is watching animal porn ok? page 4 (locked)

135 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by Frogmanex:

The videos don’t have to be bought. They could be downloaded or given as gifts.

Panda Porn given as a gift, I’m assuming that the gift giver is from Philadelphia?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

This isn’t a market. The producers or performers aren’t making the videos to make a profit. They’re making the videos because they’re exhibitionists or because they want to remember the occasion themselves. Sexuality is probably the strongest motivator there is. It will oftentimes be more important than money. Look at how many people post videos of themselves online, free of charge, just for the sake of showing other people.

Youtube removes some videos for a reason. Sites with certain content are being closed down for a reason. The reason performers put on their videos doesn’t matter, it’s what it shows. But since you want it, I’ll address the primary question.

Is watching animal porn okay?

So, let us assume everything else as given. Let us completely forget the morals and consequences of steps in the chain before the step of the actual watching of animal porn. Let’s completely focus on the sole watching of the video. We’re assuming nothing else happens, purely the watching of this video. Taking that as a given, without arguing the wrongness of it all, I can now freely answer the question.

Is watching animal porn okay?

Of course it is. As is playing a game where you are being told assassinating American presidents is a good thing. As is hearing a racist radio program asking you to kill every black person on the planet. You are not doing anything wrong when watching or listening to something that is supposed to be illegal, unless having the content itself is assumed as illegal. It is, however, illegal to act upon those games/radio programs/movies.

But can we honestly assume that every single step before the watching of animal porn has been completed in a proper and legal way? How do you know?

^This is my point. The fact that the person may or may not make money from the video or the fact that the person may or may not be immoral in the video isn’t the question. None of that matters when it comes to you watching the video. The question addresses whether or not it is okay to watch animal porn. My reasoning behind eliminating all other factors is something like this.

When I picture someone asking this question, I picture them asking me from a position where they’re seeking approval or asking permission.

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
No.
Why not?
The performers in the video are doing bad things.
Well when I watch shows about terrorism or rape or murder they’re doing bad things, too. But you still let me watch them. (I mean true-crime/documentary videos, not Law & Order)

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
No.
Why not?
The performers in the video are going to make a profit for doing something bad, and that’s wrong.
The people who make video games like Grand Theft Auto that promote rape and murder and drugs and gang violence make a profit. As do people who make similar movies. Or music. We worship those folk, eh?

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
No.
Why not?
Animals can’t consent.
[Insert Matt’s earlier arguments here.]

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
It’s okay if you don’t act on it.
Why?
Because acting on it would mean either performing an immoral act yourself or desensitising yourself so that it would be easier to perform those immoral acts.

By bringing up money and someone else’s immorality and the ability or inability of animals to consent, you’re not addressing the question. I don’t feel so, anyway. I also just woke up, so forgive any incoherence.

 
Flag Post

“[Insert Matt’s earlier arguments here.]” – I would like to add that I was the first to argue this point :P
Good post too BTW.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by pacaholic:

“[Insert Matt’s earlier arguments here.]” – I would like to add that I was the first to argue this point :P

Does it really matter, seriously? In all honesty, Matt argued the point more clearly than you did.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Kyru:
Originally posted by pacaholic:

“[Insert Matt’s earlier arguments here.]” – I would like to add that I was the first to argue this point :P

Does it really matter, seriously? In all honesty, Matt argued the point more clearly than you did.

lol you sound frustrated… Notice my little face “sticking out tongue” face at the end? It’s not that big of a deal. Of course he argued it more clearly, I just brought it up. Lets not get upset now.

 
Flag Post

If watching it is wrong, I don’t want to be right.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Frogmanex:
Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

This isn’t a market. The producers or performers aren’t making the videos to make a profit. They’re making the videos because they’re exhibitionists or because they want to remember the occasion themselves. Sexuality is probably the strongest motivator there is. It will oftentimes be more important than money. Look at how many people post videos of themselves online, free of charge, just for the sake of showing other people.

Youtube removes some videos for a reason. Sites with certain content are being closed down for a reason. The reason performers put on their videos doesn’t matter, it’s what it shows. But since you want it, I’ll address the primary question.

Is watching animal porn okay?

