Galloping Toward Gomorrah: When Sex with Animals is OK
Have you heard of the hot new trend? It’s about having sex with animals. Yep. Horses, dogs, sheep, goats, and etc. So, if you’re nervous because you think your son might be gay, you have no worries at all unless you think he might be having sex with Peaches the poodle instead. That sort of behavior would be a bad thing indeed, at least in my world.
From TheWeek:
I have a very “2014” question for you: How would you respond if you found out that a man living down the street regularly has sexual intercourse with a horse? I’m not kidding.
Would you be morally disgusted? Consider him and his behavior an abomination? Turn him in to the police? (This would be an option in the roughly three-quarters of states that — for now — treat bestiality as a felony or misdemeanor.)
Or would you perhaps suppress your gag reflex and try hard to be tolerant, liberal, affirming, supportive? Maybe you’d even utter the slogan that deserves to be emblazoned over our age as its all-purpose motto and mantra: Who am I to judge?
Thanks to New York magazine, which recently ran a completely nonjudgmental 6,200-word interview with a “zoophile” who regularly enjoys sex with a mare — unironic headline: “What it’s like to date a horse” — these questions have been much on my mind.
They should be on yours, too.
Because this is a very big deal, in cultural and moral terms.
No, not the fact of bestiality, which (like incest) has always been with us, but the fact of an acclaimed, mainstream publication treating it as a matter of complete moral indifference. (Aside, of course, from the requisite concern about animal abuse — a nonhuman analog to the pervasive emphasis on consent as the only relevant moral criterion for judging sexual behavior. The interview dispenses with this worry by informing us that the zoophile regularly brings his equine lover to orgasm orally — and that she often initiates acts of intimacy, showing that she appears to enjoy their sexual interactions.)
Am I worried that large numbers of people will soon choose to shack up with their pets or farm animals? Not at all. I can’t imagine that very many people will ever be drawn to bestiality, no matter how casually it is treated in the media.
Why, then, is the New York interview a big deal? Because it’s perhaps the most vivid sign yet that, in effect, the United States (and indeed the entire Western world) is running an experiment — one with very few, if any, antecedents in human history. The experiment will test what happens when a culture systematically purges all publicly affirmed notions of human flourishing, virtue and vice, elevation and degradation.
Moral and religious traditionalists have seen this coming and warned about its consequences for years. And indeed, they are the ones raising the loudest ruckus about the New York interview.
I share some of their concerns. But there are at least two problems with their analysis of the experiment.
First, the trads are wrong to blame the purging of publicly affirmed notions of human flourishing on the spread of relativism. Viewed from inside traditionalist notions of virtue and vice, a culture that seeks to redefine “normal” to include zoophilia might seem like a culture defined by relativism. But it isn’t. Rather, it’s a culture fervently devoted to the moral principle of equal recognition and affirmation — in a word, to an absolute ethic of niceness. Moral condemnation can be mean, and therefore it’s morally wrong — that’s the way growing numbers of Americans think about these issues.
Of course, these nonjudgmental Americans would think differently — they would continue to publicly affirm notions of human flourishing and condemn acts that diverge from the norm — if they confidently believed in the foundation of these judgments. But increasingly, they do not. Judeo-Christian piety used to supply it for many, but no longer.
Then there’s the option of basing our judgments on what conservative bioethicist Leon Kass once called “the wisdom of repugnance” — that is, on our commonsense moral intuitions. But as the liberal philosopher Martha Nussbaum has argued, the “ick factor” just isn’t a reliable basis on which to make moral evaluations. And we know that from lived experience. Interracial romances once seemed icky, but then they didn’t. Next it was homosexual acts that passed through the looking glass from repellant to respectable. Faced with this slippage and uncertainty — with a long string of reversals in moral judgment — it’s no wonder that the ethic of unconditional niceness increasingly trumps all other considerations.
And that brings us to the second way in which the trads go wrong — in speaking confidently about how we’re “galloping toward Gomorrah.” This implies that they know exactly where the experiment is going to end up. The truth is that they — and we — have no idea at all. Because there has never been a human society built exclusively on a morality of rights (individual consent) and an ethic of niceness, with no overarching vision of a higher human good to override or compete with it.
As I noted above, I find it hard to imagine that more than a tiny fraction of human beings will ever choose to engage in sex acts with animals, even if and when the taboo has been thoroughly deconstructed and the behavior mainstreamed by dozens of sympathetic stories in the media. I suspect the same is true about incest and polyamory. Most people will continue to live boring, mundane sex lives, monogamously committed to one human being of the opposite sex at a time.
So what, then, is there to worry about? Why is this cultural experiment a big deal?
