You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Love and Animals

john27 December 17, 2021 at 20:40 2225 views 5 comments
If beastiality is inherently wrong, what about anthropomorphic animals? I mean, have you seen Jessica Rabbit? Where do we draw the line, and why?

Comments (5)

john27 December 17, 2021 at 20:51 #632323
I just realized that this discussion sounds a lot weirder than I thought. It didn't sound that weird in my head, I promise.
Nils Loc December 19, 2021 at 02:44 #632772
Quoting john27
If beastiality is inherently wrong, what about anthropomorphic animals?


Anthropomorphic features are on an arbitrary continuum. If you put a hat on some slime mold, it's more human eh?

If you dress an animal up to give it anthropomorphic features before you exercise sexual gratification with said animal, it's still bestiality. Veggestiality is far more common. Melons are quite popular.

But given that, if we don't need consent to eat an animal, why would we need consent to eat out an animal? Taboo and probably useless questions from a standpoint of good taste to be sure.

Stylized/cartoony bestiality porn is probably far less stigmatizing with regard to your peers finding out rather than the real act.
john27 December 19, 2021 at 12:50 #632824
Quoting Nils Loc
Anthropomorphic features are on an arbitrary continuum. If you put a hat on some slime mold, it's more human eh?


Exactly. It's all about finding that delicate balance of almost unacceptable, but acceptable.

Quoting Nils Loc
If you dress an animal up to give it anthropomorphic features before you exercise sexual gratification with said animal, it's still bestiality. Veggestiality is far more common. Melons are quite popular.


I find that Pygmalion is a wonderful rendition of our modern dilemma. Did he fall in love with a statue, or a human? If the latter, it comes of parallel consequence that we accept modern humanistic bestiality as "human" with cute, incomprehensibly cute parentheses.
Nils Loc December 19, 2021 at 19:33 #632919
Quoting john27
If the latter, it comes of parallel consequence that we accept modern humanistic bestiality as "human" with cute, incomprehensibly cute parentheses.


Ain't no one gonna accept beastiality except a vanishing and disturbed minority. Getting off to furry/octopus porn doesn't count as beastiality. A human dressed in a costume is a human.
john27 December 19, 2021 at 20:26 #632933