Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.

Topic: Guilt over sexual experimentation involving dog

Skar started this discussion 6.5 years ago #1,611

I'm a male who just turned 24 recently. I'm still a virgin and plan to remain so for the time being, but I do date, am attracted to girls, and masturbate regularly. Overall, I'd like to think I have a largely normal sex drive. I've always had an experimental streak when it comes to sexual matters, and did some questionable things when I was much younger, but I don't feel any guilt over those instances because I understand that I was just a kid.

Recently, though, there have been a few instances where, while masturbating, my family dog will come up and start licking my penis, and I've let him do it. If I'm perfectly honest with myself, I knew he was present and kind of wanted him to. I'm definitely not attracted to animals at all, and don't intend to ever do anything more than that. Rather, I think I was just curious about how it would feel, seeing as I've never received oral sex. Now, though, I find myself feeling very guilty and anxious about it, enough that I don't plan on doing it again. I just think about how people would react if they knew about it, and how I definitely can't use youth as an excuse like I could when I was younger. Essentially, I just feel like a creepy deviant.

Should I be feeling this guilty, or am I overreacting? I'm not doing it again regardless, but I feel like this guilt over it could turn into a lasting problem if I don't address it now.

(Edited 7 hours later.)

Cassandra joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 15 minutes later[^] [v] #0

My vote is: not guilty.
Of what? I'm not sure.
Don't you have a little fear of teeth?
Being female makes this a scary idea (why? I don't know-I wouldn't want to literally be eaten, I guess) but I can easily see young guys (and you're a young guy) trying this.
You probaby have a lot of company.

Molly joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 49 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #0

Cassandra is so awesome!lol

I think you are one of the brave ones to admit it.Do not feel guilt over this.

Also,no need to tell anyone. This site was a great place for you to ask that question. MOST people will project their shame and disgust onto you. They will have a harder time using compassion.

You know "American Pie", with the fucking the apple pie scene? That is what it reminded me of.You are not gross. You were just curious.

Jennifer joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #0

Peanut butter....

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 33 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #0

honey....

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #0

Big dogs are best / for the human, male or famale She says.

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

Skar (OP) replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #0

Thanks for the replies, I'm feeling a bit better about it. I guess as long as nobody in real life knows and I don't allow it to happen again, there's no reason for me to dwell on it.

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 14 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #0

You didn't hurt your dog.

Skar (OP) replied with this 6.5 years ago, 32 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #0

Yeah, I know. He's generally an obessive licker anyway, so I doubt he noticed much difference. :p

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #0

The only problem I could think of was that if you continued, and you say you won't, is you could get kind of hooked on your dog being part of that experience.

WonderfulTherapist joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 8 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I really don't think this is something you have to feel guilty about; whether you are a child or an adult while doing it. It's something I've given a lot of thought actually because of my my sexual experiences with other children and animals when I was a child, some of which were clearly normal, some of which were clearly wrong, and numerous in between.

If you were to involve a child in this, whether or not they were 100% consenting, it would be completely wrong (not implying you're considering this, just showing a contrasting situation which would be wrong). However, animals don't have the same views of society and sexuality as we do. I do not see this as harming an animal at all - it is not as if they will at some point grow up and realize "omg that was a penis I licked". To them, licking your penis is like licking any other part of your body. If it feels good to you, and you are not FORCING your dog into doing it (peanut butter is acceptable; forcing his head there and forcing him to stay while he's pulling away is wrong in my opinion, even if he'll never be "scarred" by this or realize it's a sexual act), I don't see why you should feel any guilt. Obviously, I think you should keep it on the down low and try not to get caught because it certainly is an odder thing to explain to someone that catches you rather than other forms of masturbation. I really do think it's quite common though; based on conversations with friends, it seems most girls who grew up with a family dog have tried this out (and I assume boys, but I've never checked with them).

Personally, I think I did it a few times with my family dog when I was a kid (like 10-13 years old). I'm a woman, by the way. Recently, there's been a few occasions when I'm masturbating and my dog will come right up to me, lick my legs, and sniff around, and I totally spread my legs as much as I can (lol) hoping he'll go for it.. but.. he unfortunately never has lol. And although it's not like I'd be in any way scarring him or harming him by directing his head to the right spot, I'm too embarrassed about it, even if it's just my dog and he doesn't understand that my vagina is a different part of my body to me than my leg, to really push him any harder than that. But if you've got a dog who is happy to lick you where it feels good, go for it!

It is pretty darn annoying though, that if I'm going to the washroom, for example, and don't want him around, he keeps trying to lick me there, yet when I want him to, he seems scared to get too close LOL Maybe one day he'll figure it out.

Btw, the day you do get a BJ, it will be way, way better than your dog licking you ;)

(Edited 23 seconds later.)

Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 days later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #0

Let HIM do it? Gay.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 9 hours later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
You're an idiot.

shh joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I saw something once where the girl spread pate on herself and then whistled the dog to come over - that seemed to work well!

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Lmao. Yes, I've heard many similar stories.

Just don't do it with a cat. Claws are not fun in that area ;)

Mekay joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

good ole bestiality. sexy

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
LMAO

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 56 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

"peanut butter is acceptable"

If someone gets their penis bit off, it's on your head, WT.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Hahaha.
I meant that I don't see it as abusive if you entice him with peanut butter. But if you're forcing him beyond that, then it's too much.
I suppose I should have preceded my comment with "use peanut butter at your own risk"

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 27 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Ok people. We are talking about sex with animals. Are you really saying its ok? I can see letting a guy off the hook for getting a little freaky but come on now.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I think it's good you voice your opinion.

In my opinion, letting an animal lick you is ok. Sure, to us it is a sexual act. Yeah, it's a little freaky, but to a dog, it is not a sexual act, and it will never feel it to be a sexual act. It's the same as licking any other part of your body. I understand not preying on vulnerable beings (animals, children, etc.) but to me it isn't quite the same with an animal and a child - with a child, at some point they will realize it was wrong. With an animal, they will never realize that. It actually doesn't make sense to an animal why you would push them away when they try to like your penis when you wouldn't push them away when they try to lick your hand. A dog doesn't see a differentiation between those two body parts and more importantly, a dog will never see a differentiation between those body parts.

However, I haven't done anything like that since I was a kid, so I relate to everyone that feels it's a little too freaky. I don't think it's abuse, and I don't think anyone that does it should be categorized as abusive, but I personally can't get myself to do it. Just feels a bit too weird.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Why would you want to "get yourself to do it"??? There are plenty of people in the world to have sex with. Also, I think justifying with "it doesn't hurt them" is kinda lame.

(Edited 9 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I'm saying it's not something I can wrap my head around doing myself. That's all. If it happens naturally for other people, like the original poster here, I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

And I would much rather people whore around with their dogs than "plenty of other people in the world".

(Edited 13 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 53 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> And I would much rather people whore around with their dogs than "plenty of other people in the world".

Why???

mr hat joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I am 18 male and I also have done these things a few times when I was 14-15 . Now that I am a bit more mature and sexually active, Everytime i think of this I am repulsed and I have been deeply depressed, chronic anxiety and overridden by ocd by my actions and over the past 2 weeks my mind keeps dwelling on these memories from all those years ago... Because I was younger and didn't know how wrong it was does it make it forgivable? I have NO desire to ever repeat these actions again and have no sexual attraction to animals, I also feel like I need to get it off my chest but I cannot bring myself to tell family or friends as I fear they will never forgive me and hate me. Some research I've done has suggested that at that age it's more of an innocent sexual experimentation. Any advice guys?

(Edited 1 hour later.)

Molly joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I'm pretty sure my first porno I watched was called,Mr hat. It was a penis with a little hat on it, looking for miss V. I could be wrong.
Mr hat, if I could grab you by the shoulders,look at you straight in the eyes and say,"It's OK. Let this go. None of what you did you should feel shame about."
Most of us have done similar things at
the very least. Do not place your self
worth on something like this.
Also there is no reason to apologize to anyone.I would suggest not telling
anyone.Compassion does not come with every
person. And it sounds like that's what
you need.
If I could wish for one thing today,it would be for you to see this is no big deal. Let it go,and enjoy the rest of your
life.

mekay joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

hahahaha "mr. hat looking for Mrs. V" heelarious.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > And I would much rather people whore around with their dogs than "plenty of other people in the world".
>
> Why???

Ummm, there are these things called STIs that are spread around humans, in case you haven't heard. Yes, through oral sex, too. Those aren't spread by having your dog just licking you.

There's also this thing called pregnancy.

And there are things called emotions that arise between humans when they have sex - dogs don't get those kind of emotions from licking any part of your body. These emotions can be good and they can be bad. If they're going to be bad, I'd much rather you have sex with a dog then with a human.

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Thanks guys, the humour actually helps... Half the reason i dwell on these unwanted memories/intrusive thoughts is that i sit at home everyday doing nothing and have to much time to think about these bad things, I am going to keep this to myself but It feels good to get it out of my head even if it be on a forum, thanks for the kind words :)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Mr hat, I'm pretty sure if you just read the past responses on this thread (as well as any of Dr. Robert's answers addressing this issue), you will see it's very common and there is absolutely no reason for someone to feel guilt about this.

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I did read all the responses, just felt I like needed to get it off my chest (made me feel better)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I'm really glad to hear that. I've felt the same way around this forum. There are so many things in life that aren't acceptable to talk about/share publicly and that makes us feel shame about them. But you come here, or you talk to a T about them, and you realize that they're actually very common/natural things to think/feel/do. As soon as I'm able to write it all out on here, all of a sudden it feels a lot less crazy!

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Yay mr hat!!! Sometimes getting it off your chest is what you needed most. Who knew that being 'normal' has so many more twists and turns.

WT,your insight,and compassion makes me read with a huge grin! It's astounding!

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > > And I would much rather people whore around with their dogs than "plenty of other people in the world".
> >
> > Why???
>
> Ummm, there are these things called STIs that are spread around humans, in case you haven't heard. Yes, through oral sex, too. Those aren't spread by having your dog just licking you.
>
> There's also this thing called pregnancy.
>
> And there are things called emotions that arise between humans when they have sex - dogs don't get those kind of emotions from licking any part of your body. These emotions can be good and they can be bad. If they're going to be bad, I'd much rather you have sex with a dog then with a human.

So because diseases exist, people can get pregnant, and sex involves emotion you think people should stop having sex with each other and have sex with animals? Not me...
Babies for dinner anyone?

(Edited 14 seconds later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

lmao jen thats not what she is sayin. haha to stop having sex with people you're funny ladeh.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

That's what she said! That sex with animals is better than "whoring around" with people. Obviously she sees sex with people in general as bad. I don't like sex but I don't think all sex between people is that awful.

(Edited 7 minutes later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

lmao!! WT explain yourself here!

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> So because diseases exist, people can get pregnant, and sex involves emotion you think people should stop having sex with each other and have sex with animals? Not me...
> Babies for dinner anyone?

Jennifer, your response makes a series of illogical assumptions that make me not want to respond to you.

What I am saying is that if someone is craving sexual satisfaction/pleasure, that they are better off letting their dog lick them (who doesn't have any STIs, can't get you pregnant, and doesn't have emotions and therefore could never possibly think "this is wrong"), then to meet up with a random stranger who may have STIs, who may get you pregnant, and who may have emotions (feel hurt by you using them, you feel hurt by them using you, you have memories of trauma, whatever it may be.. we all know emotions come with sex).

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> That's what she said! That sex with animals is better than "whoring around" with people. Obviously she sees sex with people in general as bad. I don't like sex but I don't think all sex between people is that awful.

Again, illogical conclusion.

Saying that letting a dog lick you when you need pleasure is better than "whoring around" does not mean that I think sex with people in general is bad.

If you look at my other posts, you'll see I'm an incredibly sexual person and don't think sex is by any means bad.

However, I do believe that whoring around with the wrong people is bad and if letting your dog lick you one in a while keeps you from doing that, I say go for it!

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I would much rather have sex with a total stranger, and have many times, than get sexual with a dog.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Me too Jen, but I think what the gist of it all is. Is the dude doesn't need to feel bad about it, there are a lot worse sexual acts going on right now. I, personally, can't get down with it. but to each their own I guess

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 16 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

EDIT: You made my point, Mekay.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Me too Jen, but I think what the gist of it all is. Is the dude doesn't need to feel bad about it, there are a lot worse sexual acts going on right now. I, personally, can't get down with it. but to each their own I guess

I can totally understand curiousity and letting someone off the hook who knows he made a mistake but I would never promote beastiality to the extent WT is. Besides, I think it's illegal anyway.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

is it?? illegal? ha that's bananas. I have seen a bestiality clip (it was awful with a horse) and the guy(horse) seemed to be enjoying himself quite a bit.

(Edited 37 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

People have to register as sex offenders for "crimes against nature."

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
You're being absurd, Jennifer. I'm not supporting bestiality. If you want to make the illogical conclusion that I'm supporting bestiality by saying I'd rather this guy let his dog voluntarily lick his penis rather than have him go out and whore around with women who will give him aids (which will ultimately kill him), then go right ahead. You are attributing human emotions/feelings to dogs. Dogs don't get that licking a penis is any different than licking a finger. Don't force your feelings about that onto dogs. I'm done with this thread.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

holy crap I did not know that. lol harsh.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
It's illegal in some states/countries and not others. I can guarantee you no one will ever get charged for letting a dog voluntarily lick their penis. Ever. Laws look at intentions behind acts and the welfare of the animals. The welfare of a dog is in no way being compromised when you let it voluntarily lick your penis. No judge would ever determine that letting a dog lick your penis is illegal. The laws are in place to prevent much more severe bestiality (which I am one 100% against as I've already made clear in this thread) and animal cruelty.

(Edited 41 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> You're being absurd, Jennifer. I'm not supporting bestiality. If you want to make the illogical conclusion that I'm supporting bestiality by saying I'd rather this guy let his dog voluntarily lick his penis rather than have him go out and whore around with women who will give him aids (which will ultimately kill him), then go right ahead. You are attributing human emotions/feelings to dogs. Dogs don't get that licking a penis is any different than licking a finger. Don't force your feelings about that onto dogs. I'm done with this thread.