Because it stands as a stunning testament to our ignorance about ourselves. Roughly 2,500 years since Socrates first raised the question of how we should live, several centuries since the Enlightenment encouraged us to seek and promulgate scientific knowledge about the universe and human nature, Western humanity seems to have come to the conclusion that we haven’t got a clue about an answer. There is no consensus whatsoever about what ways of life are intrinsically good or bad for human beings.
Get married and have kids? If that’s what you want, sounds good. Live in a polyamorous arrangement? As long as everyone consents, have fun. What about my intense desire to copulate with a horse? Just make sure no one gets hurt — with hurt defined in the narrowest of terms (covering physical harm and the violation of personal preferences).
That’s all we’ve got. Or at least all we’re left with, now that we’ve shed the (ostensibly) discredited notions of human virtue that most people once affirmed.
Is that good enough? Can we do without a publicly affirmed vision of human flourishing? Fulfilling personal preferences (whatever they happen to be), seeking consent in all interactions, and abiding by the imperative of universal niceness — is that sufficient to bring happiness? Or will a world that tells us in a million ways that we are radically undetermined in our ends leave us feeling empty, lost, alone, unmoored, at sea, spiritually adrift?
I have no idea.
But I suspect we’re going to find out soon enough.
There is one thing that has become abundantly clear, especially after watching a certain video that was taken by one of our drones hovering over the Mideast, men are going to screw something regardless of what it is and regardless of their religious or non religious persuasion. While many people don not think about it, sex is one of the basic needs of life. I think it somehow figures into the power and domination thing man believes he has over everything on earth. This reminds me of the old joke about the place that guaranteed to help men lose weight, so a guy shows up and pays his money.
His first four days there he was put into a large room with two beautiful women who had signs on their backs that read, “If you catch me you can have me.” After the four days he had lost only three pounds.” He told the owner he was having fun but was not losing weight fast enough. The owner told him the real weight came on the fifth and subsequent days. So when the guy shows up on the fifth day he is shown into the big room again and the door is locked. On the other side of the room where the women usually come out, in comes a mountain gorilla with a sign on that says, “If I catch you I can have you.” He lost ten puonds that day.
Wouldn’t that be rape since animals cannot consent to having sex with a human. I’m looking at mine here and thinking, these treacherous little fuckers lick themselves everywhere, I am not having sex with that if you paid me. We humans are a bunch of freaks as rule 34** keeps showing us.
**Not a Gibbs’ rule.
Have you noticed how well behaved I’ve been here and completely avoided any use of the word ‘pussy’? I’m improving ever so slowly aren’t I?
er…oh….um…ah….crap
oops?
Mrs Slocombe, is that you 😉
🙂 🙂 🙂
It’s not a “Gibbs” rule? Then whose rule is it? That girl agent whose name I’ve forgotten because it’s not Ziva who I loved desperately?
Her name on the show is Eleanor Bishop and married to Jake Bishop the dreamy Jamie Barber from BSG. Anyway, back to reality, it’s from Urban dictionary, if you can think it there is porn about it paraphrased.
Hands off!! She’s mine!!!
I will fight you for her Mike. 🙂
LOL…OK man 🙂
Bad deal for you and the Brits Norm. All that will come out of this article is a replacement for the slur “Limey.” Everyone will start calling you guys “sheep shaggers.” Now do something with your teeth.
Ha Ha Ha!!! Yeah Normie. Do something with those teeth and stop cutting down the trees to create stumps 🙂 🙂
The Welsh and the Yorkshire men are renowned for their ‘love’ of sheep…
Mind you…Liverpudlians (Scousers) tend to refer to everyone in Lancashire and Yorkshire as ‘woollybacks’ which relates to the Lancashire / Yorkshire cotton trade during the Industrial Revolution.
Liverpudlians, being not overly bright (I’m in trouble now), confused cotton for wool.
It may also relate to a completely untrue suggestion that, in the absence of any other forms of entertainment during inclement weather high on the Pennine Moors in winter we shagged sheep.
I was far to drunk, at the time, to confirm or deny… 😉
Dammit, I never saw your comment before I called the lot of them sheep shaggers. You knew I’d be good for that anyway so I don’t care.
LOL Jess! I did the same thing.
Joe’s brain is just too quick, compared to the rest of us heathens. It must be the republican Jesus lover in him.
I told my wife I wanted to try a stand up routine at the amateur comedy night at a local club. I told her people think I’m funny. She laughed at me.
So, Mike is a friend of mine. He most definitely does NOT hate gay people. Being gay myself Mike has shown nothing but respect for me. His article is very funny and very pointed. To me it shows that homophobes will create links to the most absurd things on the planet to being gay. Beastiality is one of them. As you read further in the article you see where he is using very dry sarcasm throughout the whole thing and then goes on to destroy the ultra conservative theories about all of this non-sense.
