if you're so rational, then why you don't fuck dogs??? (lmao don't) – my counter argument for rationalism and systematic ethics


this doesn't help the stereotype how people think that we furries are dogfuckers but here we go.

i have always thought myself that people who claim that we humans should be rational, aren't really ready for the world that is rational. we put a lot of feelings and irrationality into our decision-making and i'll give example why it's sometimes a good thing that we are just don't care how rational and systematic our moral values are.

i don't say that you should fuck dogs, but if a person believes in moral consistency (as they should within this ethical paradigm of rationalism), the unethical nature of zoophilia cannot be logically debunked, especially if you believe in anthropocentric superiority and speciesism like most people do.

the arguments of those who believe in speciesism that "they don't want to cause harm to animals" and that "animals cannot give consent" are awfully funny arguments, conserning how badly we treat animals. we are the last motherfuckers to preach about animal rights.

you don't want to cause harm to animals? you don't want to rape them, but you still want to kill them. let's take people for example to prove how stupid that would sound. "yeah, i killed my girlfriend with a shotgun, but at least i've never raped her!" well you still killed her with a shotgun. what good does it bring her? don't you think you just caused harm to her? "rape is not as bad as killing", does this make killing justified? this proves that we don't really care about the harm inflicted on animals.

also i don't know about you but as a rape victim i feel that people who ever says that "rape is worse than killing" aren't rape victims. i don't think that me being raped is as terrible as the thought of being killed. like, why i would think that action that leads into losing consciousness permanently is lesser crime than wrong kind of people sticking dick in me. killing is much worse for sure. people who says otherwise, are suicidal.

an animal cannot consent to sex? well, that animal certainly never consented to being shot and turned into a hamburger patty. you are not interested in obtaining consent when you want meat. you are no better than someone who doesn't want consent for sex. sex and meat are both purely hedonistic things. human does not need meat. you can eat synthetic b12-vitamin as pill. you can get plant-sourced protein. so you eat meat for selfish pleasure, not for an actual need. you kill a living being for your own pleasure. but can you really blame yourself? meat is fucking delicious.

usually this is referred to as the fact that less conscious beings should not be on the same line as others. wait, if someone has down syndrome and has mental level of a 3-year-old, then you can do anything to them too?

"it's just disgusting", so if you think that having lesbian/gay sex or eating blueberries is disgusting, should those be banned as well? something being disgusting is just an opinion and moral principles shouldn't be based on that. "b-but there's two consenting adults" i just showed you the argument why you don't actually give fuck about consent.

to a large extent, the opposition to zoophilia is based on emotion and not on any logical argument. for an argument to be logical, it should be coherent.

zoophilia is prime example why i laugh at ben sharpiro type "facts don't care about your feelings" mantras when in reality many of our moral principles aren't based on logical reasoning, but feelings.

if i heard that someone doesn't get laid and is so desperate that they have to put peanut butter on their penis after every day of work so that their dog can lick it, i'd consider that person more of a laughing stock, a pathetic person than a full monster. people are hypocrites when it comes to animal rights, so it's hard for me to really get upset or angry about it. butchers kill millions of animals every day.

it's laughing stock for me because i just don't understand how on earth someone can see animals in sexual way. animals are so out of this world. it has exactly the same energy as if some smoking hot woman starts unironically flirting with man who talks and laughs like goofy.

i guess i can understand it maybe from the aspect that if we were talking about humiliation fetishes, that people piss, spit and that some dog starts to fuck you, sure, that would be the pinnacle of humiliation, but who the hell would really want to do it in practice and wouldn't the turn off already come from that isn't the dog itself such a stupid animal? that humiliation kink would be on the same level as barney the dinosaur starting to fuck you.

but yeah, only a vegan can be morally coherent on this subject.

i think pedophilia is a thousand times worse than zoophilia, because humans live longer than animals, humans are more conscious than animals, so there is more suffering.

so when some #zoopride dogfucker on x dot com is owning you with their precise and logical arguments how you're not any better because you go to mcdonalds, taco bell and kfc, just fuck your shit up, accept that you aren't rational and you don't necessarily have to. ethics aren't black and white.

justification of zoophilic practices through hypocrisy of anthropocentrists is the ragebait of systematic ethics for sure.