985Report |
at 28 Jun 2006: 12:49
>>983
"If they do have access to others of their own species, why would Svansfall be masturbating them, if he cares so much about their wellbeing? Wouldn't actual *sex* be better?"
I've always said that providing a mate for your animal is the best way to satisfy them. Who better then a member of there own species with genitalia that actually matches there counterpart! Just be sure that at least one of them is surgically sterilized (without removal of the gonads). Plus, if you have kids and they see your animals doing it, they will be taught by example that sex is natural and nothing to be ashamed of (unless expressed inappropriately).
I can, however, think of two and only two cases where manually stimulating an animal would be preferred to providing a mate. In situations were a bitch has been spayed before sexual maturity, sexual drive can still develop according to my observation. Since the genitalia of mutilated puppies stay forever juvenile, they are not compatible with mature genitalia of the opposite sex. Therefore, the only possible way to give them what they want is to manually stimulate them. However, since I don’t believe in spaying bitches anymore (because I consider it immoral to take sex away from animals), this is not a situation I am likely to ever encounter again. Correctly, I still stand by the notion that providing a mate is the best think for any animal.
Unfortunately, this leads in to the other situation where I find it necessary to manually stimulate an animal. Even if a male dog is provided a mate, most bitches (with a few exceptions) do not accept sexual advances from males unless in heat. This means that, even though male dogs are horney 24/7/365, bitches are only horny for about a week to two weeks twice a year. Since all bitches go into heat during approximately the same times, providing harems for male dogs does not help there situation. Thus, male dogs are forced into sexual frustration for 48 to 50 weeks out of the year with no relief in between. To me, this situation seems unfathomably cruel, even though it is the result of humans selectively breeding them for millennia. It is interesting to note that male wolves do not suffer from sexual frustration because they still retain a sexual cycle in perfect sink with wolf bitches. Because male dogs must endure so much frustration, duty to give them relief outweighs any concept of consent in my mind.
I think what Svansfall is doing, by masturbating his animals, is reach a sort of compromise. He gets to pleasure his animals without pleasuring himself in a like fashion. Since he isn’t actually fucking his cows, he isn’t committing bestiality and, thus, escaping any and all moral trappings therein. He’s trying to walk the line, in other words, without actually crossing over it. Whether or not he actually crossed that line is another matter entirely.
I do have one moral question for you, Juber. But first, a little background on artificial insemination.
When vets perform artificial insemination in dogs, they jerkoff the sperm donning dog and inject that sperm into a bitch’s uterus. After insemination, the vet then fingers the bitch because it is thought to maximize fertility.
In cats, the tom’s sperm is harvested under anesthesia so that he will not feel pain from the electrode placed in his rectum. When the power is turned on in pulses, the semen spills out and is collected. Queens, unlike males, are orgasmic overulators. In other words, they must orgasm in order to ovulate. To do this, the vet manually stimulates the queen with an electric tooth brush or glass rod until she gives off an “aftercry”. Usually, queens are restrained because they often flee from such stimulation and may attack the vet.
Aside from the greater moral and ethical implications of artificial insemination, what do you view it’s morality in the context of this thread? I’m genuinely curious of your answer, so please don’t think that this is a setup for a “gotcha” argument.
|