3sd4v1auu5oa
(Is it possible to archive Docs or does Google do that for you?)
https://twitter.com/shippershifter/status/1108888589226725376
http://archive.li/3FTqX
tldr; a giant Doc full of links, supposedly explaining that animals can consent, how zoophilia isn't a disorder but a sexual orentation, how it doesn't have a cure, and a guide to have sex with dogs "while avoiding health issues" thrown in there too (though this one has a broken link). I've only went through the first 3, covering animal intelligence and reproduction, and the News & Reports one. I really don't want to go through more, the news section (which was only 3 articles) was already disgusting and malignant, can't imagine how much worse the others are like.
Good fucking god, this was mind-draining, and it's not even half of the Doc. If a Kiwi is able to continue reading it, kudos to that person.
In other news...
https://twitter.com/shippershifter/status/1129158287927205889
http://archive.li/2LIdT
https://docs.google.com/document/d/...Jke7xR9hTdEyeiw/edit#bookmark=id.3sd4v1auu5oa
(Is it possible to archive Docs or does Google do that for you?)
https://twitter.com/shippershifter/status/1108888589226725376
http://archive.li/3FTqX
tldr; a giant Doc full of links, supposedly explaining that animals can consent, how zoophilia isn't a disorder but a sexual orentation, how it doesn't have a cure, and a guide to have sex with dogs "while avoiding health issues" thrown in there too (though this one has a broken link). I've only went through the first 3, covering animal intelligence and reproduction, and the News & Reports one. I really don't want to go through more, the news section (which was only 3 articles) was already disgusting and malignant, can't imagine how much worse the others are like.
In the first section, Shippershifter admits that dogs do in fact have the mentality of a 2-3 year old, b-b-but, just w-with "an ability to pick up on when they are being misled", whatever the hell that means. Neither of the links they give seem to even advocating for zoophilia, they're just wholesome articles that out of context make you go "Huh, guess piggies are smart! That's cute". It's like a pedophile reading about the intelligence of little toddlers, confirming they can do basic shit like understanding simple commands, counting up to 4, perceiving lies, learn to use symbols, and being able to babble "hello" and "bye bye", so then the pedophile says "See! SEE?! Told you they were intelligent, so that means they can consent, now I can get loving and mutual with them! If we take them to daycares, change their diapers, and they're not consenting to any of that, then why would it be bad to have sex with them, HMMMM?! Checkmate puritans!". It's the exact same logic.
Second and third section. I love that they used bonobos as arguments, even though as someone pointed out, they're known for raping shit to death. And what the fuck you wanna do with that information, anyway? Are you seriously implying you're gonna travel all the way to the Central Congo Basin just to grab and fuck one? Good luck with that. These articles mainly talk about wild animals. Again, you zoos wanna go travel to find a marmoset, a bat, a bear, and an orca so you can eat them out, because you read on the internet that those animals can have sex for pleasure, and prove to those evil bigots "The Power of Love" is real? The articles do talk about cats and cows, in heat, and goats and horses getting sucked off (among the same species), but it's not illogical to think you'll damage them or give them a disease if you try to stick your dick in them, since it's obviously not compatible. Shit's filthy. You're only having sex with the animal because you like it, it serves no purpose and you're sure not "strengthening" your bond with it, so don't hit me with that. It's just pathetic hedonism, don't try to twist things.
I don't understand why they're putting links on how dogs and horses choose their mates and communicate their consent to them if they're not mentioning any zoophilia, as if he wants to say "So y'see kids, if dogs and horses ever do this to YOU, that means you're next! Happy fucking!". The horse one, does mentions humans having involvement in looking after the horses, but it doesn't say anything like the horse mounts the human or that the human should stroke their penises, which is something I'd imagine zoophiles would wanna hear. It does however mention this about humans:
"In addition to the common prob- lems of awkward approach, slow interest, and lack of confidence seen in many young or novice stallions, these animals showed marked dis- interest in mares and unusual attachment to humans. Their owners and veterinarians remarked that they were “human bonded.” In the presence of a mare, these animals were more attentive to the activity of the human handlers or observers than the mare. If encouraged or forced to approach a mare, these stallions seemed fearful, bored, con- fused, or resistant. In some instances, these stallions showed juvenile responses and a subordinate posture in response to mares. On several occasions, mares that had shown strong proceptive responses to other stallions on the same day responded to these stallions with aggressive or ambivalent behavior. These animals either failed to respond sex- ually to a mare while in the presence of a human or responded sexually only to humans. In two recent cases, erection would occur only if the stallion was allowed to lick the hand of a human handler for several minutes. In one of these cases, erection would occur only with one particular handler. In each case, the stallion was extraordinarily quiet and compliant with handling demands. It appeared that these animals had become conditioned to respond sexually to humans and were ambivalent or inhibited by other horses."
