10-03-2022, 06:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-03-2022, 06:12 PM by WinterGreenWolf.)
"Are you going to contribute some content to this thread, or just reply to my every post with some sort of bashing?
You are just displaying your inexperience, lack of knowledge, and inability to verbally joust in any sort of intellectual way.
It is like an immature child interrupting the adults trying to have a conversation."
Now, why don't you let Kharrs speak for himself in response to my posts?
It's funny you change the quotes to 'snip', most likely to maintain a fragile sense of superiority in this case. You also forget we're not 'verbally jousting', this is text. Your earlier nonsense about 'tone' is just that, nonsense. I see a LOT of ego bolstering from you here, a lot of a position of both nihilism AND self-soothing here, which is sad.
I did counter your points, and pointed out some problems. But instead of simply asking me for a definition, which would have been easier and clarified much you decided to go off-rail and call me everything from a Zealot to stupid. This isn't how you get someones' attention to engage with you, nor is it how you prove a point.
On another note: Kharrs is PERFECTLY free to speak for himself, at no point am I saying I'm his mouthpiece. All I'm saying is we share a damn-near identical view on the ZETA Principals which are what he called in to question.
Including the problems with fetishists, random bestials, fence hopping...
I really, REALLY am getting the sense you are just trolling at this point, or are playing dumb to benefit yourself here. Poor choice and poor tactic.
Quote:
On 10/1/2022 at 1:24 AM, Darkmoor said:
It is easily shown that there is a modern history since the Supreme Court ruling overturning the US state sodomy laws, for the most part which included the bestiality laws (ref: Texas vs. Lawrence) in which various forms of anti-bestiality laws have since been passed at the state level, in direct association with zoophilia in the view of the public.
For example:
MO - Hossie appears on Jerry Springer.
ME - Muttnick is attacked by his father and makes a statement before the state senate floor.
FL - Wet Goddess is published.
WA - Mr. Hands is dropped off at a hospital and dies.
TX - Craigslist Advertisements
- The pubic viewpoint in the United States is well documented. Laws will be passed. And enforced when exposed.
- I would expect that there would be more interests in zoophiles "Protecting Their Animal Companions" as wordless victims with no say or care in this human matter over-riding interest in selfish human publicity.
- Any publicity is negative, no matter the message.
- Mass education approach is doomed to failure. Not saying there are not exceptions of individuals that would reconsider their opinion, but these must be approached one at at time.
- Politicians won't be put on a stand by voting against these laws.
- It is not part of the LBGTQ+ thing, nor should it be. This means there isn't a backing from the human rights league.
- Any argument for the fight for "rights" cannot define what rights are being denied. Half the time, those I ask, cannot define what a right is, let alone state the one being denied.
- There is no figurehead worthy of backing by the community that can withstand public scrutiny aka is pristine under that microscope. All zoophiles wouldn't agree to it even if there was.
- And for that matter, there really isn't a "community", the word is used as a convenience to be an inclusive moniker.
Look at modern times where ultra conservative organizations are passing laws attacking groups that theoretically already have anti-discrimination protection. Libraries are being politicized, and books are being banned/burned.
The right place for zoophilia is not in the spotlight. And the right time is certainly not right now
"Education Without Promotion as a first cause for determining what a Zoo Community could and should be" is what we are discussing here. This premise does not presume the existence of a formal Community but recognizes that communities currently exist in various online and irl spaces.
With this in mind, mass education and in your face tactics (showing up to public events, conventions, demonstrations etc.) would be more akin to promotion and would violate this principle.
People who care about their animal lovers should, by definition, educate themselves about everything they can to ensure the safety of themselves and that animal. This should follow naturally for the love and concern for their wellbeing and was what motivated me in my youth to seek out any and all information I could get my hands on at the time to figure shit out.
The point here, is to be able to make this information available to those who are curious and seek it out.