One, you have no idea what an animal thinks or feels. We can't even fully communicate with animals to be able to know that. Two, having sex with a total stranger does not guarantee a person will get aids so they should not be afraid of it. Three, it is completely unacceptable and to say that there is a way that it can be IS promoting it. I believe that there are lines that you shouldn't cross. If someone crosses a line like that, its done and in the past and they should feel the appropriate guilt and then move on, but we don't move the line to accommodate that person.

(Edited 4 hours later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 16 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Jennifer's exaggerating.

Crime's against nature include homosexual acts, anal sex, bestiality, necrophilia, fellatio, and cunnilingus. I'm pretty sure we can agree all those things are not horrible and that some laws are outdated and that no judge would ever make you register as a sex offender for those "crimes" as Jennifer likes to put them.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

WT, go look on the sex offenders registry.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> One, you have no idea what an animal thinks or feels.
I'm done. I'm not arguing with someone who is implying that there's any way that an animal thinks that liking a penis is wrong. Not a single veterinarian/scientist/doctor will ever tell you that an animal can differentiate between penises and any other part of the human body. And we certainly can tell what animals are feeling by studying their reactions, and their reactions tell us that licking penises is the same to them as licking fingers, so we know that they do not think/feel negatively towards it. Or should we not let dogs lick our fingers any more either because we can't know how they think or feel about that?

> Two, having sex with a total stranger does not guarantee a person will get aids so they should not be afraid of it.
This comment confirmed by belief that you are in some way deranged and I should therefore not waste my time communicating with you.
Do you realize that we would all have aids right now if we listened to what you just said. OF COURSE YOU HAVE TO BE AFRAID OF GETTING AIDS. If you have no fear of getting aids and whore around with everyone you meet, you're bound to eventually get it. I never in any way implied that having sex with a total stranger guarantees a person will get aids (seriously, stop with your illogical conclusions), but there certainly is a possibility and to not prepare for/be afraid of that possibility classifies you as an idiot.
I can't believe there is someone on this forum who just said that you should not be afraid of getting aids because it's not guaranteed. It astounds me that people can be so stupid sometimes.

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 49 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
What about it? Please feel free to send me an example of someone being put on that registry for having let his dog voluntarily lick his penis. Please. I'd love to see it.

I don't even live in your country and I know more about your legal system than you do.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

http://www.inhumane.org/data/Beastiality.htm

That should tell you what you need to know.

And just so you know I was a hooker for about 5 years and still every now and then partake in it and I don't have aids. I have had sex with THOUSANDS of total strangers. It is NOT a guarantee, it is a risk. Why you would fight so hard to make this acceptable and human relations not accepting only leads me to one conclusion...

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

LMAO!!! Maybe we I should send animals to a shrink. Also, having sex w/ strangers is like playing russian roulette. Sorry. Too funny not to respond.

I get what you were saying WT. You were showing what the grey areas are in life,when most people only see in black and white. KUDOS my friend!!! People who have the courage to stand up for the grey areas always will get beaten down a bit for it. I say,this is the only area I want to live in!

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 44 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I asked you to find me an example of someone being found guilty of or put on the sex offender registry list for letting his dog voluntarily lick his penis.

I know enough about the US legal system to be familiar with their outdated laws. I also know the judges there aren't stupid enough to ever enforce the outdated ones. You giving me a copy of an interent page that shows me how inefficient the US legal system is does nothing to prove to me that someone would be put on the sex offender registry for letting his dog voluntarily lick his penis.

Your resources have shown me that engaging in anal sex, cunnilingus, fellatio, and homosexual acts also technically acts that people can be put on the sex offender registry for doing.
Should I therefore stop having anal sex, performing fellatio, receiving cunnilingus and performing homosexual acts?
I assume you are at least smart enough to recognize that beastiality being a reason you can be put on the sex offender registry means nothing to me when all those other things are also reasons you can be put on the sex offender registry right?

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

OMG These are not outdated laws. I will look and find one.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Jennifer, please show me where I ever said that getting aids by having sex with strangers is a guarantee. If you look at my post number 33,786, you can clearly see that I said I do not believe there is a guarantee, but a possibility, and a possibility is enough for someone to have to be careful. Good for you to be proud of yourself for sleeping with thousands of strangers. Stop with the illogical conclusions and assumptions. It makes your arguments so flawed that there isn't even a point in fighting them.

Can you also please tell me where I said that human relations were not acceptable? I think I've been very clear throughout this forum about my feelings about human relations and how much I crave sex and intimacy with other humans. You are the one who said you did not like sex, I never said anything or implied anything remotely similar to that. I was going to ask what your conclusion was, but I just realized I don't care.

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Jennifer, are you telling me that it is right, then, for the US legal system to say that someone should be allowed to be put on the sex offender registry for engaging in homosexual acts, anal sex, cunnilingus, and/or fellatio? I would love to try to see you argue that those are not outdated laws.

The fact that a law is still in place does not mean it is not outdated.

(Edited 13 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist triple-posted this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I get what you were saying WT. You were showing what the grey areas are in life,when most people only see in black and white. KUDOS my friend!!! People who have the courage to stand up for the grey areas always will get beaten down a bit for it. I say,this is the only area I want to live in!

Thanks Molly. I think that if we only wanted to see black and white then every single one of us on this forum would hate ourselves. There's always some gray areas, and we all fit in some gray areas. I really don't mind being beaten down, so it's all good :)

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Is like that every where. Some see white,some see black,we all are mad,and generally are uncomfortable living together...and ourselves. I say the grey is compassion. A way of seeing there is always a NEW way of looking at things.

This dog licking thread is a great example. To say this is bad,illegal,and shameful is telling every kid out there that is looking for answers to their overwhelming guilt over this,that they are being illegal,bad,and should be ashamed. Say's who?

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Here is just one from the Sex Offenders Registry in Cassopolis, Michigan.

Clifford Glen Warble

Address: 17094 Wagner [Show location]
Zip code: 49031
Crime: Engaging In Sexual Activity With A Person 12 To 15 Or Encouraging, Forcing, Or Enticing A Person Under 16 To Engage In Sadomasochistic Abuse, Sexual Bestiality, Prostitution, Or Any Other Act Involving Sexual Activity; engaging In Sexual Activity With A Person 12 To 15 Or Encouraging, Forcing, Or Enticing A Person Under 16 To Engage In Sadomasochistic Abuse, Sexual Bestiality, Prostitution, Or Any Other Act Involving Sexual Activity
Sex: Male
Date of birth: 1983-08-22
Eye color: Hazel
Hair color: Unknown Or Completely Bald
Height: 5'06
Weight: 140
Race: White

http://www.city-data.com/so/so-Cassopolis-Michigan.html

There is no way to know what the exact crime was without getting the full story. We just know he has to register under that. Here are some other things about beastiality though.

http://animalblawg.wordpress.com/2009/08/30/bestiality-and-the-sex-offender-registry/
http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/FloridaLaws.jsp
http://belablack.com/2009/07/29/breaking-news-beastiality-is-on-the-rise-in-south-carolina/
http://sexoffenderresearch.blogspot.com/
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-10-29-tn-beastiality-law_N.htm
http://www.acic.org/Registration/Sex%20Offender%20Manual%205th%20edition%2009.pdf

The law says ANY sexual contact with an animal for the gratification of the person is illegal. If someone is caught, which it's not easy to catch someone doing this because it is usually done out of site of other people for good reason, they will be prosecuted and have to register if convicted.

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 36 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Is like that every where. Some see white,some see black,we all are mad,and generally are uncomfortable living together...and ourselves. I say the grey is compassion. A way of seeing there is always a NEW way of looking at things.
Absolutely. Great way of looking at it!

> This dog licking thread is a great example. To say this is bad,illegal,and shameful is telling every kid out there that is looking for answers to their overwhelming guilt over this,that they are being illegal,bad,and should be ashamed. Say's who?
I agree. I absolutely understand that many/most people don't want to do it, but if you look at the acts from a rational rather than an emotional perspective, there is not a strong argument that it is bad or shameful, and I don't think we should make any kids feel like it is.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

This "kid" is 24 years old. And, I'm sorry but this is not a grey area. It's a law. I wish that prostitution was not illegal but I have still been to jail for it. That is not a grey area either.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Here is just one from the Sex Offenders Registry in Cassopolis, Michigan.
>
> Clifford Glen Warble
>
> Address: 17094 Wagner [Show location]
> Zip code: 49031
> Crime: Engaging In Sexual Activity With A Person 12 To 15 Or Encouraging, Forcing, Or Enticing A Person Under 16 To Engage In Sadomasochistic Abuse, Sexual Bestiality, Prostitution, Or Any Other Act Involving Sexual Activity; engaging In Sexual Activity With A Person 12 To 15 Or Encouraging, Forcing, Or Enticing A Person Under 16 To Engage In Sadomasochistic Abuse, Sexual Bestiality, Prostitution, Or Any Other Act Involving Sexual Activity
> Sex: Male
> Date of birth: 1983-08-22
> Eye color: Hazel
> Hair color: Unknown Or Completely Bald
> Height: 5'06
> Weight: 140
> Race: White
>
> There is no way to know what the exact crime was without getting the full story. We just know he has to register under that. Here are some other things about beastiality though.

Jennifer, are you capable of reading? I hope you posted the wrong entry, otherwise you are much slower than I thought.
Are you not capable of recognizing that that crime had to do with a MINOR? Regardless of the exact crime, everything that is listed there has to do with a minors, which is not at all what we are talking about here.
Of course there are going to be entires about people who engaged in sexual activity with children. I don't think any of us doubt that. What we're talking about here is people being put on the registry for letting a dog voluntarily lick their penis.
I really hope you copy-pasted the wrong entry, for your own sake.


> http://animalblawg.wordpress.com/2009/08/30/bestiality-and-the-sex-offender-registry/
> http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/FloridaLaws.jsp
> http://belablack.com/2009/07/29/breaking-news-beastiality-is-on-the-rise-in-south-carolina/
> http://sexoffenderresearch.blogspot.com/
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-10-29-tn-beastiality-law_N.htm
> http://www.acic.org/Registration/Sex%20Offender%20Manual%205th%20edition%2009.pdf
>
> The law says ANY sexual contact with an animal for the gratification of the person is illegal. If someone is caught, which it's not easy to catch someone doing this because it is usually done out of site of other people for good reason, they will be prosecuted and have to register.

Jennifer, I don't like repeating the same argument on more than one occasion. I have never disagreed with you that there are some states and countries in which beastiality is illegal (I specifically said that it is illegal in some states and countries). My argument was never that I thought beastiality was legal, so I don't understand why you are trying to prove to me that beastiality is illegal.

My argument was that many of these laws are outdated and, more importantly, that these laws do not apply to what we are actually talking about. My argument was not about whether or not beastiality was illegal, but whether or not any judge has ever or would ever find someone guilty of beastiality for letting a dog voluntarily lick his penis. Showing me that it is illegal does not tell me that any judge has ever done that or would ever do that. Find me an example and I'll believe you.

Showing me articles that beastiality is illegal does not help your argument. I am very well aware of that (I'm also well aware that homosexuality, anal sex, fellatio, and cunnilingus are illegal (and punishable by death) in many regions - this doesn't make me think they're wrong). What I'm also aware of is how inefficient and ineffective the US legal system is (along with the vast majority of legal system around the world) and I recognize that a law does not mean someone would ever be punished for a crime that, on paper, seems to disobey that law. Do you understand now?

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

If you look at the previous link I posted that whole law is ONE law. All of that fits into ONE category of the law. Whatever it was he did he has to register under THAT law.
Also, if you look at the other links I posted you will see that they are not so outdated, 2009 was only three years ago.
And homosexuality, cunnilingus, fillatio, etc are not part of those laws.
But it's clear you are unable to be reasonable about this or be able to consider that your position is wrong. For whatever reason this is acceptable to you. Like Mekay said, to each their own...

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> This "kid" is 24 years old. And, I'm sorry but this is not a grey area. It's a law. I wish that prostitution was not illegal but I have still been to jail for it. That is not a grey area either.

You obviously do not understand the purpose of a legal system or the inefficiencies of legal systems. Would you also like to argue that homosexuality, cunnilingus, fellatio, and anal sex are wrong because they are against the law in some regions? Do you think it is wrong, then, for women to own property because it used to be against the law?

I think that this conversation is becoming useless because you lack a clear understanding of what a legal system is and how it works. You fail to see that grey areas cannot be written into laws and therefore think grey areas don't exist.

Judges are allowed to interpret laws in order to allow for grey areas (which is exactly my point - a judge would never find someone guilty of beastiality because they would interpret the law and recognize this as a grey area that the law does not apply to).

If you are simply going to tell me what is legal and illegal, without a clear understanding of what that really means in our society, I think our conversation herei s rapidly becoming useless.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I have worked in law.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> If you look at the previous link I posted that whole law is ONE law. All of that fits into ONE category of the law. Whatever it was he did he has to register under THAT law.
I am starting to highly doubt your ability to read. I have never doubted that beastiality is not against the law, so you are wasting your time trying to prove it.
The entry you posted from the sex offender registry has to do with one law. All of that law has to do with sexual exploitation of minors. Whatever the crime this man was convicted of, it had to do with a minor (whether it was direct sex with a minor or enticing a minor into other types of sexual acts - yes, one of which is bestiality). Whatever sexual act it was he committed (I understand that it was possibly bestiality), it had to do with a minor. We are not arguing here that enticing a minor into sexual acts with animals is ok. We are talking about adults.

> Also, if you look at the other links I posted you will see that they are not so outdated, 2009 was only three years ago.
Homosexuality is aslo illegal in 76 countries. As of 2012. Most of those countries punish homosexuality. with execution. Would you like to argue that those are not outdated?
Maybe you should first look up the definition of outdated.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 17 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I have worked in law.

What is this supposed to mean to me?

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 48 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I think that this conversation is becoming useless because you lack a clear understanding of what a legal system is and how it works. You fail to see that grey areas cannot be written into laws and therefore think grey areas don't exist.
>
> Who are you,and where do you come from? lmao! You are amazingly wise...and you are 20? This world is blessed to have you.