All of this is written under "Reproductive Behaviour Problems".
News and reports section. In the Berlin article they fucking call bestiality an "artistic duality", me thinks they're one of those postmodern "Art is subjective" autists. Blablabla, we live in a society, we're so opressed, blablabla. "They were clearly disappointed – it wasn’t going to be one of the crazier parties." D'aww, what's wrong, zooies? I thought you painted dogs as these sexual spastics that all bang want to bang their owners? What a shame. "Judging Cash’s body language, they thought he was being beaten." no fucking shit
"He first had sex with Sina (his granny's dog) at age 12. Then the story becomes traumatic: ‘In the same year we moved, and I had to leave Sina behind. I missed her terribly, and saved money to go back and visit. By the time I had enough, I was two years older. When I got there. I was told Sina had died two weeks after we left." Wowww! My gosh! What a mystery! I wonder why that happened! Jeepers!
As if a literal child has sex with his dog isn't traumatic. The rest of the BlackWolf story is legitimately heartbreaking, it really is the story of a misguided, hormonal kid who doesn't understand his emotions, being groomed by zoophiles (He was 14 at this time). I don't have to explain why teenagers this young shouldn't be exposed to shit like this, especially while interacting with mentally ill strangers on the internet. He should have seen a school therapist if he had one, (the way the story was worded makes it look like he had sex with the dog behind his family's back, also), not a fucking paraphilia forum. Whatever "SEE I TOLD YOU FUCKING ANIMALS IS TRUE, HONEST LOVE" stuff happens next doesn't matter, the fact it all came from a minor being groomed on the internet, and not seeking real professional help, and hiding from your family that you killed your grandma's dog, makes all the following events something out of a horror movie. Gee, what happened, Shippershitter? I thought you zoophiles were peaceful, wholesome people who do not stand by grooming and manipulation of children? Why'd you include this on the Doc, then?
Moving on. Suspicious that the article titled "Denmark moves to ban bestiality -- but is sex with animals really so bad?" is made by a Nordic website and Danish scientist say it's natural. Not biased at all. Nope. On the last article, apparently Shittershifter still insists on using "thousands of people have sexual fantasies about it lol, it's super hawt and taboo so why not!! my dog lets me do it so it's loving consent!" as arguments. These are all based on sensationalism and biased guesses of what the animal feels like. Also I'm smelling some of that "Don't make it taboo, cause if you do, then people will want to do it!" fallacy.
Second and third section. I love that they used bonobos as arguments, even though as someone pointed out, they're known for raping shit to death. And what the fuck you wanna do with that information, anyway? Are you seriously implying you're gonna travel all the way to the Central Congo Basin just to grab and fuck one? Good luck with that. These articles mainly talk about wild animals. Again, you zoos wanna go travel to find a marmoset, a bat, a bear, and an orca so you can eat them out, because you read on the internet that those animals can have sex for pleasure, and prove to those evil bigots "The Power of Love" is real? The articles do talk about cats and cows, in heat, and goats and horses getting sucked off (among the same species), but it's not illogical to think you'll damage them or give them a disease if you try to stick your dick in them, since it's obviously not compatible. Shit's filthy. You're only having sex with the animal because you like it, it serves no purpose and you're sure not "strengthening" your bond with it, so don't hit me with that. It's just pathetic hedonism, don't try to twist things.