As far as laws go, without sufficient backing from authorities in ethology and psychology, there is no hope of turning the tide. I agree with your examples, they show how the current tone of activism can blow up and have real consequences, including death. The other issue is one of modern society which has built itself on the backs and blood of animals. Animals are objectified and killed at the whim of humanity for every product under the sun. Gel caps, glue, medicines, leather, computers, tires, roads, circuitry... it would be easier to list items that do not rely on animal products. Add to this, that dogs and cats are used up and discarded as "pets" with hundreds of thousands of lives being ended in shelters around the world each year. Society is not ready to elevate animals. This does not mean that we cannot provide a solid ethical foundation, provide support for more studies and fight for more robust privacy laws.
Lastly, I'll add to one of your points. The public in general does not want to think about sex with animals. In general, when forced to do so, they will do the most convenient and easiest thing they can do to get it out of their attention. This means most people, by default will think bestiality to be immoral out of hand and will back anything and every piece of legislation they are forced to when they must look and consider it. There are more subtle and constructive approaches I feel, that can move the community (small c=the most general of terms) in a positive direction.
Quote:
9 minutes ago, Kharrs said:
Nothing whatsoever requires or forces you or anyone else to care about the fate of zoophiles tomorrow. I personally feel though that the state of affairs could be better the risks to ourselves, and our animals could be reduced with careful planning and consideration. Sacrifice and martyrdom are not a necessary action or risk to take to improve the situation.
I would even argue that if we take better care of ourselves here, it would help take better care of our non human companions and partners. Thus enabling us to prevent even more problems and 'harsh punishments' of the law.
Quote:
12 minutes ago, Kharrs said:
I will add here that the vacuum of leadership and ethical standards seems to have led to abusive elements taking hold. Animal exploitation, abuse and pimping seemed to have gotten out of control.
Mhm, and I'd say that the 'pride movement' you and I see a lot of are a good example of promotion with no risk mitigation, misinformation, etc...
Oneof the biggest problems I see too, is that every time a 'level' leader tries to emerge they are shot down in online spaces most of the time. I think this happens for a couple reasons.
- Some folks inherently want the 'taboo' and 'nasty' aspect to continue (unabashed fetishism).
- The ones currently making the money 'in community' are not allowing such a person to exist because it threatens the income they seek from sexual exploitation. Sadly I think to some degree lawmakers, and the public at large are just in their perceptions of us. Twenty-plus years of bad acting is hard to undo.
10-03-2022, 07:16 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-03-2022, 07:17 PM by Bear28.)
Quote:
53 minutes ago, WinterGreenWolf said:
Oneof the biggest problems I see too, is that every time a 'level' leader tries to emerge they are shot down in online spaces most of the time. I think this happens for a couple reasons.
- Some folks inherently want the 'taboo' and 'nasty' aspect to continue (unabashed fetishism).
- The ones currently making the money 'in community' are not allowing such a person to exist because it threatens the income they seek from sexual exploitation. Sadly I think to some degree lawmakers, and the public at large are just in their perceptions of us. Twenty-plus years of bad acting is hard to undo.
You forgot also that when some so called zoo savor or spokesman shows up that some of them are not people that we want to represent us or even want to be assacated wit us.
Sappho being a prim example. Sorry I don't want to be lumped in with a self proclaimed child fucker. She wanted to be come a face, well all she did was make people go, "look all them animal rapist also fuck kids too!"
Quote:
1 hour ago, Bear28 said:
Sappho being a prim example. Sorry I don't want to be lumped in with a self proclaimed child fucker. She wanted to be come a face, well all she did was make people go, "look all them animal rapist also fuck kids too!"
Is this a fallacy of all-inclusion or black-and-white reasoning?
If you don't want to support her, fucking don't. I didn't.
You, as in the old usergroup / usenet days saying 'fuck the newbies and new faces, let them learn the hard way' isn't helping our situation either.
Perhaps a different approach is needed as compared to the 'old guard' ways.
