As an animal rights activist I don’t know how to deal with this controversial issue.
Most humans eat meat, meaning they can justify the murder of animals for food. They must also be able to justify the agricultural process: the masturbation of animals so their sperm can be collected for artificial insemination, the forced mating of animals etc. If these activities can be justified by society it is surprising that bestiality is prohibited. The argument may be that animals are required for food, however any vegetarian knows this is not true.
The usual argument against bestiality is that animals cannot give consent, however they cannot consent to the things listed above yet society doesn’t prevent them happening. They cannot consent to being taken for a walk any more than they can consent to being eaten.
Morality is occasionally used as an argument against bestiality, however morality is subjective and has been used to justify the criminalization of homosexuality or sex before marriage.
Finally bestiality is used synonymously with animal abuse or rape. This is inaccurate as not all bestiality is forceful. A dog may mount a human of its own free will, animals can reject human advances by moving away, a human zoophile may make a concerted effort to avoid harming his animal partner etc.
Should people concerned with animal rights be pro or anti bestiality?
That is truly disturbing. Even animals don’t choose to mate with different species. As humans, we should use our abilities to protect nature and protect animals. Especially as animal rights activists, we fight for animal protection, not exploitation. We are fighting to ammend all those agricultural laws that are abhorrent. Farm Sanctuary is a good example of that. To question if you should even consider fighting for pro-bestialty makes a mockery of all animal rights activists!
Wow!..just wow! OK…gag. I’m sorry but I’m just speechless! I agree with what animalmagick said,
Well, there are reasons for it being illegal. Here’s one, animals have their own diseases, germs, etc. By preforming bestiality it is possible to transmit these diseases. I mean, we don’t want that do we? We already have HIV/AIDS, herpes, etc.
I’m not sure but I think the person who posted this question wasn’t advocating bestiality but rather questioning an apparent incongruity with the law- mainly that the reasons given to justify bestiality being illegal could also be said about the agricultural process and the act of killing and eating meat- so why is one OK and the other isn’t? I of course do not support bestiality and think it should be illegal. It is unnatural; animals don’t try to mate with other animals outside their own species and neither should humans.
On a side note, there are no strictly-sexual transmitted zoonotic diseases. Most zoonotic diseases are transmitted through close proximity or contact with an infected animal. If you were to catch something from an animal while having sex with it, it would have more to do with close physical contact or the environment of the animal than it would the actual sex. Anyone who has a pet though is also at risk of acquiring one of these diseases.
Ingesting animal meat or by products is actually far more likely to spread disease than bestiality. Scientists believe that humans likely got AIDS from eating chimpanzee meat for example.
To the contrary: If, for instance, male sheep grew up with goats, they only mate with goats, not with sheep. Female sheep grown up with goats mate with both sheep and goats. (Same vice versa for goats grown up with sheep.)
And what is the point of “protecting” a non-human animal “from sex” with a human s_he lives with? Would you “protect” her_him “from other activities” with that human, too? Where exactly is the difference? Where precisely do you draw the line and why?
“Sex with humans” (from the non-human perspective) includes rubbing, touching, licking, and all sorts of sexual activities that a non-human might initiate her_himself. Plus all non-harming activities, regardless of who initiated them.
You think that sex is harming per se? Think again.
If you think that the reason for non-humans being sexually oriented towards humans is a lack of contact to other members of their own species during their growing up, fight for the banning of single holding. And realize that single holding is the reason for all kinds of activities a non-human might do with a human, not just sex.
Sex per se is not worse than any other activity. Especially it’s not ignominious. Non-humans don’t care about their reputation. We’d be better off if we gave a shit about that, too.
Of course it’s bad (and should be seen as this) to do anything with anyone that s_he doesn’t like (in that moment). But that’s not precisely the topic here. …