I don't understand why they're putting links on how dogs and horses choose their mates and communicate their consent to them if they're not mentioning any zoophilia, as if he wants to say "So y'see kids, if dogs and horses ever do this to YOU, that means you're next! Happy fucking!". The horse one, does mentions humans having involvement in looking after the horses, but it doesn't say anything like the horse mounts the human or that the human should stroke their penises, which is something I'd imagine zoophiles would wanna hear. It does however mention this about humans:
"In addition to the common prob- lems of awkward approach, slow interest, and lack of confidence seen in many young or novice stallions, these animals showed marked dis- interest in mares and unusual attachment to humans. Their owners and veterinarians remarked that they were “human bonded.” In the presence of a mare, these animals were more attentive to the activity of the human handlers or observers than the mare. If encouraged or forced to approach a mare, these stallions seemed fearful, bored, con- fused, or resistant. In some instances, these stallions showed juvenile responses and a subordinate posture in response to mares. On several occasions, mares that had shown strong proceptive responses to other stallions on the same day responded to these stallions with aggressive or ambivalent behavior. These animals either failed to respond sex- ually to a mare while in the presence of a human or responded sexually only to humans. In two recent cases, erection would occur only if the stallion was allowed to lick the hand of a human handler for several minutes. In one of these cases, erection would occur only with one particular handler. In each case, the stallion was extraordinarily quiet and compliant with handling demands. It appeared that these animals had become conditioned to respond sexually to humans and were ambivalent or inhibited by other horses."
All of this is written under "Reproductive Behaviour Problems".
News and reports section. In the Berlin article they fucking call bestiality an "artistic duality", me thinks they're one of those postmodern "Art is subjective" autists. Blablabla, we live in a society, we're so opressed, blablabla. "They were clearly disappointed – it wasn’t going to be one of the crazier parties." D'aww, what's wrong, zooies? I thought you painted dogs as these sexual spastics that all bang want to bang their owners? What a shame. "Judging Cash’s body language, they thought he was being beaten." no fucking shit
"He first had sex with Sina (his granny's dog) at age 12. Then the story becomes traumatic: ‘In the same year we moved, and I had to leave Sina behind. I missed her terribly, and saved money to go back and visit. By the time I had enough, I was two years older. When I got there. I was told Sina had died two weeks after we left." Wowww! My gosh! What a mystery! I wonder why that happened! Jeepers!
As if a literal child has sex with his dog isn't traumatic. The rest of the BlackWolf story is legitimately heartbreaking, it really is the story of a misguided, hormonal kid who doesn't understand his emotions, being groomed by zoophiles (He was 14 at this time). I don't have to explain why teenagers this young shouldn't be exposed to shit like this, especially while interacting with mentally ill strangers on the internet. He should have seen a school therapist if he had one, (the way the story was worded makes it look like he had sex with the dog behind his family's back, also), not a fucking paraphilia forum. Whatever "SEE I TOLD YOU FUCKING ANIMALS IS TRUE, HONEST LOVE" stuff happens next doesn't matter, the fact it all came from a minor being groomed on the internet, and not seeking real professional help, and hiding from your family that you killed your grandma's dog, makes all the following events something out of a horror movie. Gee, what happened, Shippershitter? I thought you zoophiles were peaceful, wholesome people who do not stand by grooming and manipulation of children? Why'd you include this on the Doc, then?
Moving on. Suspicious that the article titled "Denmark moves to ban bestiality -- but is sex with animals really so bad?" is made by a Nordic website and Danish scientist say it's natural. Not biased at all. Nope. On the last article, apparently Shittershifter still insists on using "thousands of people have sexual fantasies about it lol, it's super hawt and taboo so why not!! my dog lets me do it so it's loving consent!" as arguments. These are all based on sensationalism and biased guesses of what the animal feels like. Also I'm smelling some of that "Don't make it taboo, cause if you do, then people will want to do it!" fallacy.
Good fucking god, this was mind-draining, and it's not even half of the Doc. If a Kiwi is able to continue reading it, kudos to that person.
In other news...
https://twitter.com/shippershifter/status/1129158287927205889
http://archive.li/2LIdT
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2019
I don't think GDs can be archived but I downloaded it and attached it to serve as an archive.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2018
I don't believe what he says, but EthicalZ says he's gonna go get therapy. (Found on r/yiffinhell, archive of post because I don't wanna open twitter)
n33gr
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2019
Wait I'm confused, does he want to get rid of his paraphilia or not? If he's trying to quit why would he identify proudly as a zoophile, be defending sex with animals to no end, associate with other proud zoos and be friends with them, and give other zoos "tips" for fucking animals? And why would he put it as a sexuality and not a depraved fetish that causes mental harm? Unless I'm missing something it's a direct contradiction
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2018
It's so strange that often the only determining factor as to whether or not these people get help is whether or not they are proud of their illness. Just by berating this guy enough and dragging him out of his hugbox into public view, it's caused him to reconsider his lifestyle. It's amazing that all somebody needs is just a bit of exposure to differing opinions and shame to change their minds.
Yes, he is trying to get rid of his paraphilia if I'm reading this all correctly. That post from July 1st is actually a resignation from his account which implies he will no longer defend the zoophiles. I think if the guy gets into contact with the right psychiatrists/therapists and takes the right medications to subdue his urges, we'll have one zoophile down and plenty more to go.
n33gr
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2019
This episode in "Adventures in Clownworld": https://www.quora.com/How-long-until-the-taboo-on-bestiality-is-broken https://archive.li/kovNo
Some madman wrote a book-length essay, which is basically the same as the Doc mentioned earlier but wayy more tedious. He equates gays to animal fuckers (hmm, what does that remind me of?) , throws around the words "bigot" and "ignorant" like a parrot and thinks "speciesism" is as serious as sexism or racism. He calls eating meat, which is, y'know, a basic biological and health need, something made for "selfish human purposes" and seems to portray PETA in a good light, and anyone with more than 2 brain cells would know they're a company full of shit, so these are indicators that this might as well be veganism fuckery dressed up as a loving and tolerant animal "rights" activist
"You better do bestiality or else you're incestuous!"
Evidence he hates meat-eaters
www.quora.com
archive.li
archive.li
archive.li
www.quora.com
Link to thread where a bunch of answers admit that zoophillia is a disorder possibly formed by one having some really rough stuff happening to them, and their brains convince them that humans don't love them. This autistic twit of course doesn't mention this because it'd ruin his narrative, so he keeps lumping zoophillia into LGBT and "huhuh let's embrace and celebrate our sexual differences guys!!"
Has he been mentioned here before? He's probably not Aluzky or Shippershifter because neither of them have an alien or demon interest for all I know, which he has. When I google his name all I get another photo of him on an apparently defunct "esoteric" forum writing website where he had a forum about dragons or something. There's a load of other funny and horrifying shit in his Quora answers but not all of them have archiveable links since all of the answers, including his disappeared in the threads for some reason, so take those ones with a grain of salt. (like the ones in Attachments)
www.quora.com
Edit: Tried shortening this with spoilers, and words
Some madman wrote a book-length essay, which is basically the same as the Doc mentioned earlier but wayy more tedious. He equates gays to animal fuckers (hmm, what does that remind me of?) , throws around the words "bigot" and "ignorant" like a parrot and thinks "speciesism" is as serious as sexism or racism. He calls eating meat, which is, y'know, a basic biological and health need, something made for "selfish human purposes" and seems to portray PETA in a good light, and anyone with more than 2 brain cells would know they're a company full of shit, so these are indicators that this might as well be veganism fuckery dressed up as a loving and tolerant animal "rights" activist
"You better do bestiality or else you're incestuous!"
Evidence he hates meat-eaters
Should I marry a furry? - Quora
How would I stop my future son from being a furry? - Quora
archived 5 Jul 2019 16:19:25 UTC
What's the possibility of an extraterrestrial lifeform being a furry?…
archived 5 Jul 2019 16:18:19 UTC
Someone is making fun of me for being a furry. What do I do, and how …
archived 5 Jul 2019 16:21:53 UTC
Have you ever experienced proof of aliens? - Quora
Has he been mentioned here before? He's probably not Aluzky or Shippershifter because neither of them have an alien or demon interest for all I know, which he has. When I google his name all I get another photo of him on an apparently defunct "esoteric" forum writing website where he had a forum about dragons or something. There's a load of other funny and horrifying shit in his Quora answers but not all of them have archiveable links since all of the answers, including his disappeared in the threads for some reason, so take those ones with a grain of salt. (like the ones in Attachments)
Daniel Grant Wilks - Quora
Blogger
Free weblog publishing tool from Google, for sharing text, photos and video.
phantasypublishing.blogspot.com
Edit: Tried shortening this with spoilers, and words
Attachments
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2019
'Interspecies copulation" isn't suddenly going to manifesting itself as "being able to have kids with your dog, thus changing the way evolution works". There's a reason why even animals that are close to one another biologically to reproduce (lions and tigers, for instance, or donkeys and horses) end up having fucked up offspring that are born with a grab-bag of birth defects and sterility issues. While incest can be damaging to one's biology, so can hybridization from a species too far removed from your own.
The closest related animal to us is chimps and we can't even reproduce with them. Humans may've hybridized with neanderthals and denisovans, but this largely succeeded since we were close enough relatives that it wasn't hugely detrimental to our health to do so. Both of these species were just barely branched off from our collective ancestor species so that it wasn't a huge deal to interbreed again, and both would've likely qualified as "human enough" that if they were still alive today (and not assimilated into our biology) that they would not be considered akin to monkeys or apes in appearance or intelligence.
Tl;dr: This guy is wrong in many ways and I'm very mad about it. Also betting that he's either quoting an old schizo on the street or himself because the "old man's wisdom" he's citing only shows up in his stupid fucking article and nowhere else on the entire goddamn internet.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2019
ζ FeuerWulfsky ζ on Twitter: "Animal Consent: You know when an animal…
archived 9 Jul 2019 09:50:33 UTC
ζ FeuerWulfsky ζ on Twitter: "Just something I thought I should add: …
archived 9 Jul 2019 09:58:10 UTC
Tastypaws on Twitter: "1. My mate is the top and willingly mounts me.…
archived 9 Jul 2019 09:54:00 UTC
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2019
I don't have anything important to add; I just needed to vent (get the fuck away from me Dr. Scott Ford) so I'll keep my chimping out under the spoiler.
View attachment 832747
1) Whether the dog is topping or not doesn't change the fact that dog genitals are porous due to being internal 99% of the time, resulting in the organ itself having a thinner surface skin, like the inside of your sinuses or mouth. This puts them at high-risk for dangerous infections caused by bacteria like e.coli entering the bloodstream. How many "my dog mounts me, not visa versa" zoophiles have lost their canine companions to kidney and bladder infections? Didn't Kero's dog die that way? Funny how that keeps fucking happening, and how most zoophile-owned dogs seem to die before reaching old age.
2) A psychologist isn't a veterinarian or a medical physician. A shrink's main occupation is making sure that their client is mentally stable enough that they don't go on a goddamn rampage and kill other people and/or themselves. A lot of psychiatry involves having to empathize with people who are, oftentimes, very hard to empathize with or fully understand, because directly calling someone disgusting or delusional is a good way to both lose a client and set them off into hurting themselves or others if they feel that their avenue for mental recovery is gonzo. What's more, they are absolutely not qualified to determine the health (physical or mental) of an animal. That's not their fucking job.
3) What "facts" have zoophiles presented exactly? That weren't sourced to other zoophiles who have a blatant bias for wanting to prove that dogfucking is okay, of course. As much as I hate quoting that walking squathrust Ben Shapiro, "facts don't care about your feelings"; medical science does not give a fuck if you and your dog are engaged in a goddamn harlequin romance novel existence. Quit putting your dick around or near your pet's ass, and visa versa.
I don't even want to get into FeuerWulfsky's shit, either... but I will.
Domestic animals (especially social ones, such as dogs and cats) typically want to please or at least placate their owners because their survival is dependent on doing so. Providing food to them at any time (not just smearing it on your crotch) makes them aware that you are a provider. Hell, a dog's motivations could very well be sexual gratification for the sake of it; but it's still a motivation towards something that they think is imperative to their survival, whether through via reproduction (because animals don't get that they can't have kids with you) or because they can pick up that you (the hand that feeds) want it.