Molly double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 26 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I have no idea how to do quotes correctly. I am ashamed of this.:( :)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 39 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > I have worked in law.
>
> What is this supposed to mean to me?

That I have a decent understanding of how the law works here in the states.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> That I have a decent understanding of how the law works here in the states.
Then why don't you understand how judges and juries apply laws? If you understand how laws work in the states, you would understand that laws are written in black and white, but interpreted to account for intent and meaning behind the action. Therefore, you would recognize that no jury or judge would ever find someone guilty of beastiality for having let his dog voluntarily lick his penis.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > That I have a decent understanding of how the law works here in the states.
> Then why don't you understand how judges and juries apply laws? If you understand how laws work in the states, you would understand that laws are written in black and white, but interpreted to account for intent and meaning behind the action. Therefore, you would recognize that no jury or judge would ever find someone guilty of beastiality for having let his dog voluntarily lick his penis.

They may never do that, and in this case I believe that they would not, but it IS illegal. There IS a line that must not be crossed. It IS there for a reason. It IS NOT outdated. Like I said previously, I can understand curiousity, and if someone crosses a line like that, its done and in the past and they should feel the appropriate guilt and then move on, but we don't move the line to accommodate that person. We don't make it acceptable. We say truthfully that it is wrong and hope they learn not to do it again.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Who are you,and where do you come from? lmao! You are amazingly wise...and you are 20? This world is blessed to have you.

LOL. Thanks Molly. I am 20 years old and I come from Canada and I'll keep the rest of my identity secret from the online world :) But thank you for your respect. And in general, I think going through a lot of pain and hardship through one's life, especially throughout childhood and adolescence, leaves one wiser than most people. I suspect many of you on this board are equally wise. Horrible things happen to us, but good things come from even the most horrible things.

When it comes to the quotes, I THINK where you're going wrong is with the "greater than" symbol. It seems to me as though if you put a ">" symbol at the start of a paragraph, it will turn that paragraph blue to show it is being quoted (the forum does this automatically for you when you hit the "Quote" link). So, when you're quoting someone, skip a line at the end of what they said and start a new paragraph that does not have the ">" symbol before it :)

(Edited 1 minute later.)

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> They may never do that, and in this case I believe that they would not, but it IS illegal. There IS a line that must not be crossed. It IS there for a reason. It IS NOT outdated. Like I said previously, I can understand curiousity, and if someone crosses a line like that, its done and in the past and they should feel the appropriate guilt and then move on, but we don't move the line to accommodate that person. We don't make it acceptable. We say truthfully that it is wrong and hope they learn not to do it again.

Jennifer, I understand your argument, and you have all the right to think that it is wrong to engage in any kind of sexual act with an animal.

I do want to make it clear, though, that I am not trying to move the line to help people in not feeling guilty. I am trying to move the line because my moral judgement tells me the line shouldn't be where it is/where you place it. We are allowed to disagree with where the line should be. That's the whole reason why laws are constantly re-written and re-interpreted time and time again by different judges.

However, your argument that something is wrong because it is against the law is still flawed to me. I accept your belief that sexual acts with animals are wrong, you are entitled to that opinion, but to say it is wrong because it is against the law really confuses me. Does this mean that homosexuality and fellatio are also wrong because they are against the law?

I think that we will continue to disagree based on our different understanding of your legal system. If judges can understand that there are certain lines that can be crossed, I can certainly understand it as well. If you feel that no law should ever be broken (seriously? Homosexuality? Fellatio? Cunnilingus? Anal sex?) than that is your right, but we will continue to disagree.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Awww thanks!

I just can't believe your capacity to show compassion in such an intelligent way. It goes to show that there is no age limit on wisdom. Before you know it,you will be able to internalize your compassion you have on others inward. Nothing about you is black and white.Or anybody for that matter. The hard part is knowing how to 'see' that. Which clearly you grasp.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I believe that any sexual act with an animal is wrong. I believe that what this young man did was wrong. I personally find it disgusting, offensive, and distasteful. Those are my personal feelings about it. However, that has not stopped me from watching the occasional beastiality film and getting a laugh out of it. Personal feeling aside, it is unacceptable in any situation according to society. So much so that he can be prosecuted for it. No matter what anyone feels that is the bottom line. I will just fight this to the very end because I love animals and think it's wrong. It's the use of another living being for selfish sexual satisfaction. Not a mutual desire between two living things.

(Edited 8 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Thanks, Molly.
Compassion definitely comes from pain. When you're in a place where you need compassion, especially when you don't get it, I think that leads to an ability to show compassion better than most people. This is why I always wonder about therapists and their ability to show compassion - I sometimes question their ability to show compassion and really feel it if they have been through the same trials and tribulations as we have. Sure they can read all the books that exist about what trauma is like for a victim, but I feel they will never actually be able to understand it without experiencing it.

Internalizing the compassion you have for others inwards is a lot harder than it seems, I think. We are often able to look at the situations as others and feel their pain and feel compassion and empathy, but I think it can be much harder to do the same for ourselves.

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I wonder if us showing others compassion,we then in a sense are giving us compassion in a way we are more comfortable? Im open to hear what people think about this...

I think you might be under estimating how many people do suffer. Not to the extent as sexual assault,but look how a lot of people are raised? To be completely out of sink with what our common sense/ heart is screaming at us.(your debate on this thread is a great example) But instead we are constantly suppressed by,let use Mekay as an example:Her mom says she's so beautiful,but tells her to hide the fact that she's black. Or Christians who believe their thoughts are 'bad" and they need to ask fro forgiveness,when psychology shows that our thoughts are not a choice . The list goes on and on. Lots/most of us live in constant contradictions that leads to suffering.

Some therapist might ONLY care how a person ticks. But the great ones are the sensetive ones too. I sure hope you have one of those!!!!

(Edited 5 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I believe that any sexual act with an animal is wrong. I believe that what this young man did was wrong. I personally find it disgusting, offensive, and distasteful. Those are my personal feelings about it. However, that has not stopped me from watching the occasional beastiality film and getting a laugh out of it. Personal feeling aside, it is unacceptable in any situation according to society. So much so that he can be prosecuted for it. No matter what anyone feels that is the bottom line. I will just fight this to the very end because I love animals and think it's wrong.

This is the most logical argument you've made in this entire discussion. I have nothing negative to say. You are entitled to your opinion and you are entitled to fight for it.

I do want to comment on watching a beastiality film when you are opposed to the creation of beastiality films. I think it's important to be aware of the affect that you have on the creation of those films if you watch them. By watching beastiality films, you are encouraging their creation (and I say this not to criticize you but rather to bring the issue up in the minds of anyone who reads this post). It may not feel like you are doing so, but you indirectly are. Increased demand leads to increased supply. The more people that watch those films (regardless of their reasons behind watching those films), the more demand is created, and the greater the demand, the greater the supply (therefore, the greater the number of people that engage in beastiality in order to produce these films).

I do think it's interesting that you note you can be so adamantly opposed to something you watch for humour. That might be something you want to give some thought. I could not possibly watch, for the purpose of humouring myself, something that I am adamantly opposed to (such as child porn).

I bring this up not to criticize you but just because it's something I've thought about so much lately and I think it can lead to a very interesting discussion and realization that most people have not yet come to. If every single person on this planet were opposed to beastiality but they all watched beastiality films (for whatever reason - humour or whatever), beastiality would be a rampant concern and beastiality film-making would be a multi-billion dollar industry.

Same goes for child porn - I know people who have watched it for reasons completely separate from being attracted to children, and I thought it was important to make them realize that by watching it, even if they were not watching it for any immoral reasons, they are increasing the demand for it and therefore increasing the supply of it (therefore increasing the creation of child porn/abuse of children). You have to go through numerous steps to get to the conclusion that one person watching one child porn film increasing the sexual abuse of children, but ultimately, it is a valid conclusion to be drawn and I wish people would give it some more thought.

This was a serious issue for me when I (very long story that will likely not make sense to most of you) was considering watching child porn. It disgusts me, I am adamantly opposed to it, and would do anything I could to completely abolish all forms of child porn. However, there was a part of me that felt that watching certain child porn films might, although disgust me, help me come to terms with the abuse I experienced as a child. Ultimately, for the aforementioned reasons, I decided against it. I couldn't stand the idea of watching child porn (even if my intentions were noble) and indirectly supporting an industry I am so adamantly opposed to. This might be something you want to consider when it comes to watching beastiality films.

MeKay joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
OK I understand this point. THIS is what you need to emphasize to me not that it's against the law. I agree with this. I think of animals like children.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I wonder if us showing others compassion,we then in a sense are giving us compassion in a way we are more comfortable? Im open to hear what people think about this...
I think you could be right about this. I'm interested to hear what others think.

> I think you might be under estimating how many people do suffer. Not to the extent as sexual assault,but look how a lot of people are raised? To be completely out of sink with what our common sense/ heart is screaming at us.(your debate on this thread is a great example) But instead we are constantly suppressed by,let use Mekay as an example:Her mom says she's so beautiful,but tells her to hide the fact that she's black. Or Christians who believe their thoughts are 'bad" and they need to ask fro forgiveness,when psychology shows that our thoughts are not a choice . The list goes on and on. Lots/most of us live in constant contradictions that leads to suffering.
I definitely agree that everyone suffers. I think most people in general underestimate how much others suffer. We feel our own pain and we assume it's worse than others' pain because we can't see/feel their pain and so it doesn't seem real to us.
I think this is similar to the way that, most kids growing up, feel they have a dysfunctional family and that only their family is dysfunctional. Every single family has problems. It seems to take a long time for most kids to learn this, though, and they are often ashamed about their own families until they realize that.
So, definitely all families have problems, and all individuals have problems, and all individuals have pain and suffer in their own way. I do, however, think that some of us are dealt with a lot more shit than others and this affects our ability to understand others' pain. And it's definitely not just a matter of how much we're dealt with, but how we deal with it - I know people have had beyond horrible childhoods and found ways to overcome it and no longer suffer from it, while other people have gone through problems that may only seem minor or trivial to us and it causes them severe suffering. Regardless of what someone has faced, what's more important is to see how it's affecting them and how much suffering it causes them rather than an objective determination of whether what they experienced was really bad.

> Some therapist might ONLY care how a person ticks. But the great ones are the sensetive ones too. I sure hope you have one of those!!!!
I can't figure out my therapist. One minute I hate him, the next I love him. One minute I think he cares, the next I think he just wants his money and for me to get out.
He's very hard to read, and doesn't ever show any emotions, and this often makes me feel like he just doesn't care. I realize that it's more about him not wanting to project his own emotions on me (he was shocked when I told him that one of my former T's used to cry during our sessions) because he wants me to explore what I think is important, not what he thinks is important, and he wants me to interpret my feelings and experiences on my own, not based on what he thinks about my feelings and experiences. The fact that I've been able to open up to him so much means that something inside of me feels that he is trusted, and he is sensitive, and he does understand me.
So I do think I have a good one, it's just hard to see while you're in the middle of it all. At times I hate him because he won't give me a hug, or tell me I'm attractive, or tell me anything personal about him. But deep down I know he's a good therapist because of all those things and that's why I've been sticking around with him.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 17 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Hey WT I agree with a lot of your points I just didn't like the name calling. Jen is actually quite smart.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

My point has not changed and my personal feelings should not matter when it comes to discussing this. There was a reason I left them out of it.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I guess I just don't think the law determines whether something is morally corrupt or not. The law used to be that blacks and whites couldn't marry, gays still can't marry, slavery used to be legal. I guess I just don't like the law argument that doesn't determine whether something is morally corrupt to me considering the law is corrupt and it's been shown over and over in history. that's just me though

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Me, that's fine but that was not my argument at all. My argument was that beastiality should not be made to seem acceptable when it is not. Not for anyone or for the sake of anyone's feelings. If someone thinks it is acceptable then all I can do is point out why it is not.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

yea i got that but there was a lot of talk about law, and I didn't feel that part was relevant. But i'm huffy about that b/c I can't legally marry a woman if i want to. slavery used to be legal. I don't have much respect for the law it's pretty much corrupt and fucked if you ask me.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Sorry for the name calling, Jen.

It is incredibly frustrating to say something, though (e.g. I don't think having sex with strangers guarantees that you will get aids, but there is a possibility) and then have someone respond as though they didn't read what you said and say tell you no, having sex with strangers does not guarantee you will get aids. I'm not sure how to interpret that other than "are you not able to read?" I don't know why someone would tell me "no, having sex with strangers does not guarantee you will get aids" right after I voiced my opinion saying that I think having sex with strangers does not guarantee you will get aids. I didn't mean to sound like I was calling you names, Jen, but I was actually quite serious when I said "do you not know how to read?" I wasn't sure how else to interpret some of your responses.

Also, I think it's important to point it out when someone makes a very stupid statement. It doesn't mean they're stupid (I hope I didn't tell you that you were stupid, Jen, I'm not going to waste my time reading all the posts, but I don't think I called you stupid and I apologize if I did), but smart people can act very stupidly, and I don't think I was wrong to point that out.
For Jen to say that you should not be concerned about having sex with strangers because aids is not GUARANTEED, to me, is a very, very stupid comment. I don't understand how someone could interpret that as anything other than stupid. I think it's important to point it out so that other people don't go on to believe that statement, which would have fatal consequences. To me, that seems like the same thing as saying that you should not be concerned with jumping off a bridge because dying isn't guaranteed. Of course it's not guaranteed, but there's a risk, and you should therefore still be careful!
It doesn't mean that she's stupid by any means (sorry for giving that impression), but that it was a stupid comment. I was hoping she'd take the opportunity to re-voice that opinion because I couldn't believe someone who is sane would really believe that (and that is why I said I thought she must be deranged in some way - I still think she must if she believes in that statement), but she didn't choose to change what she said. I'm still not sure how to interpret that. I have never met someone who would say that you should not protect yourself when having sex with strangers because aids is not guaranteed.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 56 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Not to mention my ex's abuser who only spent 2 years in prison for raping her from as early as 6 until 15. fucking bullshit the law doesn't give a shit about people as it pretends. They only want to make money really in my book.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 27 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Me, that's fine but that was not my argument at all. My argument was that beastiality should not be made to seem acceptable when it is not. Not for anyone or for the sake of anyone's feelings.