Who said ASB was dead?
I got a cramp in my finger from all the scrolling.
Quote:
1 hour ago, WinterGreenWolf said:
Is this a fallacy of all-inclusion or black-and-white reasoning?
If you don't want to support her, fucking don't. I didn't.
You, as in the old usergroup / usenet days saying 'fuck the newbies and new faces, let them learn the hard way' isn't helping our situation either.
Perhaps a different approach is needed as compared to the 'old guard' ways.
How so? I just pointed out a point that you missed. That not all so called "Savories" or "Spokesman" have the communities best interest in mind. I will also add that many of them (actually the majorly of them) have done more harm then good. Weather you want to believe it or not.
Now on to the fuck the newbies and new faces statement. I for one, along with many others, do what we can to help those who want the help. Their is a reason we are part of the Old Guard. We have been though this more then we care to. You and others can take our advice or not as you wish. We have seen this over and over and over.
There is a reason out of sight out of mind works. People for the most part don't give a shit about what you or anyone else is doing as long as you don't shove what your doing in their faces.
Quote:
4 hours ago, Kharrs said:
This thread only asks us to consider if the Zeta Principles, specifically education without promotion, is a good place to start if we were to conceptualize what a Zoo Community could and should be.
I feel that it is, the "how to FAQs" of old are clearly not the way to go, they promote activity and unsafe practices.
We need more education. The sad part of that is that when it comes to the academic world those who try to study us are laughed at or dismissed as those kinky doctors. If it had not been for the work of Dr. Alfred Kinsey others who would fallow him like Hani Miletski would never have happened. But both faced major backlash over their work. To this day their are many who dismiss Hani for the work that she did for zoos, though you would be hard pressed to find a sexologist better then her. There are even some who say that she herself must be an animal rapist, for only one who would engage in such practices can defend those who are zoos. We know that is a logical felicity but try to point that out and the public is just going to burn you at the stake as well.
The How to FAQ were written for who I would call the fetishist who just wish to engage in bestiality for the trill of it.
Quote:
4 hours ago, Bear28 said:
How so? I just pointed out a point that you missed. That not all so called "Savories" or "Spokesman" have the communities best interest in mind. I will also add that many of them (actually the majorly of them) have done more harm then good. Weather you want to believe it or not.
Neither myself or Kharrs are painting ourselves as some prophet or savior, we're merely trying to encourage people to do the right thing, which we already have ethical principals for, hence this thread. Remaining in a shit position because you aren't being rounded up yet isn't a good state of existence, and status quo isn't a good fit. Just because you're sunsetting doesn't mean we all have to.
Quote:
4 hours ago, Bear28 said:
Now on to the fuck the newbies and new faces statement. I for one, along with many others, do what we can to help those who want the help. Their is a reason we are part of the Old Guard. We have been though this more then we care to. You and others can take our advice or not as you wish. We have seen this over and over and over.
You being 'old guard' doesn't mean you're always right, or that you're doing things right. Look at the absolute shit information in existence in our community. Doesn't this tell you anything? I personally want to compile information, stories (good and bad), events (good and bad) and try to help people NOT have to go step 1 - 10 ad-infinite. It's more helpful if we can take steps 11, 12, 13, 14 and so on. You cannot do this with the tactics the 'old guard' wish to take. The common 'shut up and fuck your dog' doesn't work anymore.
Unless you WANT more Mr. Hands, Fausty, Aluzky, Pepe, Muttnik... Learn from history, don't force people to re-live it.
Quote:
4 hours ago, Bear28 said:
There is a reason out of sight out of mind works. People for the most part don't give a shit about what you or anyone else is doing as long as you don't shove what your doing in their faces.
Does out of sight, out of mine REALLY work though Bear? Direct, serious question. I'd say if you want animals hurt it does, same as if you want people to have to struggle for every little morsel of information, then yes it works. Me personally, I wish I'd had someone LIKE me guiding me when I was discovering and growing as a Zoo I'd have made a lot better choices with whom I associated with and why.