This is why engaging them in sexual behavior for personal enjoyment (whether they "initiate" or not) is so fucked up and unacceptable. There is an inherent power imbalance involved regardless of how "mature" or "smart" that animal is. They are not able to form the adequate mental capabilities to comprehend the entirety of their situation, whether it's due to lack of experience, social standing, or (in the case of animals) limited self-awareness. "The dog wagged it's ass at me and got a boner" could totally mean that the dog wants you to fuck it, but it does not mitigate the fact that dogs fundamentally can't comprehend things like STDs/STIs/health complications/reproductive incompatibility and humans are not adequately equipped to explain this to them in a way they can understand.
There's a reason why neglecting to tell a grown ass adult human being that you have an STD (provided you were aware prior) is considered a crime, even if you both consented to the activity, because the other adult did not consent to the potential risks. How the fuck do you parse that an animal, incapable of understanding what the fuck bacteria even is, can be fully aware of the full consequences that can result of getting an infection via sex?
1) Whether the dog is topping or not doesn't change the fact that dog genitals are porous due to being internal 99% of the time, resulting in the organ itself having a thinner surface skin, like the inside of your sinuses or mouth. This puts them at high-risk for dangerous infections caused by bacteria like e.coli entering the bloodstream. How many "my dog mounts me, not visa versa" zoophiles have lost their canine companions to kidney and bladder infections? Didn't Kero's dog die that way? Funny how that keeps fucking happening, and how most zoophile-owned dogs seem to die before reaching old age.
2) A psychologist isn't a veterinarian or a medical physician. A shrink's main occupation is making sure that their client is mentally stable enough that they don't go on a goddamn rampage and kill other people and/or themselves. A lot of psychiatry involves having to empathize with people who are, oftentimes, very hard to empathize with or fully understand, because directly calling someone disgusting or delusional is a good way to both lose a client and set them off into hurting themselves or others if they feel that their avenue for mental recovery is gonzo. What's more, they are absolutely not qualified to determine the health (physical or mental) of an animal. That's not their fucking job.
3) What "facts" have zoophiles presented exactly? That weren't sourced to other zoophiles who have a blatant bias for wanting to prove that dogfucking is okay, of course. As much as I hate quoting that walking squathrust Ben Shapiro, "facts don't care about your feelings"; medical science does not give a fuck if you and your dog are engaged in a goddamn harlequin romance novel existence. Quit putting your dick around or near your pet's ass, and visa versa.
I don't even want to get into FeuerWulfsky's shit, either... but I will.
Domestic animals (especially social ones, such as dogs and cats) typically want to please or at least placate their owners because their survival is dependent on doing so. Providing food to them at any time (not just smearing it on your crotch) makes them aware that you are a provider. Hell, a dog's motivations could very well be sexual gratification for the sake of it; but it's still a motivation towards something that they think is imperative to their survival, whether through via reproduction (because animals don't get that they can't have kids with you) or because they can pick up that you (the hand that feeds) want it.
This is why engaging them in sexual behavior for personal enjoyment (whether they "initiate" or not) is so fucked up and unacceptable. There is an inherent power imbalance involved regardless of how "mature" or "smart" that animal is. They are not able to form the adequate mental capabilities to comprehend the entirety of their situation, whether it's due to lack of experience, social standing, or (in the case of animals) limited self-awareness. "The dog wagged it's ass at me and got a boner" could totally mean that the dog wants you to fuck it, but it does not mitigate the fact that dogs fundamentally can't comprehend things like STDs/STIs/health complications/reproductive incompatibility and humans are not adequately equipped to explain this to them in a way they can understand.
There's a reason why neglecting to tell a grown ass adult human being that you have an STD (provided you were aware prior) is considered a crime, even if you both consented to the activity, because the other adult did not consent to the potential risks. How the fuck do you parse that an animal, incapable of understanding what the fuck bacteria even is, can be fully aware of the full consequences that can result of getting an infection via sex?
n33gr
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2019
Does this faggot and the ones that liked the tweets realize that all of this can be perfectly applied to toddlers and children?