Jennifer, I think this is where many of us disagree with you. That was your argument completely for many posts. We are all okay with you saying that you think beastiality is wrong. Our issue was that you spent many posts trying to use the law as proof that bestiality is wrong and we don't believe the law proves that.

(Edited 28 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I said there are plenty of people in the world to have sex with if one is horny. You called it whoring around and that it is better to let a dog satisfy you. I think that is wrong. I gave my reasons. I argued the justification you gave for it. End of story.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> If someone thinks it is acceptable then all I can do is point out why it is not.

Yes, but you tried to use the law to point out why it is not, and we disagree with that belief. That's the issue.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I don't really care if you disagree with the law. It is the law. It won't change just because you don't like it.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I said there are plenty of people in the world to have sex with if one is horny. You called it whoring around and that it is better to let a dog satisfy you. I think that is wrong. I gave my reasons. I argued the justification you gave for it. End of story.

Feel free to go back and read our early posts if you don't remember. I didn't say that in every circumstance that every time you have sex with someone it is called whoring around. And I certainly didn't argue that it is always better to let a dog satisfy you. You're making assumptions and that's why I'm tempted to call you names. I don't think smart people need to make illogical assumptions to win arguments. But a lot of people have urges to satisfy and they do whore around without using protection and I argued that I would rather those people let their dogs like their penises, if the dog wanted to and did it voluntarily, then go around and have sex with strangers without being concerned about getting aids, getting pregnant, and ruining your own and other people's emotions.

Can you please clarify what justification of mine you successfully argued against and how you argued against that? If I remember correctly, the only thing you argued successfully was that you believe that letting a dog lick your penis voluntarily is wrong. You didn't disprove any of my arguments.

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 39 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I don't really care if you disagree with the law. It is the law. It won't change just because you don't like it.

Actually, it will. That's the whole point of the Canadian and US legal system. Individuals have the power of changing the law. When I'm on the Supreme Court of Canada 10 years from now, I will change those laws, thank you very much.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

No one ever mentioned any of those things at all in this thread until you brought them up. You are making a HUGE leap in what is being talked about. No one EVER said to go have unprotected sex with anyone. It is completely out of place in this. And has nothing whatsoever to do with beastiality.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Jennifer double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 21 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > I don't really care if you disagree with the law. It is the law. It won't change just because you don't like it.
>
> Actually, it will. That's the whole point of the Canadian and US legal system. Individuals have the power of changing the law. When I'm on the Supreme Court of Canada 10 years from now, I will change those laws, thank you very much.

Then go change it and fuck a dog.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> No one ever mentioned those things at all in this post until you brought them up. You are making a HUGE leap in what is being talked about. No one EVER said to go have unprotected sex with anyone. It is completely out of place in this.

No one ever mentioned WHAT things? Please try to make your posts a little more understanding..
If you're talking about me bringing up the possibility of people getting STIs and getting pregnant, I think thats something that necessary when we're talking about going around and having sex with strangers. Maybe you don't do that, but I'm familiar with too many people who do have unprotected sex with strangers so it was actual very appropriate, and not a very HUGE leap at all from what is being talked about for me to voice my opinion on the matter.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

What does any of that have to do with letting an animal touch anyones genitals in ANY way for the purposes of sexual satisfaction on the persons part?

(Edited 29 seconds later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 38 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Then go change it and fuck a dog.

You're just brilliant. Other than the fact that I stated on numerous occasions that I had no intention of having sexual relations with a dog. I also never stated any support or people "fucking dogs", but rather letting them voluntarily lick you. You're letting your insecurities overcome you and your arguments and it gives off the impression that you're not a very smart person. That is why I am tempted to call you names (only those that I feel are truly reflective of the individual you portray). And this is why I now doubt Mekay's statement that you are a very smart person.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > Then go change it and fuck a dog.
>
> You're just brilliant. Other than the fact that I stated on numerous occasions that I had no intention of having sexual relations with a dog. I also never stated any support or people "fucking dogs", but rather letting them voluntarily lick you. You're letting your insecurities overcome you and your arguments and it gives off the impression that you're not a very smart person. That is why I am tempted to call you names (only those that I feel are truly reflective of the individual you portray). And this is why I now doubt Mekay's statement that you are a very smart person.

You do what you feel you need to. I personally don't have to resort to name calling because I AM confident in my position and KNOW that your argument is completely illogical at best.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> What does any of that have to do with letting an animal touch anyones genitals in ANY way for the purposes of sexual satisfaction on the persons part?

Besides the fact that letting an animal touch one's genitals for sexual satisfaction was the original reason for this post? A virgin came on here looking for reassurance that it was ok for him to let his dog lick him if his dog starte doing it voluntarily. Your reaction was to tell him that there are plenty of strangers to have sex with when you're horny. My reaction was to educate him on the dangers of having sex with strangers and voicing my opinion that it is okay for him to let his dog lick him if his dog initiates it and does it voluntarily.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Ok can I just ask this Jen. Why does the law determine what is morally correct to you? That is my only question. It is a little perplexing considering gays can't marry, and as I mentioned earlier black people being enslaved here under the laws for years. I guess I just don't get that argument. It just sounds really right-ist to me. "Well the law says its ok kill this black person b/c they aren't human under the law I guess its ok." I agree bestiality can be abusive to animals. I just don't get being stuck on the law part.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> You do what you feel you need to. I personally don't have to resort to name calling because I AM confident in my position and KNOW that your argument is completely illogical at best.

Can you please explain to me how any of my arguments have been illogical?

I am not resorting to name calling to win my arguments. I am winning my arguments on their own merit. Actually, I am not resorting to name calling at all by saying you are acting stupidly. If you want to call that name calling, go ahead. The way I see it, I am trying to make it clear to others that the statement is seriously flawed and should not be followed/listened to. There is nothing wrong with saying that a statement is stupid. That doesn't classify as name calling.

You can say that you're not name calling, but is telling someone to "go fuck a dog" any different than name calling? It's the same useless behaviour. At least I have a reason behind the language I use (dissuading people from not worrying about AIDS when having sex with strangers) as opposed to you who simply can't make a coherent argument.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 12 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I never said it was morally wrong. I personally think it is morally wrong but I never once said that. The law just makes it wrong. But I will say that many laws are put in place because of morality. Homosexuality has not been illegal for a very long time. Gay rights activists have seen to it. Look at the laws. They change in response to society. This one has not changes. In fact it has gotten harsher.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 51 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

And none of this needs to get nasty I don't get why it's going there. On fb a girl called a model ugly I said that was a little harsh. and she made this whole argument about it. It's like holy shit if that model is hideous how are normal girls being judged? A very valid point, and she couldn't see that she just wanted to get huffy annoying.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 20 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I am also truly interested in your response, Jen.

You did mention that people cannot change laws because they disagree with them, so why do you believe in these laws if they are not reflective of what people believe in?

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 11 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
But gay marriage is illegal. So do you think it's wrong?

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> But I will say that many laws are put in place because of morality. Homosexuality has not been illegal for a very long time. Gay rights activists have seen to it. Look at the laws. They change in response to society. This one has not changes. In fact it has gotten harsher.

Jen, I don't understand your argument. I'm making an effort here not to criticize you and I would like you to re-word it in a way that we might be able to understand. It appears as though you are saying that laws reflect morality but that homosexuality laws are getting harsher. Can you please clarify that so that I don't have to criticize the perceived flaws I see in that statement?

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > You do what you feel you need to. I personally don't have to resort to name calling because I AM confident in my position and KNOW that your argument is completely illogical at best.
>
> Can you please explain to me how any of my arguments have been illogical?
>
> I am not resorting to name calling to win my arguments. I am winning my arguments on their own merit. Actually, I am not resorting to name calling at all by saying you are acting stupidly. If you want to call that name calling, go ahead. The way I see it, I am trying to make it clear to others that the statement is seriously flawed and should not be followed/listened to. There is nothing wrong with saying that a statement is stupid. That doesn't classify as name calling.
>
> You can say that you're not name calling, but is telling someone to "go fuck a dog" any different than name calling? It's the same useless behaviour. At least I have a reason behind the language I use (dissuading people from not worrying about AIDS when having sex with strangers) as opposed to you who simply can't make a coherent argument.

Because when I made my argument it was about how you were actually giving ways and means for which to attract a dog to entice it to sexually stimulate a person and implying that it was an acceptable practice. When I said peanut butter at the beginning I was making a joke, I do have a sense of humor. You, on the other hand, were being completely serious. In response to my saying that it was not acceptable you started talking about diseases you get from having sex with strangers. That is illogical.
You don't have to attack my character to win an argument if it is a good argument.
I told you to go fuck a dog because you are saying it is acceptable, better than fucking people, and you can change the laws to make it so. Have at.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 second later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

no she was saying bestiality laws are getting harsher, I think.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Sorry, Mekay, I'm not trying to get nasty.
It's hard for me to hear someone say something like people should not worry about having sex with strangers because AIDS is only a risk, not a guarantee, and not get offended/disturbed. People all around the world are dying from AIDS because of a lack of education, and when someone makes a statement like this that will only further the lack of education, I get seriously offended and can't help but question her intelligence/knowledge in the matter.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 19 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> But gay marriage is illegal. So do you think it's wrong?

If you get married to someone of the same sex in a state where it is illegal, then yes, it is wrong. If you get married to someone of the same sex in a state where it is not illegal, then it is not wrong. This also has NOTHING to do with how I may feel about it.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 33 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Ok, are you trying to get at the fact that gay marriage is ok because laws on the matter are becoming more relaxed but bestiality is not ok because laws on the matter are getting harsher?

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 36 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> If you get married to someone of the same sex in a state where it is illegal, then yes, it is wrong.

I think I will just end this discussion right here then.

EDIT: I do have one last question. How can you vote on laws if you believe that the law that is currently in place is what's right? Does this mean that no law should ever change? Gay marriage should always be wrong in the states in which it is illegal and it should always be right in the states in which it's legal?

Also, there are many countries around the world in which people are killed because the law says hat homosexuality is illegal ad punishable by death.
Do you think that it is right, then, for people to be kille for being homosexual?

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I know I understand, but I don't think Jen was saying she supports people not protecting themselves and going out and getting aids. I think that is a bit of a stretch. hell I think you guys both have been stretching ha. regardless. good points on both sides. But I notice with debates people always get mean. Anger is so easily enticed when it becomes to beliefs. It's part of the reason I am afraid to express opinions. Seems like every time I do someone is jumping on my case. So I am probably transferring that on to you guys a bit. ha

Mekay double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
hm I disagree with that. Maybe your wording isn't reflecting the point you're trying to get across. You have to remember I like the ladies so that strikes me as insulting a bit. (I know you are saying you don't feel this way though sort of confusing for me) It's not wrong whether it's illegal or not. Period. people deserve to be happy, and the only reason it's illegal is b/c of people using their beliefs to exert power over others. Now THAT is wrong.

(Edited 34 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > If you get married to someone of the same sex in a state where it is illegal, then yes, it is wrong.
>
> I think I will just end this discussion right here then.
>
> EDIT: I do have one last question. How can you vote on laws if you believe that the law that is currently in place is what's right? Does this mean that no law should ever change? Gay marriage should always be wrong in the states in which it is illegal and it should always be right in the states in which it's legal?
>
> Also, there are many countries around the world in which people are killed because the law says hat homosexuality is illegal ad punishable by death.
> Do you think that it is right, then, for people to be kille for being homosexual?

Again, completely beside the point. A person can use common sense to answer this question. If society feels that a law is unfair or unjust then they can speak to the proper representatives and take it to the right people who will change those laws.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Yeah, I know what you mean about the stretching.

The reason why I pointing out the stupidity that I saw in a statement that said, and I quote: "having sex with a total stranger does not guarantee a person will get aids so they should not be afraid of it" was because I wanted to give her an opportunity to re-phrase it. If you are not afraid of something, you have no reason of protecting yourself against it. I wanted to give her an opportunity of correcting me in my interpretation of her saying that it was oka to not protect yourself against it, but she didn't take me up on that opportunity.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Mekay, no one is keeping that couple bound to that state. They are free to move to a state in which it is not illegal. So to try to force the issue in a place where it is not acceptable is wrong.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

@previous

Yea, but unfortunately the majority of people who vote are baby boomers with outdated, biased, overly right religious beliefs. And it's not the quite simple. I got married in Cali and it was retracted (not my marriage) but law was as we all know prop 8. That's bullshit. I don't give a fuck who voted they weren't right in that. No one should be able to tell anyone who they are allowed to marry (if human). anyway the original post was about bestiality. So I'm gonna stop here, but that thinking is flawed to me a bit Jen with all due respect.

Mekay double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 49 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
It's still illegal federally. Just like in my state you can get a license to smoke weed, but it's still illegal federally so you can still get arrested. I'm getting upset over this and don't understand your thinking on that one. So you guys go back to the bestiality debate.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Again, completely beside the point. A person can use common sense to answer this question. If society feels that a law is unfair or unjust then they can speak to the proper representatives and take it to the right people who will change those laws.

Jen, please, how is this beside the point?

You made it clear in your statement saying: "If you get married to someone of the same sex in a state where it is illegal, then yes, it is wrong. If you get married to someone of the same sex in a state where it is not illegal, then it is not wrong." that you believe that laws dictate whether something is right or wrong.

I gave you an opportunity to realize how nonsensical some laws around the world are to re-assess that view. How is that beside the point?

We are debating here whether laws can determine whether an action is right or wrong. You are telling me yes, laws do determine that. For me to show you an example of a law in which I think the law does not determine that something is right or wrong is not beside the point. You are refusing to answer, it seems, because you can see that those laws are illegal but those actions are not wrong.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> It's still illegal federally. Just like in my state you can get a license to smoke weed, but it's still illegal federally so you can still get arrested. I'm getting upset over this and don't understand your thinking on that one. So you guys go back to the bestiality debate.

