Dog sex in a bdsm relationship.

[Pure]

Hi Beany,

Thanks for your post:


Beany said:
HUH??? Pure, this sounds like you're projecting. I never once said that I thought using animals for sex was either objectionable or bad.

I certainly thought you were suggesting that(objectionability), but I appreciate your clearing it up, in case the "anti" group, or BlessedBe herself misread you. I think perhaps you and I and Blessed agree that 'using' the dog or animal in some sensual** or sexual way, is no worse (or better) that 'using' it a guidedog, provided no harm is done to the animal.

**I have enlarged the scope of the 'use', since Blessed seems to indicate that a variety of loving or friendly relationships are included, not merely, strict 'sex', i.e. penetration and/or intercourse. It might be noted that, in the case of BB, 'commanding' some sexual interaction would not necessarily be any form of domination or punishment, in itself, any more than asking a gay male sub to have sex--e.g., orally service-- to another male.

Best regards,
J.

 

[Pure]

Hi Lark Sparrow,

Your reasoned approach is a delight to read, even where we disagree:


Lark Sparrow said at one point:
I wouldn't be involved with a BDSM partner who expected it as a threatened or accepted act, and if anyone took it upon themselves to punish me in this way I would have them prosecuted to the full extent of the law - Dominant or not.

If you are in a SCC relationship, as I stated, and further, have a safe word, then any act youre "forced" to do--e.g., be bound up and 'used' for the mistress' pleasure-- is essentially voluntary, and I believe would be seen so in the law. This is not a Patty Hearst brainwashed and terrified into robbing a bank.

So you might consider: What would you think the Domme might be charged with? Would you yourself be charged?

I find it amusing, that "It's illegal" is seriously offered here as any argument, in the absence of harm. In another thread, the likely illegality of all 'heavy' bdsm sex has been described, and your and others' response is "How antiquated the laws are! We'll be careful, but do as we please (so long as its SSC)" Is there a little 'double think' going on?


Fantasies and theories are great - tolerance has to go both ways, and on a subject like this I think a grounding in what one would do in reality, and how one really feels personally are valid. People are allowed to think dog sex is icky. If you feel a dog is a reasonable sex toy, then have it, but by all means take care of your "toy" and use reasonable safety and concern for "it".

People are "allowed" , in my book, to say that ANY sexual encounter at all is "ICKY"; I've never said otherwise. But if they keep hanging around sexual and BDSM threads and saying "EWWW, ewww, another icky page," I have to wonder.

I don't criticize someone who avoids all sex, and affirms that as a choice FOR THEMSELVES.

==========================
Lark sparrow most recently said,
I enjoyed your points, luvsubbbbb.

One of the things I thought of in regard to this question is that dogs are sometimes trained in harmful ways - such as dog fighting. In this case, many of us would take the perspective that the owner did not have a right to train, encourage or use their dog in this way. Another illegal act.

There's no question a dog could be trained--or allowed to develop--in a harmful way. One dog, a Rottweiler, down our block, killed the other rottweiler, its companion, (having the same owner). This owner may be seriously negligent.

As you suggest, the test should simply be, Is the dog harmed? and any vet can look at the physical results, for instance, of a 'dog fight' (to which an aggressive dog, by the way, may have 'consented'--i.e., he's eager).


Teaching your dog that it is allowed to copulate with humans may lead to a dog that no longer respects, and becomes unruly and challenging within, the pecking order. Just as teaching your dog that trying to kill other dogs is acceptable may also lead to an unpredictable and unsocialized dog - perhaps even leading to their destruction, when they become too much to handle, an accident occurs or they are no longer useful in the ways they have been trained/molded. These dogs don't have much hope of being re-socialized after this training has become second nature.

Every dog has to appreciate its place in the 'order'; i.e., subject to human command and control (and its well being is to be respected, of course). Iow, it's not like a cougar, but more like a domestic cat. I believe a dog can be trained to 'wrestle' in play with its (his or her) owner, AND, at the same time, NOT to engage physically with any little kids. Don't ya think?