Seeing this was surreal
Lo (MAP Mama) on Twitter: "Animals can't consent because they're stup…
archived 9 Jul 2019 23:47:07 UTC
I'm stunned. Zoophiles are so irredeemable and fucked up that even pedophiles can be against them.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2019
Does this faggot and the ones that liked the tweets realize that all of this can be perfectly applied to toddlers and children?
Seeing this was surreal
I'm stunned. Zoophiles are so irredeemable and fucked up that even pedophiles can be against them.
Unfortunately, it's not surprising. Unless they have overlapping fetishes for kids AND dogs (looking at you, babyfurs) pedophiles and zoophiles will regularly throw one another under the bus, citing one another as worse forms of degeneracy to make themselves look good. You see this a lot within the individual communities, too, with zoophiles believing they have the moral high-ground over zoosadists because they honestly think that since they aren't intending to hurt the animals they fuck that somehow makes them less awful than the sadists who cause harm on purpose. The blunt truth though is that willful ignorance is a key proponent of neglect, and it's easier for them to gaslight others like them into believing that what they're doing isn't harmful by pointing fingers at an even lower standard.
A similar trend is with hebephiles (pedos attracted to young teens) vs. typical pedophiles vs. sadistic pedophiles vs. no-contact pedophiles. They're constantly kicking one another to the curb to try and make their individual preferences look better to the general public, and can't comprehend the fact that everyone knows they're all awful degenerates.
- Joined
- May 25, 2015
>Minor Attracted Person
>>>female
its a tranny
>>>female
its a tranny
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2018
it said cis female, dummy.
which is more concerning. For how "anticontact" she is, she could get a daycare job easily. I know this is the zoo thread, but remind me again why "antis" need to out themselves? I'd be disgusted and never admit to it.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2019
Her profile claims she's cis. Given she already owned up to being bisexual and into children (probably vying for "pedophiles should be denoted as a sexual orientation" opinions) I don't see why she'd bother to lie about being trans.
Anti-contact or anti-offending pedophiles/zoophiles/whatever literally onto denote that to make their 'phillia seem reasonable by comparison to others. Because if they can present the image of a rational, educated, level-headed individual arguing that maybe not all pedophiles are bad because some of them avoid kids or haven't been caught yet, it's easier to get people to agree to play Devil's Advocate for them based on the grounds of "well if kids aren't really being hurt by some pedophiles, maybe we're being too harsh".
It's basically designed to entice people into a "not all X" argument.
- Joined
- May 25, 2015
her profile can say that all it wants, but im not buying it one bit.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2018
Zoophilia and Pedophilia go hand and hand. Mostly, it starts with zoophilia first, and that gets them used to exploiting and harming a creature weaker than them, unable to ask for help or defend themselves. It doesn't take that far of a leap to move on to children. After all, children are weaker, are taught to obey adults, and can be threatened/intimidated into staying silent. Abusing animals just isn't enough after a while for them.
Again, these people prey on DOMESTICATED animals. They wouldn't dare go after a wild one. You might be able to abuse a domestic horse, but I guarantee trying to do the same thing to a wild pony would get you killed.
Also, I don't care if you are non-offending or not. If you tell me you're a zoo/pedophile, you're going to end up with at least a busted nose. No tolerance.
Again, these people prey on DOMESTICATED animals. They wouldn't dare go after a wild one. You might be able to abuse a domestic horse, but I guarantee trying to do the same thing to a wild pony would get you killed.
Also, I don't care if you are non-offending or not. If you tell me you're a zoo/pedophile, you're going to end up with at least a busted nose. No tolerance.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2019
Getting a serial killer vibe with that first paragraph as well. A lot of them start out with animals and move on to people. This might not seem super relevant to the zoophillia/pedophillia connection, but zoosadists are really just one step away from trying this shit on people, and likely the only reason why they prefer animals is because it's more taboo.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2018
I feel like they target animals is because animals in the eyes of the law are considered property. If a farmer ends up with a dead cow because some sicko fucked it, they won't face serious jail time. Pay the farmer the cost of the cow and maybe a few months in jail and fine, and they are out doing it again.
