I read this story on yahoo today...hope it's not someone who comes here
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/loca...stiality20.html

I do not think his wife liked him much


Rus

This post has been edited by wyldfyre67 on Oct 21 2006, 06:53 AM

Personally, I don't know how a wife could call the police on her husband (other then if it was something incredibly serious like homicide etc.), unless she really wasn't happy with him to begin with. I couldn't imagine sending someone I loved, knowingly, to jail... But there's all types in this world. *sigh*

Hope they don't crucify the poor bloke just to "make an example" :(

Eh, sorry furis, but I am guessing that is what will happen. Even if he makes a good case for himself, he will be the first to be tried.... cant set the bar low now can they....

I am curious though, what you guys think would help the guy's case... of course we dont know exactly what is going on, but what would be less frowned upon and potentially help reduce the guys judgement?

I am thinkin, one thing, is a vet that finds the animal physically AND mentally unharmed by the relationship... But what about the "consent" issue? Anything else can you think of?

EXACTLY!!!... And I wonder how this falls under "animal cruelty"?... how could they prove, what he did, was "cruel"?...

To me there is something a bit fishy about this story. Would you run and get your cell phone and take pics if you just caught your hubby? and would he so openly have sex when his wife was around?
My guess is she knew about it all along and happily took pics, something else has gone wrong and she has dobbed him in to the police to get back at him. I could be wrong but it seems very bizarre to think on the spur of the moment 'oh better get the camera out and get proof' :unsure:

After reading the article from the Seattle Times, I thought the same thing that Shylark mentioned. There is a strong suspicion in my mind that something else has gone on between that couple and she had a fit and took the pictures to "fix his booty" (no pun intended).
It still remains, there are those that are going to make "political hay" from this and the man is in serious trouble as it is mentioned in the paper that this is now a class C felony in the state of Washington.
They call it cruelty to animals. I fail to see how having sex is cruel, but that is what they are calling it in Washington State.

I think a vet visit would be sensable, and maybe a behaviorist examination of the dog's mental wellbeing and behavior, but even then, I'm sure they'll go off on some tangeant about how the poor dog's innocence has been raped, stolen, and that's not something that can be repaired, etc.. *rolls eyes*

It's definitely not so much cruelty to animals as it is sacrelige to the public's morals. If you ask me, the animal cruelty thing is just something they came up with so they had an excuse to make it illegal.
I know there are instances where some low-life has actually harmed the animal, but they've pushed animal cruelty beyond that, to encompass any sexual actions towards an animal are harmful (eihter mentally/emotionally or physically, it doesn't matter to the legal system, the person defied "morals")

Even if they could somehow prove that animals can give consent (bring in an animal sexual behavior specialist? lol I don't know, bring up the point that, I'm assuming, no restraints were used and the pitty could've freely turned on the man to defend herself if she hadn't wanted to) I'm sure they would whip out that "Well, the dog is under 18 years of age, so can't legally consent anyways.".

And since all involved are humans, with morals, there's no telling if the vet could find something that wasn't really there, or the behaviorist look to deeply into something, or the wife claim the dog acts completely different now (which wouldn't hold if he's been doing it for awhile?).

Would it even help for the man to say, talk about flagging and all the other signals? Probably not... Though I think it would be smart for him to seem very knowledgable about dogs and behavior... But then the wife would probably just call it cheating too.

This post has been edited by Särx on Oct 21 2006, 06:31 PM

I have never brought up this type of sex with any of our vets. I trust all of them and out of sight out of mind. Any public knowledge of this will come to no good. We are a minority who use the net to communicate. If the general public want to or feel the need to connect the dots we are in deep.
We need to keep to our selves with out indangering our partners or our selves. Axcedents can happen but we can not afford any.
We are a minority and our piece continued envolvment and this forum all rely on us not attracting any attention from the outside.