On this 'cross species' issue, and 'natural order', you are familiar, aren't you, with the dog behavior of 'humping' a person's leg? Doesn't this suggest that the dog--or some of them-- has no objection to crossing the line you're worried about?

Mine got a bit too inclined to this behavior, with guests, so my partner insisted that he be spayed. Without his 'consent', as it were!! He was not "harmed" seriously, of course, (anesthetic, veterinary surgeon, etc.), and gets along better. But I have mixed feelings about the operation.

Best

 

[Guest]

Blessed Be

Any person who engages in sex with an animal, unless that animal came up and asked them for it, is using it for their own sexual purposes. Just like hunters use their dogs for hunting and the blind use their seeing eye dogs, those who have sex with animals are using those animals for sex.

You do not know me. Don't make judgements on things you don't know. FYI, there have been times when I have not had an orgasm when being sexual with non human animals...and I can assure you, they did! Again, since you know nothing about bestiality or Zoophilia, don't act like you do. I don't wish to go into a big, long debate over it. Lord knows I have enough in the past.

 

[Guest]

BlessedBe, may i respectfully ask a question?

What is the difference between Zoophilia and Bestiality?

Though I've already stated the differences in this thread...

Zoophilia is the love of animals. No more, no less. Bestiality is the act of being sexual with animals. No more, no less. Though they are not the same thing, several Zoophiles do engage in bestiality. Likewise, there are many Zoophiles who do not engage in bestiality. Then there are people called beasties who DO use animals for their own sexual gratification. Those people are not Zoophiles as they do not love animals...they are merely using them.

And, with this said, I won't be back to this thread.

 

[lark sparrow]

Hi Lark Sparrow,

Your reasoned approach is a delight to read, even where we disagree:

I'm glad you are enjoying. I'd probably have left this thread long ago, but it simply feels wrong to me to have it stated in absolutes that this activity is ok and that no one is harmed. So, I keep coming back to give a perspective where people will think about this activity before participating rather than being given carte blanche to go find the first dog without a thought. Yes, I'm smart enough to know most people will think about it first but I'm concerned about the tone this thread is left in. It's a subject I care about - animals and our responsibility to them.

Lark Sparrow said at one point:
I wouldn't be involved with a BDSM partner who expected it as a threatened or accepted act, and if anyone took it upon themselves to punish me in this way I would have them prosecuted to the full extent of the law - Dominant or not. [/B]

If you are in a SCC relationship, as I stated, and further, have a safe word, then any act youre "forced" to do--e.g., be bound up and 'used' for the mistress' pleasure-- is essentially voluntary, and I believe would be seen so in the law. This is not a Patty Hearst brainwashed and terrified into robbing a bank.

Pure, I am in a relationship. This is not the land of theory, this is my reality. my Mistress and I do not play with safe words as you may understand them. We don't use red, yellow, green. Can I say... that clamp has slipped and it's a bad hurt? I don't think I can take anymore of this (whatever it may be)? Please, Mistress, can we take a break? Yes, I can tell her what's going on in plain simple, direct English. Most of the time my requests will be a given, sometimes they are not. That's the nature of our power exchange. Because of this, it's very important that our limits and desires are parallel. If I were to choose to have sex with a dog on my own, She may very well consider that the end of our relationship. Why? Because it is a "hard limit" or unthinkable to us both.

PS This may not work for everyone, and I do not condone it for everyone. SSC and safewords are good things.

So you might consider: What would you think the Domme might be charged with? Would you yourself be charged?

I don't want to get into a legal discussion, but I can assure you that there would be MANY things a person would and could be charged with in this case.

PS "This case" being that a submissive and Dominant agree that having sexual relations with a dog is a hard limit and unthinkable, and then through either the Dominant going temporarily insane, or trying to psychologically punish and harm a bound submissive by forcing them to have sex with a dog... and the submissive subsequently filing charges against the Dominant.

