A few observations after having been away from this thread for a while—
(I) This just as a random aside. Something else I noticed in Silly Zoo Apologist Girl's book ... she makes a few references to Bluelight, but nowhere does she mention that it is a site entirely devoted to the discussion of illicit drugs and drug culture. She just calls it a “forum,” full stop, where he was an admin. I think generally speaking the nature of the site is something that a journalist would mention. More proof that she got sucked into some kind of cult of personality around Fausty and became an ardent personal defender of hers.
(II) The “bigotz [⇐
lol intentional misspelling like a hiphop album title so edgy] block list” thing is hilarious as is the idea that “naming and shaming” people who are against molesting animals is going to,
IDK, make them look like bad people in the public eye, something like how people have lost their jobs when doxed by left-identitarians for posting “rayciss” content, etc. I don't think anyone's going to lose their job because their boss found out that they think that molesting animals is pretty disgusting (unless maybe you work at Bad Dragon or something.) And I don't think anyone's going to be “shamed” by being on such a list ... only reason I would mind being “named and shamed” as being anti-bestiality is that I wouldn't want to be found anywhere near the subject in the first place (or having a Kiwi Farms account in the first place. But that's another subject altogether.)
(Obiter: The whole concept of a service who's whole purpose is to make lists of people to “block together [solidarity forever!!!!!1111]” on Twitter because >triggering is hilarious in and of its fucking self. On a former Twitter account where I used to post a lot of stuff about HBD & Jewish Question type stuff I definitely made such a list and it had a noticeable impact ... there are, it seems, loads of people who are willing to sheep themselves into a little fold that's supposed to be a deliberate and purposefully-built walled garden (as determined by other people or rather a SJW hive-mind) “safe space” in mean, mean Twitter ... it's sad, more than anything else.)
(III) I'm a guy who has some pretty un-PC ideas about race, sexuality, etc., e.g. I'm not really comfortable with gays flaunting their sex lives, or the redefinition of marriage, or whatever; I'm realistic about various differences between races ... so in a lot of people's minds, I'd qualify as a first-degree “bigot.” Nonetheless, I'm still vicariously offended on the part fags and even troons that he'd compare animal-molesting to being gay ... I can look at another man and know that he's good looking to women or gay men, and sort of understand the fact that there'd be sex appeal there, even if the idea of having relations with another man is viscerally disgusting to me.
The idea of having relations with an animal, however, truly goes beyond the pale ... even the idea of a sexually attractive animal is so beyond the realm of decent and normative human behavior as to make my head spin.
Probably at least once a week I'll be walking down the street and see someone walking a dog and make some comment about “what a good looking dog” or whatever ... but sexually? It's something that would just literally never enter into my mind; whereas by way of contrast it's not that far out to be able to realize “yeah, so and so is a buff, handsome dude, I'm sure he'd be desirable if I swung that way,” even if I don't normally think about that when randomly walking down the street.
(IV) I mean, these people are fucking freaks. Total degenerates. Beyond the pale of humanity. There have been cultures in world history, great cultures even, in which homosexuality wasn't considered to be problematic (at least non-receptive male homosexuality.) There has never been a culture in the world in which animal fucking has been OK. (Which isn't to say it hasn't gone on—there are injunctions against it in the Bible clearly because it was something that happened—but rather to say that, for example, the Greeks and Romans and Chinese, among others, practiced pederasty at least in some circumstances without stigma ... never anywhere has this been the case for bestiality.)
And yet Mahoney, and some of her book reviewers on her website, and apparently a not-entirely-insignificant number of people, apparently somehow find dog-fucking to be (at least) at least the way I'd see fucking a dude—that is, as something that I'd find revolting on a very fundamental level, but somehow in the realm of things that at are at least comprehensible.
The fact that people like Fausty can compare themselves to gays sort of shows the "slippery slope" nature of a naïve progressivism that keeps on “progressing” in accepting more and more stuff, because they see “open-mindedness” as inherently a virtue, without giving any real regard to what they are opening their minds to. This is what I imagined happened to our author.
Spink played this chick perfectly and expertly, as only a psychopath can—he must have picked up on her distress about the euthanasia of the animals, played that card, and then, I'd wager, he played the “judgment” card—the last thing she would want to be is judgmental of other people's sex lives (why are sex issues so important to the left anyway? Hearkens back to the hippie era “if it feels good, do it” I guess, and blah blah blah deep seated Freudian something or other.) Heaven forfend that she should “judge” someone who is just “doing their thing and not hurting anyone” (once he somehow convinced her, an ardent animal-rights person, that molesting animals isn't hurting them.)
From there, easy enough for her to become an apologist for him. The only amazing thing is the degree to which she did, and also the degree to which she adamantly denied that her work was an apologia. Another question that remains in my mind, then, would be to what degree is she just deluding herself, or is she just being defensive, or just trying to sell her book? And will she at some point wake up and realize that she's been played by a sociopath? Or has she now totally accepted animal-molesting as an acceptable “lifestyle” or “orientation” that we dare not judge?