GrapeTang#90uMe5dJAk at 30 May 2006: 01:18
What? By that token, since you just used a logical fallacy, you lost your grounds to criticize me because you just screwed up in the discussion. Jesus, it's not hard to figure out if you think about it. My character has no impact on the truth, unless it's some sort of actual investigation about MY character. Unless the discussion is about my character, bringing my character into it is diverting from the issue, impeding the path to the truth, and if nothing else, a dipshit thing to do.
I don't know what to say to you man. I can't agree with you though. for whatever reason you've decided to mesh the issue of having sex with animals with the issue of eating meat... but maybe I screwed up in reading what you said.
Just so I can get an idea where you're coming from,
You're saying that eating meat is a bad thing to do, and you know I eat meat, but you AREN'T saying I'm a bad person even though I do a bad thing. (???)
You're saying that having sex with animals is a good thing, and that it should be accepted.
You're saying that you want me to tolerate you and people like you.
You're saying you're willing to tolerate me and people like me.
You're saying that because I eat meat, my position and opinion is partially compromised.
You're saying that if I were a Vegan, that my opinion would be more relevant.
Am I off base with any of that, cause that's what I get from your post there.
Also, that anonymous guy that you seem to admire. You know he sees you in the same light as any zoophile right? He basically says that all zoophiles are animals rapists. The "vegan" is against you, so at the very least, consider it in that light. At least one person you recognize as being as credible as you says your wrong.
I am very happy that you are discussing this with me in a calm and polite manner, despite the fact that you feel that I am calling you wrong, etc. I am sorry for expressing myself in clumsy ways that could easily be misinterpreted, I am seriously trying my best, sitting here with a dictionary since English is a foreign language to me.
I'm trying to stay civil, but it's seriously hard. Let's just say I'm not used to having someone who's double clicking his cow look over at me in disgust. You think it's wrong for me to eat meat, and I'm sorry that bothers you, but you seem pretty adamant about that. You don't accept it. You don't think it's okay. It BOTHERS you.
Some people are bothered about you being a zoophile. I think they're well within their rights to express that disgust if they feel like doing so, just as you're within your rights to express your disgust of meat eating. Now, there's a LOT of people who don't like zoophiles, so any zoophile is going to run into a LOT of disgust. Consider it part of the choices made... but don't expect things to change. People are still in the process of accepting homosexuality, in in those cases, it's adult, emancipated humans who are clearly articulating their consent. Your cows will never be able to explain to someone that what you're doing to them is okay. Never. At best, you can demonstrate in front of people, and I promise you that they won't see what you see. They'll see a cow, just sitting there, being jacked by some guy. They won't see consent. They won't see love. For what you want, you'd have to be able to SHOW them that you're right... prove it, if you will, to skeptics.
It's not difficult to convince people already on your side. It's easy to get sympathy from people who already have one foot in the door, or are in the same boat as you. Ordinary people (who do exsist, even in the furry fandom), will maybe accept your opinion on the matter, but not your actions. Even as you choose to sexually engage your cows, some people will choose to intervene, and since they're the ones with that power, they DON'T have to justify themselves to you for doing so. Maybe that's not "fair", but that's sort of too bad. This is the world we live in, and if you want it to change, you have to be willing to do something that's difficult.
You're making this difficult on yourself because you're trying two methods at once. You're trying to seem reasonable (arguing that what you're doing isn't that bad), and you're trying to make us think we're unreasonable (criticizing us for eating meat). You're not going to gain acceptance by doing this. Hell, you're probably going to Lose tolerance for trying to rub our noses in it like that.
Anyway, winding down.
If you want tolerance, then keep a low profile and don't let people find out about what you do. This, as far as I can tell, is what you SAY you want.
If you want acceptence, then you have to be prepared to actually change people's minds. Unsympathetic people. Convincing radicals of your radical ideas brings you no closer to acceptance. Hell, it probably makes it harder, since then you having even MORE to justify. If you want acceptance, you have to justify it. People aren't going to just accept something they don't like because you say so, and skeptical people are going to be hard to convince. Acceptance is, as far as I can tell, what you actually want.
All of this is going to be much more difficult if you aren't willing to look at your own actions and accpet the possibility that you might be wrong. Speaking for myself, when you said you won't change your mind no matter what, half of me just stopped considering what you say seriously and got pissed off instead, because as anyone who's ever been on the shit end of a religious lecture can tell you, it isn't a lot of fun to have some closed minded jackdaw harp on you about what you're doing when they aren't willing to listen.