I find it amusing, that "It's illegal" is seriously offered here as any argument, in the absence of harm. In another thread, the likely illegality of all 'heavy' bdsm sex has been described, and your and others' response is "How antiquated the laws are! We'll be careful, but do as we please (so long as its SSC)" Is there a little 'double think' going on?

I've not offered it as an argument, but have stated it as a simple fact. It's true, Pure, it is illegal in many cases.

PS People may want to know that the activity they are considering IS illegal so they can make an informed decision and take proper precautions.

Fantasies and theories are great - tolerance has to go both ways, and on a subject like this I think a grounding in what one would do in reality, and how one really feels personally are valid. People are allowed to think dog sex is icky. If you feel a dog is a reasonable sex toy, then have it, but by all means take care of your "toy" and use reasonable safety and concern for "it". [/B]

People are "allowed" , in my book, to say that ANY sexual encounter at all is "ICKY"; I've never said otherwise. But if they keep hanging around sexual and BDSM threads and saying "EWWW, ewww, another icky page," I have to wonder.

I don't criticize someone who avoids all sex, and affirms that as a choice FOR THEMSELVES.

People have a right to hang out wherever they want and for whatever reason on these boards. People have a right to be interested in some forms of sex, and uninterested, or questioning of other forms of sex. Personally, I don't have a positive interest in human/animal sex, but I have concerns about the practice, so I am here. If this were "Dog sex is great - please only those interested in expressing your joy in this practice!" thread, I would leave it alone. As it is, someone presented questions after reading a story, and wanted to know if this was a real part of BDSM, how people felt about it, and if they engaged it. I attempted to leave the thread after the first couple of pages, but then made a choice to come back because I was uncomfortable with the way arguments were presented as facts.

PS No one has to agree with me, but I would hope they would take a look at the larger picture, and figure it out it for themselves. It MAY not be as simple as that was a neat story, I'm going to go find me a dog and a sub!

PPS I have caught on to your use of lesbianism as an ick activity in example a couple of times. Yes, I am lesbian, and perhaps you are using it to illustrate your point as in how would you feel... but if are you trying to tell me that you personally are offended by my sexual orientation I can handle a few icks, Pure. It's ok

==========================
Lark sparrow most recently said,
I enjoyed your points, luvsubbbbb.

One of the things I thought of in regard to this question is that dogs are sometimes trained in harmful ways - such as dog fighting. In this case, many of us would take the perspective that the owner did not have a right to train, encourage or use their dog in this way. Another illegal act.

There's no question a dog could be trained--or allowed to develop--in a harmful way. One dog, a Rottweiler, down our block, killed the other rottweiler, its companion, (having the same owner). This owner may be seriously negligent.

As you suggest, the test should simply be, Is the dog harmed? and any vet can look at the physical results, for instance, of a 'dog fight' (to which an aggressive dog, by the way, may have 'consented'--i.e., he's eager).

I think this is a crap answer . When exactly is the vet who is going to decide all of this stepping into the picture? After a serious injury, death (as in a viscious dog) even molestation or rape (as in a dog trained to screw people)??

PS My focus is on personal responsibility here.

Teaching your dog that it is allowed to copulate with humans may lead to a dog that no longer respects, and becomes unruly and challenging within, the pecking order. Just as teaching your dog that trying to kill other dogs is acceptable may also lead to an unpredictable and unsocialized dog - perhaps even leading to their destruction, when they become too much to handle, an accident occurs or they are no longer useful in the ways they have been trained/molded. These dogs don't have much hope of being re-socialized after this training has become second nature.

Every dog has to appreciate its place in the 'order'; i.e., subject to human command and control (and its well being is to be respected, of course). Iow, it's not like a cougar, but more like a domestic cat. I believe a dog can be trained to 'wrestle' in play with its (his or her) owner, AND, at the same time, NOT to engage physically with any little kids. Don't ya think?