So, let us assume everything else as given. Let us completely forget the morals and consequences of steps in the chain before the step of the actual watching of animal porn. Let’s completely focus on the sole watching of the video. We’re assuming nothing else happens, purely the watching of this video. Taking that as a given, without arguing the wrongness of it all, I can now freely answer the question.

Is watching animal porn okay?

Of course it is. As is playing a game where you are being told assassinating American presidents is a good thing. As is hearing a racist radio program asking you to kill every black person on the planet. You are not doing anything wrong when watching or listening to something that is supposed to be illegal, unless having the content itself is assumed as illegal. It is, however, illegal to act upon those games/radio programs/movies.

But can we honestly assume that every single step before the watching of animal porn has been completed in a proper and legal way? How do you know?

^This is my point. The fact that the person may or may not make money from the video or the fact that the person may or may not be immoral in the video isn’t the question. None of that matters when it comes to you watching the video. The question addresses whether or not it is okay to watch animal porn. My reasoning behind eliminating all other factors is something like this.

When I picture someone asking this question, I picture them asking me from a position where they’re seeking approval or asking permission.

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
No.
Why not?
The performers in the video are doing bad things.
Well when I watch shows about terrorism or rape or murder they’re doing bad things, too. But you still let me watch them. (I mean true-crime/documentary videos, not Law & Order)

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
No.
Why not?
The performers in the video are going to make a profit for doing something bad, and that’s wrong.
The people who make video games like Grand Theft Auto that promote rape and murder and drugs and gang violence make a profit. As do people who make similar movies. Or music. We worship those folk, eh?

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
No.
Why not?
Animals can’t consent.
[Insert Matt’s earlier arguments here.]

Do you think it’s okay if I watch animal porn?
It’s okay if you don’t act on it.
Why?
Because acting on it would mean either performing an immoral act yourself or desensitising yourself so that it would be easier to perform those immoral acts.

By bringing up money and someone else’s immorality and the ability or inability of animals to consent, you’re not addressing the question. I don’t feel so, anyway. I also just woke up, so forgive any incoherence.

I love when people only say a quote from the stereotype of Conservatism, and so does every other sarcastic person.

 
Flag Post

It mainly depends on what you mean when you say animal sex. If you mean animals doing eachother, then its legal to view but extremely weird. If you mean a person doing an animal, then its against an animals rights and still weird. If you mean it by animal hentai and/or furry, then really its legal and not quite that weird.

 
Flag Post

I love when people only say a quote from the stereotype of Conservatism, and so does every other sarcastic person.

What?

 
Flag Post

that question and answer, somebody who uses their brain but doesn’t support “Animal porn” would go more along the lines of this.

The animals involved are not sentient, they cannot give their permission for the filming, thus there is no consent, without consent it has to be forced or without their knowledge, either way, it is through illegal means and as such, should not be allowed. the same case is with child pornography, they do not understand what they are doing, thus they cannot give their consent.

I seriously sound like an animal rights activist there 0_0

 
Flag Post

Okay, but you’re using the ‘illegal means’ to define its wrongfulness. That doesn’t make it wrong. There are laws in some states that forbid you from placing a chair on your front porch if it faces east. Is that wrong because the law says so? .

And again, you can’t use consent as a determining factor, because, like Matt’s arguments said, they can’t consent to anything. Yet we still hunt, kill, and eat them. We still use their hides and furs. We still milk cows and steal chickens’ eggs without consent. Those are perfectly fine, however…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by pacaholic:

Are pets considered “consenting” if you pet them?
If you say yes, then I would ask why sex is different
If you say no, I would say do you support our ability to pet them?
Then if you say yes, then I would ask why sex is different
Then if you say no, I would say… okay looney-head…

It comes down to arguing animal rights, which comes down to arguing fundamental values, which comes down to theology, which seems that everything comes down to.

 
Flag Post

I don’t think it’s about the animals’ rights at all. I think it’s about the person’s thoughts and choices.

 
Flag Post

So what we have here is thread created by some kid who doesn’t know any better and just wanted to stir up a reaction being perpetuated by intellectuals who are taking the subject too seriously and perverts who actually get off on this stuff.
The original post was “is it like watching human porn, or is it not really a big deal.” I’m sure this well phrased comment is worthy of your great debate.