Thanks dude! Couldn’t have said it better myself 🙂
er…excuse me? Why is there a British Union Flag advertising this article? Are you suggesting that the Brits shag animals??? Shame on you (unless you mean Yorkshire people of course with regards to sheep)….;-)
Mind you…there seem to be more dogs over here lately…..
I’d better shut up now ….
LOL. I knew you would jump on that one ole bean 🙂 It’s more the sentiment I liked, the flag is just coincidental. Then again you Brits do have a reputation with your sheep 🙂
I thought Britain was the place where the men are men and the sheep get all scared or something. Sheep shaggers the whole lot of you 😉
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
Anyone seen the porn movie ‘Animal Farm’? No idea what nationality it is but I remember in my early 20’s a pal brought a video to our flat and we watched it. Hilariously sick and bizarre.
Some chap shagged a cow which just stood there ‘chewing the cud’ completely oblivious of the ‘action’ going on at its rear end.
Three naked women tried to ‘do’ a dog. The dog kept running away across the field where they were filming and eventually appeared to bite one of the women. Sensible dog.
As I recall the entire thing seemed very amateurish but I at least had the last laugh.
Having worked on a farm I had told my pals that a pigs dick is like it’s tail – all curly. They didn’t believe me. After ‘Animal Farm’ they did.
I’d probably throw up seeing it now but, in my defence, I was early 20’s and extremely drunk….
There’s actually a real movie called “Animal Farm” that is based on George Orwell’s 1945 book. It is nothing like you describe so I’m guessing you watched the porn version 🙂
Shame on you!
The implication of your opening header “So, if you’re nervous because you think your son is gay, you have no worries unless you think he might be having sex with Peaches the poodle” reiterates the threadbare and erroneous implication of the religious right and other anti-gay groups, that “gay” includes such perversions as bestiality.
I assumed you knew better.
Gay is not a synonym for pervert. Gay is not non-consensual sex with anyone, or anything, it is not zoophile or pedophile or any of the other predatory prurient interest. It is about who – in human terms – we are attracted to, who we love, who we are. To suggest otherwise, as you did, is not only erroneous, it is prejudicial, un-fair, and detrimental to those of us under the LGBT umbrella that is commonly referred to as “Gay”.
I strongly recommend that you amend your rude phraseology to rectify this affront to a segment of our society that is literally fighting for its life against a radical fundamentalist theology. I’m sure Mad Mike & Co. do not intend to be a part of that bigotry.
Oh for heaven’s sake. Give me a break. Nothing like that was intended and you, of all people, should know better than to accuse me of such nonsense. That’s just bullshit to think that I’m accusing gays of engaging in bestiality or any other perversion. I’m sick and tired of being called names and accused of some form of bigotry. It was a FUN comment, and was in no way designed to insult any fucking group so get over it. I’ve no intention whatsoever of changing anything in this article. I’ve been a long time supporter of gays and the gay lifestyle, publishing many meaningful articles about the horror of discrimination as well as violent crimes being committed because someone enjoys a different way of life. I won’t now be accused of being some sort of gay hater; not by anyone! Finally you need to refresh your page. I change my opening statement several times before it finalizes, and you caught the first version. No matter, that version was fine as well, and I can tell you that had I seen your objection before the rewrite there would have been no rewrite.
Tall Stacey only a paranoid would think that’s what the author meant with that phraseology. I thought it was funny and I’m as gay as the late Liberace. Not once did I think he meant any disrespect toward us LGBT folk. I agree with Michael. Lighten up and stop drawing negative attention where it’s not needed. Gay people get enough bad press as it is without people like you putting words in other people’s mouths. The shame should be on you. And Mike I don’t know how you do it.
Marsha thanks for your support. I have to tell you it gets tiring at times to be told you are something you are not or to suggest you wrote something you didn’t. From time to time I wonder why I do this. People can be such fucking judgmental assholes.
Come on Stace! This is our Mikey! You know he didn’t mean owt like that x
Thanks Norman. Anyone who has ever spent time over here should know nothing could be further from the truth. I do have prejudices of course. I hate criminals, and I’m not too fond of Muslims.
It is liberal feminism that enshrines consent as requirement for sexual activity. But liberal feminism also defines children and animals as incapable of true consent. It certainly isn’t traditional Christianity doing that! They are still hung up on the Sodom story as being about gay sex as opposed to what it really was which was GANG RAPE.
Interesting take Thomas and you certainly make good points. No fan of Christianity here!
What the fuck? What’s next? Public masturbation encouraged? Freedom of expression? This country is going straight to hell. Great title Michael J.
Thanks Tim!!