No Pure, I don't think this can be reasonably assured in many cases at all. Kids get seriously bit by dogs daily - add sex to that, and I think it's dangerous.

PS This may or may not occur. It might be something worth consideration.

On this 'cross species' issue, and 'natural order', you are familiar, aren't you, with the dog behavior of 'humping' a person's leg? Doesn't this suggest that the dog--or some of them-- has no objection to crossing the line you're worried about?

Dogs will hump anything as puppies actually, Pure. One shouldn't feel special because after fido got done drinking out of the toilet, cleaning out the litterbox of cat poop (yummy!) and got tired of humping a stuffed animal and the tennis shoe, that he came over to hump on your leg a bit. I don't think that's a conscious request for one to train the dog to have sex with humans.

Mine got a bit too inclined to this behavior, with guests, so my partner insisted that he be spayed. Without his 'consent', as it were!! He was not "harmed" seriously, of course, (anesthetic, veterinary surgeon, etc.), and gets along better. But I have mixed feelings about the operation.

Again, we strongly disagree. All of my pets are spayed or neutered, because I am aware of the tremendous problem of unwanted pets in shelters all over this country. If my dogs had the capabilities to make a decision about sex and pregnancy, maybe I would consider not having them spayed/neutered, but as it is, it's my decision and I do it for the larger good. Frankly, I think it's fair to say that they have no concept of this entire issue.

PS It's still your own personal choice/decision/responsibilty.

Best

 

[P. B. Walker]

Woof.

 

[Desdemona]

Woof.

Here doggy. Nice doggy.

*scratching PB on his tummy*

 

[MasterKensbeany]

Originally posted by P. B. Walker
Woof.

Hey boy...do you do any tricks???

 

[lovetoread]

Hey boy...do you do any tricks???

If he does, I want pictures.

 

[MasterKensbeany]

Originally posted by lovetoread:

If he does, I want pictures

How about a nice video for Christmas?

 

[lovetoread]

Perfect.

 

[P. B. Walker]

Here doggy. Nice doggy.

*scratching PB on his tummy*

<Puuurrrrrinnnng>

PBW

 

[P. B. Walker]

Hey boy...do you do any tricks???

Mmmm.. I don't know if you'd call it a "trick". All guys know how to do it... LOL. And they lie if they say they don't.

PBW

 

[P. B. Walker]

If he does, I want pictures.

Pics... of me? Ewww... that would be scary.

PBW

 

[lovetoread]

Pics... of me? Ewww... that would be scary.

PBW

Yea right.

 

[lark sparrow]

Woof.

 

[P. B. Walker]

Yea right.

LOL...

I've posted just about all the pics I'm gonna post for the time being.

PBW "We want pics of the ladies... not us ugly guys"

 

[Desdemona]

Pics... of me? Ewww... that would be scary.

PBW

I wasn't frightened.

 

[P. B. Walker]

I wasn't frightened.

Uh oh... lol

PBW

 

[Desdemona]

Hey PB. Do you ever sit up and beg???

 

[P. B. Walker]

Hey PB. Do you ever sit up and beg???

Mmmm... depends on how "close" I am. LMAO. I mean... there's gotta be a desire to beg for something... yanno? LOL

PBW

 

[Desdemona]

Mmmm... depends on how "close" I am. LMAO. I mean... there's gotta be a desire to beg for something... yanno? LOL

PBW

As a matter of fact, I do know.

 

[lark sparrow]

Your enthusiasm "mooooo"ves me.


As an aside: This just in... what do cats talk about in the "locker room"?

 

[P. B. Walker]

Your enthusiasm "mooooo"ves me.


As an aside: This just in... what do cats talk about in the "locker room"?

LOL... great pic



so.. uhm... have you ever sat up and begged, Des? <eg>

PBW

 

[Desdemona]

LOL... great pic



so.. uhm... have you ever sat up and begged, Des? <eg>

PBW

Yanno, I've begged in a couple of different positions.