Mekay, I am not against same sex marriage. I do sympathise. People are working very hard to get those laws changed. However, I still believe the way I do. The law is the law.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> It's still illegal federally. Just like in my state you can get a license to smoke weed, but it's still illegal federally so you can still get arrested. I'm getting upset over this and don't understand your thinking on that one. So you guys go back to the bestiality debate.

I agree, Mekay. It is hard to debate about something you are passionate about and not get upset!

I think that it is very clear to us that there are some things that are illegal and are very clearly not wrong.

Jen is allowed to disagree with that, but I don't see the point in arguing about it any more.

I am therefore done with this debate as well.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 27 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
The law doesn't make it wrong. That doesn't make sense to say you support it, but if the law says it's illegal it's wrong. It's contradicting. it sounds like a "followers" thinking to me. It doesn't make sense. it dates you to me. (this is not an insult) but I notice a lot of older people thinking this way. Middle aged to older.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Mekay, I am not against same sex marriage. I do sympathise. People are working very hard to get those laws changed. However, I still believe the way I do. The law is the law

Jen, can you explain how you think the law can get changed if everyone believes that what is the law is what's right?

Do you understand why this seems confusing?

If everyone believes that what is currently the law is what's right, then no one will fight to change that law, and slavery would still be legal, women still wouldn't be able to own property, and inter-racial marriage would still be illegal. That is why I struggle to understand how we can say that something is right or wrong simply because it is the law - if we do this, no laws will ever be changed or improved, no?

(Edited 38 seconds later.)

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I agree with the follower thinking statement, Mekay, and I think that's what's aroused so much frustration and anger in me, here.

I want people to think for themselves and the "I'll agree with whatever law you put in front of me" seriously bothers me and insults me considering the goal in my career is to improve the legal system and to change laws that are not what is best for society. To sit here and say I agree with a law (or something is right or wrong because of law) goes against the foundation of the Canadian and US legal systems.

(Edited 42 seconds later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Either you really believe this or the wording is off to where I can't understand what it is you're trying to convey. I'm gonna believe the latter for now, because I like you too much to think you think something so hurtful. because that is hurtful as a woman who likes women, a woman, and as a black woman. Nuff said for me.

(Edited 26 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

There are negative consequences for breaking those laws, are there not?

WT, I'm not going to comment on slavery or women as property, or inter-racial marriage. It has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 57 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
this has nothing to do with Jen what I am about to say. lol just want to clarify. I am out of this debate. but I will say this statement reminded me of the holocaust when people went along with Hitler. Scary. Following thinking. Not good.

(Edited 42 seconds later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> There are negative consequences for breaking those laws, are there not?
>
> WT, I'm not going to comment on slavery or women as property, or inter-racial marriage. It has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

Yes, there are negative consequences for breaking those laws. What is the purpose of that statement/question?

Jen, it has everything to do with what we're talking about. You're open to talking about laws about gay marriage when that has nothing to do with the original topic, but not all these other relevant laws? It seems that every time I bring up a law that proves my point, you jump to say it has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but right now, we're talking about whether laws determine right from wrong. Laws on slavery, women owning property, and inter-racial marriage are all laws that we can study to see whether laws prove what is right or wrong.

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

> Two, having sex with a total stranger does not guarantee a person will get aids so they should not be afraid of it.

If you are suggesting you are 100% safe by using a condom....I just do not know what to say to that.

Not once has WT suggested sex with animals is in the same boat as these situations where these kids are suffering from enough guilt to seek help on here. She is offering them compassion. End of story.

On another note,when someone has STRONG beliefs that are no where near your truth,this is the best time to practice saying,"Thank you.I respect you" in your mind. if possible,throw in a hug. This will keep your heart soft and open to YOU. And that is what it is all about.

Any person reading all this,looking for help on this subject. This is why you must find acceptance in yourself. And not forgiveness from another. You will never get it.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> this has nothing to do with Jen what I am about to say. lol just want to clarify. I am out of this debate. but I will say this statement reminded me of the holocaust when people went along with Hitler. Scary. Following thinking. Not good.

Yes! Follower thinking is scary when you look through our history!

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Well I guess all of those things do matter. Because in order to illuminate how the thinking is flawed the best way to do it is to apply it to other things. If the thinking fails then it is flawed thinking. If a child spills milk and the parent's spank the child (there was a consequence to the action) but was the child wrong? No. in psychology you learn children are naturally clumpsy, and cannot use their motor skills as well as adults do. they can't help it. Same with the laws. Just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong. yes, there are consequences, but it doesn't make the illegal action wrong. It makes the system wrong for it being illegal to begin with.

ok done done. now. lol

Mekay double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 40 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
this is even how science works you apply it to something else, duplicate the experiment on and on. If it fails it's wrong.

(Edited 14 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 25 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

So, based on this argument and everything that has been said you still think beastiality is ok, even though there are laws against it. If that is how you feel about you are entitled to. It doesn't change anything. It certainly doesn't change how I personally feel about it.
Mekay, of course the holocaust was wrong. We are not talking about something as serious as taking human life. But if you want to go there then capital punishment is wrong in some states and not in others. Hopefully this will demonstrate my point better.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 48 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > Two, having sex with a total stranger does not guarantee a person will get aids so they should not be afraid of it.
>
> If you are suggesting you are 100% safe by using a condom....I just do not know what to say to that.
>
> Not once has WT suggested sex with animals is in the same boat as these situations where these kids are suffering from enough guilt to seek help on here. She is offering them compassion. End of story.
>
> On another note,when someone has STRONG beliefs that are no where near your truth,this is the best time to practice saying,"Thank you.I respect you" in your mind. if possible,throw in a hug. This will keep your heart soft and open to YOU. And that is what it is all about.
>
> Any person reading all this,looking for help on this subject. This is why you must find acceptance in yourself. And not forgiveness from another. You will never get it.


Thanks for your support, Molly.

I will take your advice when it comes to just saying "Thank you. I respect you" and leaving it at that. It is hard for me to do when I feel someone is encouraging a view that can ultimately cause harm (such as the view that you should not be worried about contracting aids from strangers). Without someone showing that those views are wrong, they will continue to be believed and followed. I will try my best to show more respect though. Not sure about the hug, but I'll make sure I keep the respect :)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
That last line was superb Molly. Absolutely. that's why we're in therapy right? :)

Mekay double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Not wrong just illegal. Big difference, Jen.

Even though I DO think capital punishment is wrong. But I don't think the law determines that. The law doesn't have a heart, or a soul, or the logic to determine right and wrong. It is writing. People with good morals that are non judgmental have a good grasp on right and wrong to me

(Edited 57 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 55 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Molly, I am all for compassion. However, like I said, there are lines that must not be crossed.

Jennifer double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 29 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Not wrong just illegal. Big difference, Jen.

What is the difference? Illegal is wrong. The law doesn't make the law. People do. They have hearts etc.

(Edited 45 seconds later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 35 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

The holocaust didn't have to do with the debate. Read my other points that were actually relevant to this. The holocaust was a seperate thing and I stated that. It was in regards to following thinking and that is all.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 12 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> So, based on this argument and everything that has been said you still think beastiality is ok, even though there are laws against it. If that is how you feel about you are entitled to. It doesn't change anything. It certainly doesn't change how I personally feel about it.
I never said I think bestiality is ok. Bestiality encompasses a great deal of actions that I do think are wrong and I'm not ok with. I do, however, maintain my original position, that I think letting your dog lick your penis if he does so voluntarily is ok.

> Mekay, of course the holocaust was wrong. We are not talking about something as serious as taking human life. But if you want to go there then capital punishment is wrong in some states and not in others. Hopefully this will demonstrate my point better.
I'm not sure what you mean about capital punishment being wrong in some states and not in others. Does this mean, continuing with your previous argument, that you think that capital punishment is right in the states in which it is legal and wrong in the states in which it's illegal? I'm not sue how this demonstrates your point.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

letting a dog like your penis is beastiality

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Yes! Absolutely. Maybe that's why so many of our therapists are so reluctant to give us the acceptance (even when we directly ask for it!) because they want us to find it ourselves.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 11 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

It is contradicting Jen I must say. I'm at a loss.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 24 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

> I'm not sure what you mean about capital punishment being wrong in some states and not in others. Does this mean, continuing with your previous argument, that you think that capital punishment is right in the states in which it is legal and wrong in the states in which it's illegal? I'm not sue how this demonstrates your point.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Also, I am separating my personal feelings from the equation which have no place in the discussion.

(Edited 44 seconds later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 56 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> letting a dog like your penis is beastiality

Yes, but bestiality encompasses many other actions that I'm not ok with.

I never said bestiality was right or wrong. I said letting a dog voluntarily lick your penis (yes, this is classified as bestiality) is ok in my opinion. And I said that other actions that would be classified as bestiality are wrong in my opinion. Not sure where the issue is.

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> What is the difference? Illegal is wrong. The law doesn't make the law. People do. They have hearts etc.

Again, as I said about two hour ago, this is where most of us disagree with you. Illegal does not = wrong to us. People make the law, but every single person has different moral judgments and we are therefore entitled to think that a law that someone else made is wrong because we don't have the same moral judgments as the people who wrote it.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 19 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Ah i want to stop but can't! lol That's a contradiction then. Something cannot be right and wrong at the same time when it comes to human rights. Regardless of what the law says. I get your point with bestiality but it doesn't test well when you duplicate it in another scenario. it is flawed thinking. Bestiality is wrong b/c it's wrong NOT because of the law. homosexuality, anal sex, gay marriage, none of this wrong just because the law says so. This is very black and white thinking Jen. Our morals are not determined by law makers. But by our own god given common sense and morals. which sometimes our government COMPLETELY lacks.

(Edited 33 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I think it is wrong. The law says it is wrong. Society says it is wrong. With all these saying it's wrong, why would you try to make it acceptable if not for the sake of someone else's feelings or because you want to perform this action yourself?

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Ah i want to stop but can't! lol That's a contradiction then. Something cannot be right and wrong at the same time when it comes to human rights. Regardless of what the law says. I get your point with bestiality but it doesn't test when you duplicate it in another scenario. it is flawed thinking. Bestiality is wrong b/c it's wrong NOT because of the law. homosexuality, anal sex, gay marriage, none of this wrong just because the law says so. This is very black and white thinking Jen. Our morals are not determined by law makers. But by our own god given common sense and morals. which sometimes our government COMPLETELY lacks.

I agree with you 100%. Especially about the fact that I want to stop but can't!!!

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 25 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > What is the difference? Illegal is wrong. The law doesn't make the law. People do. They have hearts etc.
>
> Again, as I said about two hour ago, this is where most of us disagree with you. Illegal does not = wrong to us. People make the law, but every single person has different moral judgments and we are therefore entitled to think that a law that someone else made is wrong because we don't have the same moral judgments as the people who wrote it.

That won't keep you from facing the consequences when you break that law.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 9 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

All governments all law makers are corrupt in some way. We cannot blindly follow them we have to follow our own rules, based on good judgement, morals, and compassion.

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 7 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)


> I will take your advice when it comes to just saying "Thank you. I respect you" and leaving it at that. It is hard for me to do when I feel someone is encouraging a view that can ultimately cause harm (such as the view that you should not be worried about contracting aids from strangers). Without someone showing that those views are wrong, they will continue to be believed and followed. I will try my best to show more respect though. Not sure about the hug, but I'll make sure I keep the respect :)

This is what Dr Robert wrote. Anyone reading all this will pick out their truth. We have no control over that. Hope this helps,like it helped me.

Wisdom and foolishness abound everywhere at all times, like the various radio stations on the dial. When one wants foolishness, that is what is tuned into and heard, and when one wants wisdom, that is what is tuned into and heard. I know it has been that way for me.-Robert Saltzmen

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 26 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I think it is wrong. The law says it is wrong. Society says it is wrong. With all these saying it's wrong, why would you try to make it acceptable if not for the sake of someone else's feelings or because you want to perform this action yourself?

Because I don't think it's wrong. How's that?

I don't see what's wrong with me trying to make something acceptable when my moral judgment tells me its acceptable. Why do you have to question further motives?

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> That won't keep you from facing the consequences when you break that law.

I don't understand how this is relevant. None of us argue that there are consequences to breaking laws. We simply say that we don't think laws should guide our moral judgment.

Yes, if we choose to follow our moral judgment, then we will be breaking the law, and we will face the consequences. Thanks for clarifying that for us...

(Edited 35 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 45 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > I think it is wrong. The law says it is wrong. Society says it is wrong. With all these saying it's wrong, why would you try to make it acceptable if not for the sake of someone else's feelings or because you want to perform this action yourself?
>
> Because I don't think it's wrong. How's that?
>
> I don't see what's wrong with me trying to make something acceptable when my moral judgment tells me its acceptable. Why do you have to question further motives?

I find it necessary when you are making something wrong seem acceptable.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I find it necessary when you are making something wrong seem acceptable.

Your argument doesn't make sense.

You were arguing that I have ulterior motives for wanting something to be considered acceptable because my moral judgment tells me it is acceptable.

I understand you not wanting something you THINK is wrong to be considered acceptable, so you want to disagree with me. That is fine. But how is questioning ulterior motives going to help you accomplish that?

I thought we both agreed that we have our own paths to moral judgment and that we are free to disagree with each other's moral judgements. Now, you are back to trying to question my moral judgments. How does this help anything?

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 52 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I just want to say this is my last post. I've spent too much time here and don't care to spend any more time here.

On this specific thread, that is :)

(Edited 15 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Beastiality is in no way considered acceptable by myself and most of society. To try to make it sound like it is is in my opinion the same as saying it is ok to fuck a corpse because they don't know better. Or that it is ok to fuck an infant because they don't know better. In ANY case it is a PURELY selfish act. Therefor, in my OWN personal opinion, anyone who promotes ANY of these acts is a very SICK and TWISTED individual and needs professional help.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 7 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I hope you go back and read everything I said, Jen. I have some good points, and it seems you didn't see them or focused on the wrong things. You can feel how you wanna feel, but of course I'm a little hurt if you truly believe that way. Because it justifies a lot of oppression over centuries.

Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

As I see it on this site sex with your dog,
horse, donkey, flipper, a fence post, a car.
Sex with a group of people.
Sex between two women.
Sex between two men.
Sex between a man and a woman.
Sister wives sex with one man.
Sex of any kind sex goes as long
it is not sex with your therapist.
That is the big crime?
That is where you draw the line?
odd thinking I'd say.
Since most of you would love to fuck your therapist.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I agree bestiality is wrong. If you are using a moral argument it makes sense. If you are using a law argument. it doesn't This is a debate about morality not law. Morality and law just don't mix b/c the law/government/politics isn't always moral. I mean look at the world period. how we outsource and pay pennies to children in sweat shops. Our governments are looking out for numba one. Not us. We have to be the ones to decide whats right and wrong not them. That's how democracy works

(Edited 45 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 39 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I hope you go back and read everything I said, Jen. I have some good points, and it seems you didn't see them or focused on the wrong things. You can feel how you wanna feel, but of course I'm a little hurt if you truly believe that way. Because it justifies a lot of oppression over centuries.

The government as only as oppressive as people allow that government to be. What are you actively doing to get the laws changed? If you are doing nothing then there is no reason to fault the law for upholding itself.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

You know I am. I am an active participant of protests, occupy, and educating the public. That is all we can do. We don't have as much power as you think Jen. that's foolish. It is EXTREMELY hard to rise above any government. In fact it took hundreds of years to overturn slavery and women's oppression. Also, as i stated before there are a lot of baby boomers who vote. As of right now there are more of them than us. And they tend to be overly religious right winged types as I said before dude.

Mekay double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

and even though women have more rights they STILL get paid less than men. The voting system is corrupted. the entire government is corrupted. it's silly people still actually believe we can control our government. we can't. hello it is now a law they can arrest us when they want, and keep us for as long as they want without a lawyer or trial. Does that sound right to you? it's a law though.

Mekay triple-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

http://nyulocal.com/national/2011/12/09/the-military-can-now-arrest-citizens-without-trial-oh-we-call-that-tuesday/

Mekay quadruple-posted this 6.5 years ago, 56 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

and guess what? 99 % of america hasn't even heard of it still. Why? Because we don't have power over our governments as we think. They do whatever the fuck they want discreetly while we eat fritos and watch netflix.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 22 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> You know I am. I am an active participant of protests, occupy, and educating the public. That is all we can do. We don't have as much power as you think Jen. that's foolish. It is EXTREMELY hard to rise above any government. In fact it took hundreds of years to overturn slavery and women's oppression. Also, as i stated before there are a lot of baby boomers who vote. As of right now there are more of them than us. And they tend to be overly religious right winged types as I said before dude.

Look at the changes that have taken place just in the last 10 years when it comes to homosexuality. Same sex marriage IS acceptable in some states. They got rid of the don't ask/don't tell in the military. Those are HUGE steps. The conservative right wing baby boomers, etc, don't have as much power as YOU think.

Ann N joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Get that man out of the Whitehouse

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> and even though women have more rights they STILL get paid less than men. The voting system is corrupted. the entire government is corrupted. it's silly people still actually believe we can control our government. we can't. hello it is now a law they can arrest us when they want, and keep us for as long as they want without a lawyer or trial. Does that sound right to you? it's a law though.

I thought that was always the case and only when under martial law.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
They do whatever they want to placate us. small changes. but big changes we don't have control over dude. i guarantee if they knew this law was passing through congress hell would have been raised. They did it right underneath our noses. These people have no right to determine morals. they give us crumbs!! Gay marriage should be legal. They are giving us crumbs by saying oh you can marry in this state legally but not federally. it isn't even recognized federally dude. Therefore... it's still illegal. they haven't given us shit. that's crap. Sorry I'm getting frustrated ,because I actually do know what I'm talking about. I am an active protestor dude. Governments/law= far from having any real moral ground on right and wrong. All they care about is money and control.

Ann N replied with this 6.5 years ago, 31 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> http://nyulocal.com/national/2011/12/09/the-military-can-now-arrest-citizens-without-trial-oh-we-call-that-tues

If you do not believe this you are a fool.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 45 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Nope wrong there. You gotta do your research dude. this was just passed two months ago. And it applies to ALL US citizens not just people who may be terrorists. If you look at the government the wrong way they can send you away for a long time if they want. And you have NO rights to fight it. You'll just disappear and no one will know why the hell you did

Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I said if you do NOT BELIEVE WHAT THIS SITE SAYS you are a fool.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 43 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Nope wrong there. You gotta do your research dude. this was just passed two months ago. And it applies to ALL US citizens not just people who may be terrorists. If you look at the government the wrong way they can send you away for a long time if they want. And you have NO rights to fight it. You'll just disappear and no one will know why the hell you did

Yeah, was reading that. I don't think they will take it that far, though. A government cannot govern without people. If they overstep this to much the people will react. Even our military is made up of "the people" so, yeah.. I don't think that's anything to worry about. It is most likely for american citizens who plan to participate in terrorism.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 9 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Regardless this is getting off track. the law doesn't determine morality. in fact it is far from it. And if it weren't for us, I.E me and you, overturning fucked up laws I wouldn't even be on here right now. I would be someones mulatto slave whore.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

Mekay double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 30 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
then you're giving them too much credit. if they didn't plan to they wouldn't have passed that law. it would have been modified into something more acceptable.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 46 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

....

(Edited 25 seconds later.)

Anonymous Q joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

You hope, I hope that is it true.
My fear is that we do not have
what it takes to stand
up and fight as we did in years
past.

(Edited 46 seconds later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Ok. I don't know what you said, but it doesn't matter. I'm not being nasty just pointing out what appears to be flawed thinking to me. if that is upsetting to you I would assess why. i know why I am upset. it's because the implications in what you're saying is great to me. it is nothing against you personally it just doesn't make sense. however, I feel all my words have been wasted. And that it was foolish of me to partake to begin with. So I'm good on this one as well. I'm not mad, just confused. It doesn't matter though. You are your own person and have the right to your own opinion. Unless, of course, someone outlaws your opinions then they are wrong of course. ;p ok! I couldn't resist on that one !! lol But anyway I agree that bestiality is wrong. I disagree that the law determines what is right or wrong in all cases.

(Edited 57 seconds later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Yeah, was reading that. I don't think they will take it that far, though. A government cannot govern without people. If they overstep this to much the people will react. Even our military is made up of "the people" so, yeah.. I don't think that's anything to worry about. It is most likely for american citizens who plan to participate in terrorism.

Where do they draw the line at though? 10 people? 100 people? 100,000 people? 1,000,000 people?

In a country with over 310,000,000 people, a lot of people's rights can be swept under the rug without anyone reacting.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Which is exactly what happened. and is still happening. So many people I have educated on this say "that is so fucked up I'm angry but we can't stop it" no one feels they have power anymore, Jen you are one in few. That is an archaic belief to me. I believe in the past we could overturn, but we have allowed the government too much power at this point. It would take a full on revolution and war for it to happen. they have billions of dollars and weapons and they can now throw anyone they feel is a threat in prison legally without a trial or attorney. They have acquired all the power they need. It would be extremely hard and ill advised to try and rise up at this point without intense planning and genius' running the revolution. Weapons money that's all you need to win a war. I don't have any of that. do you? On top of that they have an army. We don't have power over our government at all. Not any more. Maybe in the good ole days. But now, not so much

(Edited 31 seconds later.)

Ann Q replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I only speaking of the power of the government to do as it wishes.
Not of what is or is not right or wrong. No for me or anyone else to determine.
Just (Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.) never doubt what they can and cannot do.

> > http://nyulocal.com/national/2011/12/09/the-military-can-now-arrest-citizens-without-trial-oh-we-call-that-tues
>
> If you do not believe this you are a fool.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Ok. I don't know what you said, but it doesn't matter. I'm not being nasty just pointing out what appears to be flawed thinking to me. if that is upsetting to you I would assess why. i know why I am upset. it's because the implications in what you're saying is great to me. it is nothing against you personally it just doesn't make sense. however, I feel all my words have been wasted. And that it was foolish of me to partake to begin with. So I'm good on this one as well. I'm not mad, just confused. It doesn't matter though. You are your own person and have the right to your own opinion. Unless, of course, someone outlaws your opinions then they are wrong of course. ;p ok! I couldn't resist on that one !! lol But anyway I agree that bestiality is wrong. I disagree that the law determines what is right or wrong in all cases.

I'm not upset with you Mekay. And if I did something that was illegal I would be in the wrong no matter what my opinion of that law was so you are not wrong in saying if someone outlaws my opinion I would be wrong. Say that 10 times fast.
I'm just not worried about that law. I agree it has potential to be abused but I don't think the people would stand for it for to long if it ever were. There will likely be amendments to it along the way. What I erased was I hit reply instead of edit and it copied the whole thing.
As for revolution, weapons may have changed over time but war hasn't. If the need arises it will happen.

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

Ann Q replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Which is exactly what happened. and is still happening. So many people I have educated on this say "that is so fucked up I'm angry but we can't stop it" no one feels they have power anymore, Jen you are one in few. That is an archaic belief to me. I believe in the past we could overturn, but we have allowed the government too much power at this point. It would take a full on revolution and war for it to happen. they have billions of dollars and weapons and they can now throw anyone they feel is a threat in prison legally without a trial or attorney. They have acquired all the power they need. It would be extremely hard and ill advised to try and rise up at this point without intense planning and genius' running the revolution. Weapons money that's all you need to win a war. I don't have any of that. do you? On top of that they have an army. We don't have power over our government at all. Not any more. Maybe in the good ole days. But now, not so much

Agree - my point it would take a full revolution and war. We have become weak and spinless....

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Ok, I'm glad youre not upset with me. That sort of thing happens when people debate, and I don't want a bridge burned with you because i quite like you even though I disagree

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Ok, I'm glad youre not upset with me. That sort of thing happens when people debate, and I don't want a bridge burned with you because i quite like you even though I disagree

I can't say the same for WT, though. She didn't hurt my feelings or anything like that, she is just unwilling to see anything besides what she wants and will resort to put downs when someone doesn't like what she has to say. Plus, I think someone who thinks the way she does, on the topic of this thread, is someone I wouldn't want to associate with.

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I can't say the same for WT, though. She didn't hurt my feelings or anything like that, she is just unwilling to see anything besides what she wants and will resort to put downs when someone doesn't like what she has to say. Plus, I think someone who thinks the way she does, on the topic of this thread, is someone I wouldn't want to associate with.

Same to you, Jennifer.

And in case you didn't notice, feel free to scroll back up to the top of the thread and see that many of the people on this forum agree with me on this matter.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

If they think beastiality in any form is ok then I would appreciate if they don't associate with me as well.

Jennifer double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

And don't even THINK about coming near my pets!

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> If they think beastiality in any form is ok then I would appreciate if they don't associate with me as well.

WOW. Are you implying that I think bestiality in any form is ok?! That's insulting to me after I spent hours explaining my position and confirms all my previously stated opinions about you.

How about we copy some of my posts:
"I never said I think bestiality is ok. Bestiality encompasses a great deal of actions that I do think are wrong and I'm not ok with. I do, however, maintain my original position, that I think letting your dog lick your penis if he does so voluntarily is ok."
"Yes, but bestiality encompasses many other actions that I'm not ok with. I never said bestiality was right or wrong. I said letting a dog voluntarily lick your penis (yes, this is classified as bestiality) is ok in my opinion. And I said that other actions that would be classified as bestiality are wrong in my opinion. Not sure where the issue is."

Does that sound to you as thought I think bestiality in any form is ok?

Do you understand how annoying it can be to talk to someone who looks at those quote and takes away "bestiality in any form is ok"?

I'm done with you.

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> And don't even THINK about coming near my pets!

See, now how do you expect me to not put you down with a comment like that? I said in numerous posts that I had no interest in bestiality myself, that it wasn't something I could personally wrap my head around - why do you come out and say something like that? Of course I'm tempted to call you names when you display such stupid behaviour.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Jesus Christ. You have stated numerous times throughout this thread that you think letting a dog lick a mans penis is ok. Quit throwing a temper tantrum because I say people that think like that need to stay away from me and my pets.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Jesus Christ. You have stated numerous times throughout this thread that you think letting a dog lick a mans penis is ok. Quit throwing a temper tantrum because I say people that think like that need to stay away from me and my pets.

You're seriously an idiot. I don't care about the name-calling issue, it's the reality of the situation. If someone's an idiot, I'll let them know. Dr. Robert's right not to like you.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > Jesus Christ. You have stated numerous times throughout this thread that you think letting a dog lick a mans penis is ok. Quit throwing a temper tantrum because I say people that think like that need to stay away from me and my pets.
>
> You're seriously an idiot. I don't care about the name-calling issue, it's the reality of the situation. If someone's an idiot, I'll let them know. Dr. Robert's right not to like you.

Again, grow the fuck up. You're even quoting yourself saying it and then say you you never said it! You have some serious issues WT.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I hate it when I see two people I like fighting. I want all the people I like to like each other damn it!

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 34 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> How about we copy some of my posts:
> "I never said I think bestiality is ok. Bestiality encompasses a great deal of actions that I do think are wrong and I'm not ok with. I do, however, maintain my original position, that I think letting your dog lick your penis if he does so voluntarily is ok."
> "Yes, but bestiality encompasses many other actions that I'm not ok with. I never said bestiality was right or wrong. I said letting a dog voluntarily lick your penis (yes, this is classified as bestiality) is ok in my opinion. And I said that other actions that would be classified as bestiality are wrong in my opinion. Not sure where the issue is."
>
> Does that sound to you as thought I think bestiality in any form is ok?


Um... yeah.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I hate it when I see two people I like fighting. I want all the people I like to like each other damn it!

Yeah, I have to say, at this point, I'm done with not only this thread but this forum entirely. I don't want to associate with people I consider stupider than myself. It's a waste of my time and I have much better things to do with my time.

If you seriously take the time to look through this thread, Jen, you will see that I addressed every single argument of yours, while you dropped off 90% of your arguments by eventually just saying they weren't relevant. You haven't been able to make a single clear point throughout this entire thread, other than making it clear to me that you're an idiot.

