Sept. 10, 2007, 8:17 p.m. CST
Devor is going to have to prove something to me first. I heard great things about his "Police Beat" and was underwhelmed by it. Is this more of the same? And I thought I'd use this space to type something worthy rather than first.. which I've never been.
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:17 p.m. CST
by duct tape wallet
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:19 p.m. CST
Nice one Vern. If I'm first, so be it.
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:27 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:30 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Unless it's a matinee.
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:32 p.m. CST
by The Dum Guy
Then drink a half gallon of vodka, smear bannana (sp?) all over your' body, and.... eh, would that be rape? I know (actual, true story) a guy who once humped his dog (supposedly no penatration) until he got off. