[Shaun]

The only issue I believe there should be with sexuality is consent. If both parties consent it's fine. You can't really get that with a dead guy, a kid or a donkey so it's fairly acceptable for them to be illegal. I do sympathise for paedophiles/zoophiles/etc. though... it's surely just a natural impulse. Maybe some damage, sure, but it's not intentional "oh let's rape a badger today" business.

[Urban Cragou]

Originally Posted by Shaun

The only issue I believe there should be with sexuality is consent. If both parties consent it's fine. You can't really get that with a dead guy, a kid or a donkey so it's fairly acceptable for them to be illegal. I do sympathise for paedophiles/zoophiles/etc. though... it's surely just a natural impulse. Maybe some damage, sure, but it's not intentional "oh let's rape a badger today" business.

Sums up my views entirely, only better-worded than I've been able to convey so far.

[Niall]

Originally Posted by Shaun

The only issue I believe there should be with sexuality is consent. If both parties consent it's fine. You can't really get that with a dead guy, a kid or a donkey so it's fairly acceptable for them to be illegal. I do sympathise for paedophiles/zoophiles/etc. though... it's surely just a natural impulse. Maybe some damage, sure, but it's not intentional "oh let's rape a badger today" business.

This is pretty much my entire thoughts on the matter I guess.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Niall

This is something I've often pondered: what if in a hundred years time that the things that are considered sexually abnormal or depraved by current societal standards are something that are considered normal and healthy?

I mean it was only a few decades ago that homosexuality was removed from the DSM-IV.

Exactly. After all, 'right' and 'wrong' are only concepts created and constructed by humans.

Originally Posted by Shaun

The only issue I believe there should be with sexuality is consent. If both parties consent it's fine. You can't really get that with a dead guy, a kid or a donkey so it's fairly acceptable for them to be illegal. I do sympathise for paedophiles/zoophiles/etc. though... it's surely just a natural impulse. Maybe some damage, sure, but it's not intentional "oh let's rape a badger today" business.

This is pretty much my view as well, especially where consent is concerned. I've really no issue if people wish to inflict pain on each other for sexual gratification so long as everyone involved agrees to it. Similarly, stuff like agalmatophilia (statues, mannequins and immobility) from that list really doesn't bother me...live and let live.

However, and I'm not saying I totally agree with it, but they are thought-provoking opinions and ones which require quite a fair bit of open-mindedness, some of the posts on that forum thread I posted pose some interesting ideas - if the animal in question of that OP came onto the person themselves, and was clearly enjoying it, could that not be considered 'consent' in animal terms? Of course if someone just started raping an animal against its will (I think beastiality differs from zoophilia in that with the former the person gains sexual pleasure from the animals pain) then that's not acceptable - but if the animal doesn't refuse and comes onto the person themselves, is it more acceptable? It's totally strange and alien to be pondering these things and like I said it requires a lot of open mindedness but it certainly raises a lot of interesting questions.

[Jenn-CityIVLyfe]

Originally Posted by Shaun

The only issue I believe there should be with sexuality is consent. If both parties consent it's fine. You can't really get that with a dead guy, a kid or a donkey so it's fairly acceptable for them to be illegal. I do sympathise for paedophiles/zoophiles/etc. though... it's surely just a natural impulse. Maybe some damage, sure, but it's not intentional "oh let's rape a badger today" business.

Shaun: speaking my exact thoughts before I ever thought them