You were right, in your other post, Mekay, that the crazies come here. I don't really feel the need to waste any more of my time talking to crazies.

For those of you that have my email/FB, please feel free to keep in touch. I obviously don't think anything of you like I think of Jen.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Don't be done with the forum please. You two will just have to ignore each other. there is a person here who said some things she couldn't take back to me a few months ago. She left, then came back recently and I was completely civil with her. I like your contributions on the you still don't love me, and you are the first person who has been able to relate to the beauty complex. we can always chat on FB. But I think this is what happens when two strong women come together who differ greatly in opinions they just clash. it's inevitable. Women have a difficult time getting along with one another.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 34 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Yeah, I have to say, at this point, I'm done with not only this thread but this forum entirely. I don't want to associate with people I consider stupider than myself. It's a waste of my time and I have much better things to do with my time.

I think it will be very hard for you to find someone "stupider" than you. But go have a look... If you want to play that way.
Personally, I don't care what you do. Just stay away from me and my pets. lol

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

And just b/c you two disagree on this subject doesn't mean you can't put aside the bull and find common ground. Sometimes people fight ignore each other for awhile. then something will come up you see eye to eye on and you may get along. All though the name calling and petty insults don't help to keep from burning bridges. I don't think anyone should leave a forum b/c of a petty fight. Even the person who insulted, greatly btw, a few months ago, I didn't expect her to leave. it was her choice. I would have still stayed and just ignored her/carried on. Why? Because this board is SOOOOO helpful.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 14 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> Don't be done with the forum please. You two will just have to ignore each other. there is a person here who said some things she couldn't take back to me a few months ago. She left, then came back recently and I was completely civil with her. I like your contributions on the you still don't love me, and you are the first person who has been able to relate to the beauty complex. we can always chat on FB. But I think this is what happens when two strong women come together who differ greatly in opinions they just clash. it's inevitable. Women have a difficult time getting along with one another.

I don't like stupidity. You can complain about the name-calling all you want, but I see stupidity, and I call it as stupidity. Stupidity is the #1 sin in my religion. I have no interest in surrounding myself with stupidity.

I will attempt to stay on the forum but this is the last time I am opening this specific thread. Therefore, if you want to respond, please respond in another thread. I will not participate in any threads that Jen participates in. I believe in staying away from stupidity and not letting it bring you down.

Either way, please do keep chatting on FB. I will do my best to stick around here, but I have to say I am not a very patient person when people bother me and stupidity bothers me. I will therefore not stick around long if this continues.

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 13 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

WT.....She may be making you feel upset. But dont throw away all the great stuff about this forum. My FB is Molly AndFamily. Befriend me,so we can show support. I only have 9 friends on purpose,specifically for self healing. Its like a open diary for the few who show support.

Molly double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 53 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

First name molly,last name AndFamily.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 21 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > Yeah, I have to say, at this point, I'm done with not only this thread but this forum entirely. I don't want to associate with people I consider stupider than myself. It's a waste of my time and I have much better things to do with my time.
>
> I think it will be very hard for you to find someone "stupider" than you. But go have a look... If you want to play that way.
> Personally, I don't care what you do. Just stay away from me and my pets. lol

LOL Oh, you're so funny. Besides the fact that I scored a 99.9% on the LSAT, came out #1 in my university program, and got into the top three law schools in your country - yeah, I'm very stupid.
We'll see 10 years from now when I am re-writing all these laws you agree with who's stupid.

Good bye.

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Just sayin WT you'll get that a lot around here. You gotta toughen yourself up to it. Wait until the regular trolls come around. You just gotta let this stuff roll off your back. remember no one knows each other personally here. LT has used my user name on here!!!! Took MY user name and pretended to be me!! Jen is nothin like that. Wait until someone stalks you all over the board. Go to social and see all the posts with "me" in them. look at all the nasty things she (LT) said. the board is very beneficial that's why i have stayed.

(Edited 50 seconds later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 19 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

> Stupidity is the #1 sin in my religion.

Then I'll see you in hell!

(Edited 23 seconds later.)

Mekay replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

lol oh man oh man. shits getttin deep haha you know you guys are gonna read this and laugh in like 3 months right? especially when your best buddies and friends on FB.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 35 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

You all seriously want to be friends with someone who thinks its ok to let a dog lick a persons genitals? Who personally "spreads her legs" in hopes that her dog will lick her there???

> Recently, there's been a few occasions when I'm masturbating and my dog will come right up to me, lick my legs, and sniff around, and I totally spread my legs as much as I can (lol) hoping he'll go for it.. but.. he unfortunately never has lol.

(Edited 2 hours later.)

Jennifer double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> > > Yeah, I have to say, at this point, I'm done with not only this thread but this forum entirely. I don't want to associate with people I consider stupider than myself. It's a waste of my time and I have much better things to do with my time.
> >
> > I think it will be very hard for you to find someone "stupider" than you. But go have a look... If you want to play that way.
> > Personally, I don't care what you do. Just stay away from me and my pets. lol
>
> LOL Oh, you're so funny. Besides the fact that I scored a 99.9% on the LSAT, came out #1 in my university program, and got into the top three law schools in your country - yeah, I'm very stupid.
> We'll see 10 years from now when I am re-writing all these laws you agree with who's stupid.
>
> Good bye.

You sure didn't learn much.

Jennifer triple-posted this 6.5 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

But, hey, I think it would be PERFECT for you to be known as the beastiality politician. I hope you do go public with your thoughts on this subject. I can't wait to see public reaction. In fact, it would be interesting to put your beliefs to a face. What is your facebook name?

(Edited 31 minutes later.)

Sherry joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

WonderfulTherapist.. I have never posted under MeKay's. name.
Just because there was a post made that she "thinks" was added
by me does not make it true.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

....

(Edited 8 minutes later.)

mekay joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

bah. not engaging.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Sherry joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

You cannot be stalked on a open fourm that it why it is called an open fourm.
I do not have your facebook page, phone number, address, therefore I have no way of "stalking" you.
I have every right to be on this site unless or until Dr. Robert says otherwise.
Therefore you who are for everyone having all of their rights a free AMERICAN's should know that you
have not been stalked.

Sherry double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I deny it! Bah act like a baby because that is
what you do when you cannot prove you are right.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Oh, and since you all decided to bring Dr. Robert into this I seriously doubt he would find it ok if anyone were to touch his donkeys in a sexual way.

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

What I did when I was younger is horrible and I need to find a way to put it behind me, any ideas? It's not letting me enjoy my life and I am filled with anxiety and depression...

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Learn from it.

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I too don't condone that behaviour in the slightest, I love animals and would never wish to harm them, Thats why its driving me crazy, Do you think there is a way to redeem myself to be a better person besides not ever doing it again?

(Edited 45 seconds later.)

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

What did you do? Sorry, this is a long thread, I don't want to look for it.
I have the power to absolve you, so spill it.

(Edited 18 seconds later.)

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

got licked by a cat and a dog when i was younger 14-15, I am in total regret and filled with anxious thoughts and depression, I just don't want it to haunt me forever as I want to be a good human being with good morals, Is innocent teenage sexual expermination an excuse?

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Mr. hat, I think you would benefit from reading this post: http://askdrrobert.dr-robert.com/_bestiality.html

Irregardless of what people's opinions are regarding whether or not bestiality is wrong, I think Dr. Robert explains very well why you should not feel guilty at all for that type of thing. Please recognize that it is very common for teenagers to engage in such sexual exploration. I am not condoning it or arguing about whether it is right or wrong anymore, but you should recognize that this is common, it is normal, and you should not feel guilty. Please, please recognize this. Living with this guilt instead of letting it go will in now way help you or anyone else for that matter.

Actually, I think it would be helpful for anyone who has been participating or following in this thread to read Dr. Robert's page on bestiality. Specifically:
You did not molest him, and you did not rape him. SINCE DOGS, UNLIKE HUMANS, HAVE NO GUILTY FEELINGS ABOUT THEIR SEXUALITY (just watch them doing it in the road with no concern at all for passersby), your dog thought nothing of your actions, and was not hurt by them in any way. If you had hurt your dog physically, that would have been abuse, but short of that, for the dog it was just another kind of playtime. Probably some animal rights types would disagree with me here, but so many of those people, in what probably begins with a noble desire to stop the exploitation of animals, seem to gravitate to an unfortunate extreme which ends up anthropomorphizing dogs, cats, and the other animals with which humans share this earth--PROJECTING ONTO THEM, IN OTHER WORDS, HUMAN FEELINGS WHICH ERALLY THOSE ANIMALS DO NOT HAVE. To be clear: YOUR DOG DID NOT HAVE HUMAN THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS (ANY MORE THAN YOU HAVE CANINE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS) AND SO WOULD NOT HAVE INTERPRETED YOUR BEHAVIOR AS A VIOLATION OF SOME KIND. You are not a dog rapist after all!

(Edited 9 minutes later.)

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 second later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> got licked by a cat and a dog when i was younger 14-15, I am in total regret and filled with anxious thoughts and depression, I just don't want it to haunt me forever as I want to be a good human being with good morals, Is innocent teenage sexual expermination an excuse?

Yes, it is an excuse if you learn from it.

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 35 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Yes.
Were you treated harshly as a child?

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I can't bring myself to tell my friends or family... It would cause me to have a complete breakdown, which is close anyway, I guess all i can do is repent and move on. On a related note, I can't get these memories out of my head and they're causing me to feel complete anxiety.

Jennifer replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

WT, I could be wrong but I really don't think Dr. Robert was condoning it what he wrote that either.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> I can't bring myself to tell my friends or family... It would cause me to have a complete breakdown, which is close anyway, I guess all i can do is repent and move on. On a related note, I can't get these memories out of my head and they're causing me to feel complete anxiety.

Mr. Hat, I don't know why you feel the need to tell your friends or family. This is common behaviour that individuals engage in while they're growing up and exploring sexually. While I think it should be discussed more frequently, it is not something that's usually discussed, and I therefore don't understand why you feel the need to tell them. I would suggest not telling them since it is something that is generally frowned upon (which does not mean you should feel guilty about it!) If you do not get enough relief from speaking to us about it on this forum, I would suggest you find a therapist to go over these feelings.

This is very similar to when siblings or young children explore sexually (show each other their genitals, dry hump each other, etc.) because we don't talk about this openly as a society many of these children grow up with extreme guilt and anxiety. It is very common and normal for children to engage in this behaviour, but because society does not talk about it, they grow up feeling a great deal of guilt. Please, do not feel guilt about it. Recognize that it was normal at that stage in your life, and move on.

I know how difficult it can be to get distressing memories out of your head. The only suggestion I can think of is for you to work on accepting what you did and not feeling guilty about it. If you get to that point, the memories should no longer be present, or at the very least they will no longer be distressing.

Maybe someone else can help more when it comes to how you should reduce the memories and anxiety they're causing you.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
I think this is just a trigger for a bigger problem. You could be fixating on anything, it's not about the dog or the cat.
You have toxic shame, which is usually a gift given to a young child by a toxic, clueless parent.
This causes the child a lifetime of exaggerated guilt, shame and anxiety. See a therapist, but a good one. They take searching for.

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

I grew up without a dad and I was always an asshole to my mum until recently, I guess Ill just have to accept what i've done and move on, try do something good with my life, Thanks for the convo guys, made me feel a bit better and made me realise I'm not alone.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Officially absolved.
Next.

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 36 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
You are seriously BRILLIANT

WonderfulTherapist double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 18 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
LOL

Cassandra replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Why, why, thank you (blush, blush)...

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

How would a therapist react to these sorts out things though, my biggest fear is that I will never get over this,

mr hat double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Can someone please respond, I don't know what to do... My depression is at a point where I am worried on how it will end , with my past experiences come intrusive thoughts and doubt about whether I did more even though Im certain these are just false intrusive thoughts...

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 48 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

mr hat My Face book is Molly,then last name AndFamily. If you friend me,I will help you with great pointers to help. I too had obsessive thought patterns like you. I have to get ready,and then I'll respond back. It will be OK,and this is something you can over come pretty fast if you are willing to try.Ill be back...

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> How would a therapist react to these sorts out things though, my biggest fear is that I will never get over this,

Mr. Hat, I think a therapist would be incredibly helpful with this.

A therapist will help you understand why this is causing you so much grief. There's more to your feelings of guilt than simply letting your dog/cat lick you. If you read Dr. Robert's page, you would see that you should feel no guilt for having let your dog/cat lick you. There are obviously some deeper feelings that are emerging through these memories of letting your dog/cat lick you. A therapist can help you get to those feelings and address those feelings so you no longer worry about this dog/cat fiasco.

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Mr hat,I'm back. Keep in mind that your anxiety,fear are coming from something a lot deeper then your intrusive thoughts. The first thing that would be helpful is to find that source of deep shame,and lack of self worth. Or however your feeling.
It's best to open up to you about your main source of shame/guilt/fear. Or open up to a compassionate friend(you can FB friend me and send private messages for this reason only) or a professional therapist.
Then,slowly,or in a flash,you will see these intrusive images whether they came from shameful experiences or you make up new ones,are just your minds way of putting images to your feelings.
Think of your thoughts this way. You know when you dream at night,your mind comes up with all different random images to go along with the emotions your mind is going through? This is what is happening to you now.

Molly double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

Lol WT. Great minds think a like

(Edited 1 minute later.)

mr hat replied with this 6.5 years ago, 15 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

But there is nothing else making me depressed, this is all I can think about, What would a therapist do If I went to them with my problems?

WonderfulTherapist replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)

> But there is nothing else making me depressed, this is all I can think about, What would a therapist do If I went to them with my problems?

They wouldn't do anything.

A good therapist would listen to what it was that was bothering you. They would likely be able to recognize some inconsistencies that you're not able to recognize yourself and that would help you see why you feel so much guilt over this. If you don't like a therapist or are unhappy with the result of your session, you don't have to go back. There's no harm in trying though.