 
Flag Post

I would post some pics but I fear I might be banned. lol

 
Flag Post

So you’re saying that because the original question wasn’t written professionally or well thought-out we should disregard the potential for debate?

The original post is why I actually view it more as a child asking a parent for guidance, as I stated earlier…

When I picture someone asking this question, I picture them asking me from a position where they’re seeking approval or asking permission.

If you don’t want to participate in the discussion, you don’t have to. =)

 
Flag Post

Even the weirdest sentences trigger the biggest of discussions.

^This is my point. The fact that the person may or may not make money from the video or the fact that the person may or may not be immoral in the video isn’t the question. None of that matters when it comes to you watching the video. The question addresses whether or not it is okay to watch animal porn. My reasoning behind eliminating all other factors is something like this.

So, yeah, it is “okay” to watch animal porn. It is “okay” to play a game that’s telling you to assassinate all American presidents. It is “okay” to listen to a racist radio program. Assuming having the content is not illegal, it is perfectly “okay” to watch/play/listen illegal things. The question is answered. This question at least.

Is that part of the discussion now over? Because I feel I spend a few sentences too much on it. I was discussing the making of it, and I think it makes for a far more interesting discussion than just saying “yes, kid, it’s okay to watch animal porn, because you’re not doing anything illegal”.

 
Flag Post

well

bestiality is illegal in the uk now fyi

 
Flag Post

I wasn’t discussing the legality. I’ve never been discussing the legality. Just the morality. But yeah, that part of the discussion can be over.

If we’re going to discuss the issues with actually participating in the creation of ‘animal porn’, then yes, I do feel that that’s wrong. Again, not because the animal may or may not be able to consent. And not because the law says it’s a felony. But because you’re re-enforcing deviant sexual arousal.

 
Flag Post

Okay, but you’re using the ‘illegal means’ to define its wrongfulness. That doesn’t make it wrong.

Then what does make something wrong?

So what we have here is thread created by some kid who doesn’t know any better and just wanted to stir up a reaction being perpetuated by intellectuals who are taking the subject too seriously and perverts who actually get off on this stuff.

Welcome to Serious discussion, try to keep up now.

I wasn’t discussing the legality. I’ve never been discussing the legality. Just the morality.

Then please explain the difference. I think the two coincide more often then not; after all, is not legality nothing more than a widespread declaration of common morality?

 
Flag Post

If you believe we have some agreement with the state so that we are bound to observe its laws, then doing something illegal can be wrong because it violates some sense of trust between you and the state, and that could certainly be an argument for why some illegal act is wrong to do, but it doesn’t really address whether the act itself is wrong or not or why it is wrong/illegal in the first place; it addresses whether the act is wrong or not when performed by a person in a particular relationship to the state.

I think most people would be able to find some instance of applying that argument “x is wrong because x is illegal” where it is very unsatisfactory. Just apply it to drug use, homosexual marriage, various racist laws from the past, etc., and we can very quickly end any debates on those topics. Or, for example, consider “murder is wrong because murder is illegal”, which seems to fail to capture anything about what murder is. If society magically collapsed and all law disappeared, would murder still be wrong? If so, then there’s some other underlying reason for what makes it wrong.

Laws often reflect some group’s sense of morality, but I don’t think it’s clear at all that legality is identical with morality, nor that it provides a satisfactory explanation of why something is wrong or right.

 
Flag Post

Quite aside from questions of the animals’ ability to give consent, in practice most beastiality porn is apparently made without the free and voluntary consent of the human participants. Supporting the industry indirectly via its releases is likely to support further perperation of unambiguously immoral acts involved in the porn’s creation.

Of course beastiality porn can also be made without any animal involvement, an angle analogous to debating whether loli hentai should be legal.

 
Flag Post

I notice how many people are addressing the illegality of it

Illegal = wrong?

Edit: Ah wait, Frog already made this point.

 
Flag Post

It can’t be that wrong, right? Even the celebs are into it! Nicole Ritchie ‘loves’ her dog!

 
Flag Post

this is one fucked up topic