Think how things have changed
Look how many peoples dogs are neutered why?
There sex lives have been considered unexceptable dirty. Grab your leg ust to be a joke now its an insult.
People hide there breeding horses the neighbors find it discusting.
The old days none of this mattered.
If I cant breed a mare in a riding ring how do you think people react to to a person breeding her.

We need to see the changes and adapt to not cause people to take notice.
Being kind and nonconfrontational and out of sight to our selves is the way to go.
Rus

Thankyou Wild for the edit.
My apologies for the type O
I hope you were the only person to ketch the post as typed.
I type so slow and think so fast pushed send to soon.
People
I would never delebertally be disrespectfull to anyone here.
Thankyou for your past and future support.
Yours
Rus

Hmm, I actually didn't think of how the personal views of the vet/behaviourist may cause him/her to be deceptive or bend the truth.... The dog would have to be checked in a way that wouldn't allow personal prejudices to hamper the examination.

True..... but it is difficult for many people to not bring their personal/religious beliefs into something like this. I mean, even the gay/lesbian thing is still heatedly debated.... and that involves members of the SAME species....

Also, if brought up, I think the guy should admit to cheating... unless he could prove his wife knew about it and accepted it (though he most likely kept it secret)

It almost seems like playing the alcohilism/insanity card would have better chances.... but after you try that, it is difficult to say, "oh, well since you aren't buying the insanity or an alcholic plee, let me tell you why what I was doing is ok....."

So far we have (in order of importance);

- Positive Vet/Behavioural check
- A good/decent arguement that she was consenting
- Lack of restraints
- He has done his research on dogs in general, and seems knowledgeable on their behaviours

Thanks for the response.... anyone have anything else?

I understand what you are saying, but I feel that if we just hide out and do nothing others will get the wrong idea.... taking the extreme examples and trying to define bestiality/zoophilia in the worst light possible. The whole bestiality topic is slowly working its way into society, becoming more and more known... still taboo, but somewhat discussed/debated.

I think one of our better defenses is to simply be informed.... meaning understanding how various types of people may feel and comparing that to our own beliefs. Some things people say are to radical to be considered, but it is still important to try to understand and stay open minded and view boths sides.... regardless if you are for/against it OR plan to publicly express your opinions.

I honestly believe/hope many people would settle for increasing punishments for animal cruelity and staying away from bestiality laws.

This post has been edited by Gryph on Oct 21 2006, 10:50 PM

Good point
yes I think the cruality issue needs to be seprated and staying under a rock will not help us with input. Wire's been dealing with this but where he is it is still leagel. In US we are at a starting disadvantage.
just a thought
R

What happened to the dog? They act like the man sawed off the poor girl's toes or something. From the looks of things the man was just having an affair. Unless - it's not like there was a 'real' offense. Unless there's proof that the bitch was bothered by the owner's actions, or that she was completely raped then the "authorities" shouldn't have any right to arrest him. It gets discouraging to see such human ignorance in action. The charges were definately unfair, yes, but it doesn't look like other zoos are in any position to grab their signs and protest, not now in 2006 anyway. Either way, people who are in control of what is considered legally right or wrong don't know a damn thing about the way animal love works. I doubt such tyrany is going to last over the next few centuries.

Even still though, there's something romantic about such a forbidden love. It definately adds to fire during animalistic sex methinks. In fact, I almost feel lucky to be part of such a small group of individuals who understand and practice zoosexualism...because in 220 years or so, you know suddenly everyone's going to be doing it - In the name of being tolerant or 'open minded'...or maybe not (considering new states across America seem to be fabricating new laws against beast sex + more dogs in general are being nuetered.) Actually, it seems like things might get worse over time realistically. It's not like we have any 'rights' to fight for like the gays 'n lesbians. We just don't like being persecuted. It's pretty easy to release our animal love in private so I can't see many people who'll find a fight worth the risk. I guess we can rise the awareness but we might get as far as pedophilia will ever get in terms of acceptance. I dunno, I can't predict the future, anything can happen.

This post has been edited by David J. Bailey on Oct 22 2006, 01:30 AM