Molly replied with this 6.5 years ago, 6 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

A Therapist is non judgmental,and will help you figure out how to let go what ever it is that you did. One extra advice. There is no one you need to repent to. Not one person. A therapist is the perfect person to see. They are not an authority figure. They are the substitute for people who do not know how to deal with their problem,and teaches them how to deal. Trust me,your problem is out of hand,and you are spinning out of control. Again,good luck,and you are always free to w/me or any one here if you can't afford a therapist.

Molly double-posted this 6.5 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #0

You have to open up more then what you are if you want to receive help.You can w/ me privately,dr robert,or see a therapist. But you have to open up is the first step.

Skar joined in and replied with this 6.5 years ago, 1 week later, 2 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

Hm. Well, this thread certainly has grown in my absence. I would rather not have seen that fight break out, but what's past is past.
I've concluded that what I did wasn't wrong in itself (or even illegal in my area, apparently). Still, I've said I won't do it again, and I don't break my word, so I won't. I understand Jennifer's opinion, and why it would be easy to get emotional over such a topic. I appreciate any thoughtful response given, regardless of its content.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

sara joined in and replied with this 6.4 years ago, 1 week later, 3 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

i have to say i am very grateful to have found this forum.

i can relate to mr hat very much. when i was around 11-13, and i didnt even understand what sex was at that age, my dog licked my vagina and i let her did it. i didnt know that it was wrong but lately my mind has been consumed with this bad memory and i am so very disgusted by my actions and i regret it.

i have been searching a platform for me to get this off my chest because it has been depressing me but i was afraid of the judgmental people. im scared to tell this to my freinds and families because im afraid they will never see me the same way again and they are very religious.

i know that it was just a childhood sexual experimentation but i still feel guilty over it. but i am very relieved that i am not alone and seeing your responses have made me feel better.

thank you :)

sara double-posted this 6.4 years ago, 12 minutes later, 3 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

1 of the thoughts that have been consuming me: i consider myself a virgin but thinking about the past "experience", am i still considered a virgin? i really dont want to lose my virginitiy to animals. i love them but i am in no way attracted to them and i am "saving" myself for my husband. please help! :s

Molly replied with this 6.4 years ago, 2 hours later, 3 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

Hi Sara,:)

Mr Hat and I talked a lot more privately. He is 18,and just like you needed to talk it out with someone.He was spinning crazy stories in his head from this innocent guilt. I talked to him recently,and I asked him if he is still suffering this thought.He said,"No.I finally said,enough is enough with the bad thinking."

You are going through that same thing. I hope you writing on this forum gave you some relief? You are still a virgin.You can not loose your virginity this way. I also think you should not tell your friends and family.Not b/c you should be ashamed,but there is not one reason to tell them. You do not need to confess'sins'. It is OK to talk it out if you need to(like here with me) to feel better,but no confessing needs to take place. There is NOTHING to be judged. Make sense?

One thing I told Mr Hat,and I also use if I get stuck on an obsessive thought is to simply say,"Stop" in your head. Use the same voice in your head to tell yourself,"There is nothing to feel guilt about.Nothing at all." Say it till you know it to be true.

sara joined in and replied with this 6.4 years ago, 10 hours later, 4 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

hi molly, thank you for your thoughtful answer.

i did feel slightly relieved after writing it because i have been keeping it for so long. but your answer has made me feel a lot better. just like i wrote, i can totally relate to mr hat and we are of the same age too. i am 18 :)

the thing is that i have accepted the fact that i did "it" foraim exploration. i think i didn't even think about the sexual pleasure back then, i only wanted to know how it felt. but then i cannot block my mind from bad thoughts :s i will try your method though if i am stuck on an obsessive thought. hopefully i am going to feel better in the near future :)

Molly replied with this 6.4 years ago, 9 hours later, 4 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

Oh Sara,
I'm so happy for you. Keep letting yourself know when you need the reminder that your past/thoughts have zero reflection of who you are.
Keep in mind too,that age 18,you are going through life changes as well. Trying to find yourself,and your place in life. This also is bringing out this form if anxiety. Be patient,as this will fade. Good luck sweet Sara!

sara replied with this 6.4 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

the bad thoughts usually come into my mind when i have nothing to do. and i have none because i am currently waiting to go to uni. sigh. i tried your method, the "stop" thing. firstly, it was kinda hard because it just seemed that my thoughts kept coming at me, but at the end i tried and tried and i also tried to be calm, and it worked :) thank you very much, molly!

Molly replied with this 6.4 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

Yippee! When I first started saying "stop" to my personal torture stories.I said stop so much,I actually got just as tired saying stop,as I was saying mean things about myself.lol But it is redirecting thought patterns to a smoother flow. Thoughts are flowing constantly without our control,day and night.This is the human mind. Obsessing over a thought is caused by holding onto a thought that SHOULD come and go naturally.But we hold onto it,spinning a story out of it,and giving it emotional power. Doing this'stop' practice is a great way to let go of the mental torture of obsessing over past/thoughts. You can do this with any thoughts that you are getting emotionally agitated.

Your inner voice that talks to you as if you are in second person? The same voice you use to read these words? It's as if you have a little person in you making judgments of you and about others. This is the ego. Our egos have been shaped by our life experiences,and our parents had the most impact,plus our culture.We are not born w/ our ego.It is fully harden at age 1 1/2 to 2 years old.

It is helpful to realize this.That you can turn your ego,as one example I gave you w/ the 'stop',into your inner therapist in any situation. And keep an eye on negativity by saying'stop'to correct it,as if you are your own inner parent. This is life changing stuff.

Molly double-posted this 6.4 years ago, 6 minutes later, 4 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #0

Sometimes I let an image play out in my head. Like holding a knife around my kids while cooking gives me anxiety. I let ANY scary thought arise,almost viewing it like you do a move,while saying,"there is that irrational fear again." It takes the emotional power away. Then they fade so fast!
Thoughts ARE like being at a movie.We can get sucked into a movie,and be very emotionally charged.Or we,can know the exit is right behind us and walk out of it at anytime. Thoughts are not real. Just like a movie. If this sounds unreasonable.Next time you have a thought you are sucked into,look up.Look all around you. That movie/thought was only alive in your head. Just a movie. You can walk out anytime...

(Edited 48 seconds later.)

T joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 5 months later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

I experimented with what the original poster did at around the age of nine. I did it a lot up until the age of fifteen. Then I met a girl when I was sixteen and didn't do it anymore for a few years. She left me when I was twenty-one and not too long from that time, I did it again for some years until I was about thirty-three. I haven't done it since thirty-three. I am now forty-five. I have hated myself so much for this.Depression, anxiety, and alcoholism have grown to the point to where I almost want to take my own life. We had our first daughter when I was thirty. I think I may have done it once or twice until the age of thirty-three and then I just felt so terrible and sick. I never had any sort of feeling like this towards my daughters, but I feel like such a loser of a husband and a father. I look at how they have grown up so well. We have loved and cared for them dearly, but the guilt and shame I feel for my past is almost too much to take. I have quit drinking so many times and started back so many times. I've done AA, but I just can't seem to admit this to my sponsors. I think I have always drank to numb the guilt, but it's gotten so bad that there is never enough alcohol to work anymore. God please help me. I'm so sorry.

Sifter joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 15 minutes later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
OK, bear with me T. Does a dog lick its own balls? Yes. Does a dog lick another dog's balls, given the opportunity? Yes. Will a dog bite your cock if you try to force it? Yes. Did you hurt the dog? No.

Are you hurting your family with guilt, suicidal thinking and alcoholism? Yes, yes, yes, yes.

Go back to AA. Also get a therapist. The dog stuff is not your real problem, alcohol is your real problem. The dog stuff is an excuse. If you need to confess, be heard, be understood, and to understand your own behaviour, discuss this with the therapist, once you have enough of a relationship to brave it. But quit using it as an excuse to destroy yourself and your family.

T replied with this 6 years ago, 10 minutes later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

Hi Sifter. Thanks for the response.I've never ever said anything about this. You are the first person ever to here this.Even though we are in cyberspace, I kind of feel a small amount of weight lifted. Very small. I know that dogs do what you said, but it's me(the human)that I can't forgive. I am hurting my family with guilt, suicidal thinking and alcoholism, which I guess does lead to more guilt. I just can't ever bring myself to discuss this in person, even with a trained professional.I guess it does sound like an excuse, but this has made me feel so terrible about myself for so many years. I don't think I am feeling sorry for myself, but I really feel helpless and ashamed. I've built up some kind of major idenity crisis I believe.

T double-posted this 6 years ago, 21 minutes later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)Hi Sifter. Thanks for the response.I've never ever said anything about this. You are the first person ever to here this.Even though we are in cyberspace, I kind of feel a small amount of weight lifted. Very small. I know that dogs do what you said, but it's me(the human)that I can't forgive. I am hurting my family with guilt, suicidal thinking and alcoholism, which I guess does lead to more guilt. I just can't ever bring myself to discuss this in person, even with a trained professional.I guess it does sound like an excuse, but this has made me feel so terrible about myself for so many years. I don't think I am feeling sorry for myself, but I really feel helpless and ashamed. I've built up some kind of major idenity crisis I believe.

Sifter replied with this 6 years ago, 58 minutes later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Yes, I can see you feel real shame. Basically, if you could think your own way out of this, you would have already. Instead, you are in this situation of crisis. So you need help. And in order to get help, you have to get over the idea that you can't discuss it. Because what is your alternative? Keep drinking and be a wreck of a dad? Kill yourself and destroy your children's happiness? My point is not that you are feeling sorry for yourself (although... are you sure you are not?), my point is that you do have a choice here. You are already making choices.

There are ways to get help for this, you just have to decide that it's time. You could go to a therapist and say that you did something that you feel terribly guilty about, that no one was hurt but you need to talk about your guilt and shame and alcoholism without giving specifics of the background. Or you could start by anonymously emailing a brief description of your situation to some possible therapists until you find a one who responds in a way you feel safe with.

In any case, just because you feel riven with shame and guilt doesn't mean you have to keep drinking or can't get treatment for your drinking problem. One does not automatically lead to the other.

Beyond that - and less importantly - why is it that you can't forgive yourself? You know the dog wasn't hurt.

T joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 7 hours later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

I guess I've thought my way "into" this for so long. The thinking that I'm a terrible sick person unworthy of any respect, forgiveness, or love. I have very little if any self-esteem and I can never get away from questioning and judging my actions and thoughts. Which then leads me back to the repeating pattern of self-abuse, over and over. I had a fearful childhood upbringing of a vengeful god that punishes us for our sins. I don't believe that now, but somehow I can't stop not believing it. It's as though I'm in purgatory and I really believe I deserve it. I've had these internal battles for twenty-five years now. I don't think I'm feeling sorry for myself, but my thinking is so corrupt that I'm really not sure how it truly manifests itself. Neurosis of some sort come to mind with god. I don't know.

Thanks for talking with me about this Sifter. I'm two weeks sober today and I really want to get well.

Sifter joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 12 hours later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

Don't worry about the 'feeling sorry for yourself' part. For some people that idea would be helpful - a way to jolt out of a pattern of thinking - for others, not.

Congratulations on the two weeks sober - that is wonderful. You will need additional support to keep this going, I believe. You know how hard it is to make it stick. I believe you do want to get well, so please get the help you need. Don't think of the dog thing as any kind of barrier. You could get help and not talk about the dog thing, and that would be better than not getting help and not talking about the dog thing. Living well for your family is the most important thing.

T joined in and replied with this 5.9 years ago, 1 week later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

Thank you Sifter. I'm still sober, but so down on myself still. I just can't find the self-worth anymore, but I'm going to keep trying.

Sifter replied with this 5.9 years ago, 4 hours later, 6 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Good for you, T - that's really neat that you're keeping sober. I bet your family are appreciating it. I imagine self-worth can get battered pretty hard during addiction, but all that really matters is that you are taking care of yourself and your family now. I hope you can keep letting go of the self-judgement and just be compassionate with yourself. Chances are you weren't taught much self-worth by your family as a youngster. It takes time to build up a different way of seeing yourself and what you've been through.

Pandora joined in and replied with this 5.9 years ago, 2 weeks later, 7 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

Jennifer wtf (you wrote the following)

I believe that any sexual act with an animal is wrong. I believe that what this young man did was wrong. I personally find it disgusting, offensive, and distasteful. Those are my personal feelings about it. However, that has not stopped me from watching the occasional beastiality film and getting a laugh out of it.

Are you for real? How can you pass judgement on someone when you think it is funny, as an adult, to watch this s**t?

Pandora double-posted this 5.9 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

No sorry but 'getting a laugh' out of something you apparently find disgusting does not make any sense. That's like saying 'I find rape disgusting/unacceptable but I get a laugh out of watching it.'

Pandora triple-posted this 5.9 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

I don't know who you are? My post was aimed at Jennifer, dude!

Ailonna joined in and replied with this 5.9 years ago, 46 minutes later, 7 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
> No sorry but 'getting a laugh' out of something you apparently find disgusting does not make any sense. That's like saying 'I find rape disgusting/unacceptable but I get a laugh out of watching it.'

I find rape disgusting and "unacceptable" and I laugh/ get turned on by it. It makes complete sense when you dissociate and watch it from the outside. I wouldn't like to be raped, I would kill a mother fucker, and watching it depending could make me upset because they guy is gross, or turn me on because the people involved are hot or underage. I think it has more to do with fantasy (like it or find it funny) than it does reality (put yourself in the situation and get bothered by it).

Hey you guys, is that empathy, what I described!?

Ailonna double-posted this 5.9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
You are an asshole. At least tell me where the body is so I can revive her with my voodoo.

EDIT: There are some "fags" outside of my window right now in the street being really obnoxious with their Harleys, and it's pissing me off.

(Edited 8 minutes later.)

Ailonna triple-posted this 5.9 years ago, 57 minutes later, 7 months after the original post[^] [v] #0

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Like what? Now I'm curious >:D
:
[upload]

You are required to fill in a captcha for your first 10 posts. That's only 10 more! We apologize, but this helps stop spam.

Please familiarise yourself with the rules and markup syntax before posting, also keep in mind you can minify URLs using MiniURL and generate image macros using MiniMacro.