You can ban them from shelters and stores, but there are so many strays on the street to grab up. Unless someone is constantly watching, they are always going to have readily access to more living fuck toys. The sheer ease of it is what I feel appeals to them the most. That, and the lack of serious legal consequences. I've only ever saw police get super involved when there's other humans involved, like kids and sex slaves.
More people just need to shoot zoophiles they catch in the act, especially out on farms. Pigs can make a body dissapear real fast.
- Joined
- May 21, 2018
Oh my fucking God, what part of "The internet never forgets" do they not get?? Swear to babby Jesus, someone's going to realize who one of these animal fuckers are and, next they meet, they're going to say, "Oh hey, Tom, how you've been, HEARD YOU FUCK YOUR DOG."
But after reading back the past month (hint:
Pride Month), I'm honestly not surprised the bar managed to get even lower and have pet fuckers out themselves as pet fuckers and expecting the same level of tolerance/acceptance able-minded humans have for LGBT.
"I'm not raping my dog because his tail is wagging when we make love!"
Me:
Okay.
As someone who works with domesticated animals, let me tell you how goddamn hard it is to interpret an animal's body language:
Real fucking hard.
Sure, a dog's tail wags, but at what speed?
Is its tail raised high? Tucked? Level with the rest of the body?
What about the rest of the dog? Are its ears at attention? Flat? Tilted back?
Is its body low to the ground? Is it bowing or hunched over?
Are its movements slow, precise?
Is it jumping around like a pogo stick?
Are its lips curled?
If its panting, is it drooling as well? What about lip-licking?
Are its eyes bright and alert? Is it giving you the stink eye?
Is it growling? Whining?
What about snorting?
What's the pitch of its bark?
I'm probably forgetting a bunch of other things, and don't get me started on cats and exotics, but these are what you have to keep in mind when dealing with a pet you're unfamiliar with - and even with an animal you are familiar with, there's no guarantee that it won't lunge or try to bite you; its why you have to be alert at all times when handling an animal.
Plus the fact that pets are bred to be our companions - ones that never utter a single word - even if you do the most despicable, painful things to it--
And they justify it because "She didn't try to bite me when I stuck my human penis in her mouth, that means she's fine with it!"
...This, These aren't your everyday mental gymnastics, this's American Ninja-level gymnastics.
Fuck, this has pissed me off, so here's some dark humor to lighten the mood(?):
But after reading back the past month (hint:
Pride Month), I'm honestly not surprised the bar managed to get even lower and have pet fuckers out themselves as pet fuckers and expecting the same level of tolerance/acceptance able-minded humans have for LGBT. "I'm not raping my dog because his tail is wagging when we make love!"
Me:
Okay.
As someone who works with domesticated animals, let me tell you how goddamn hard it is to interpret an animal's body language:
Real fucking hard.
Sure, a dog's tail wags, but at what speed?
Is its tail raised high? Tucked? Level with the rest of the body?
What about the rest of the dog? Are its ears at attention? Flat? Tilted back?
Is its body low to the ground? Is it bowing or hunched over?
Are its movements slow, precise?
Is it jumping around like a pogo stick?
Are its lips curled?
If its panting, is it drooling as well? What about lip-licking?
Are its eyes bright and alert? Is it giving you the stink eye?
Is it growling? Whining?
What about snorting?
What's the pitch of its bark?
I'm probably forgetting a bunch of other things, and don't get me started on cats and exotics, but these are what you have to keep in mind when dealing with a pet you're unfamiliar with - and even with an animal you are familiar with, there's no guarantee that it won't lunge or try to bite you; its why you have to be alert at all times when handling an animal.
Plus the fact that pets are bred to be our companions - ones that never utter a single word - even if you do the most despicable, painful things to it--
And they justify it because "She didn't try to bite me when I stuck my human penis in her mouth, that means she's fine with it!"
...This, These aren't your everyday mental gymnastics, this's American Ninja-level gymnastics.
Fuck, this has pissed me off, so here's some dark humor to lighten the mood(?):