I had a few good ones, but they were rare. Most were rampant fetishists or paranoid-in-the-dark-idiots. I'm also, not is anyone, for people to flaunt their 'Zoo Pride' bullshit everywhere.
You can still act for a collective goal, without painting Zeta symbols and flags everywhere. We can't help the public learn about us, if we can't help US learn about us.
10-04-2022, 03:51 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-04-2022, 04:04 AM by Darkmoor.)
Quote:
9 hours ago, WinterGreenWolf said:
<snip>
shhh, shhh. Quiet your yapping. Here, Let Kharrs and I show you how adults talk.
Thank you, Kharrs, for taking the time to present some clarifications.
Quote:
9 hours ago, Kharrs said:
Nothing whatsoever requires or forces you or anyone else to care about the fate of zoophiles tomorrow. I personally feel though that the state of affairs could be better the risks to ourselves, and our animals could be reduced with careful planning and consideration. Sacrifice and martyrdom are not a necessary action or risk to take to improve the situation.
This thread only asks us to consider if the Zeta Principles, specifically education without promotion, is a good place to start if we were to conceptualize what a Zoo Community could and should be.
Whether or not this is possible is another issue entirely.
</div>
</blockquote>
Yet, I feel that some sort of set of ethics is a must for any improvement in "community" standards. (Community here meaning any zoo group defined by either geographic or interweb locale.)</span>
</div>
</blockquote>
I will add here that the vacuum of leadership</font></span>
</div>
</blockquote>
and ethical standards seems to have led to abusive elements taking hold.</font></span>
</div>
</blockquote>
Animal exploitation, abuse and pimping seemed to have gotten out of control.</font></span>
</div>
</blockquote>
Any journey, no matter how long, begins with just one step. Are the Zeta Principles a good place to start? Is education without promotion a plausible axiom? Are we content with having laws on the books forever that don't distinguish between abusive and loving bestiality (using definition 2)?
<div style="color:#111111;">
bestiality:
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="color:#111111;">
<div>
<div>
NOUN
</div>
</div>
<ol style="border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:0px;border:0px;padding:0px 0px 0px 16px;"><li style="border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:0px;border:0px;padding:0px 0px 4px;">
<div>
<div style="color:#111111;">
savagely cruel or depraved behavior:
</div>
</div>
</li>
<li style="border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:0px;border:0px;padding:0px 0px 4px;">
<div>
<div style="color:#111111;">
sexual intercourse between a person and an animal.
</div>
</div>
</li>
</ol></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I believe that tackling the FAQ/Instruction issues is not the best place to start. Perhaps educational information collecting, and sorting, and determining the views and differences is a needed place.
But the need for that kind of avenue I feel would be better served by going to the scientists, the sexologists, those with alphabet soup behind their name. researchers such as Hani Miletski have done much on zoophilia. There is an apparent split that is being talked around, without definition. Put it to them to find it and determine the difference. Where on the sliding scale of zoo is the "okay"/"less than okay" defining point?
Can a distinction be defined? A refining and/or creation of new and improved terms and definitions be implemented within peer reviewed scientific communities?
This, I feel, would be more productive and less conflictive for 3 reasons.
1) I think zoos in general would feel much better talking to scientists for study reasons, than to other zoos for ethics reasons.
2) An foundation of information starts it's basis in scientific research and study. These are the foundations used by authorities and general society as well. The zoo forums have already been used as research data bases by criminologists for the criminal perspective. It's time to have research looking from our perspective.
3) In the goal to help zoos in long term, it might be better to splinter rather than combine. Scientists love new topics, helping them with a question worth investigating, in the long term, create a separate classification, that has a standard of classification tied to it. Something to use to drive a separation in law between those that only practice bestiality and zoophiles.
|
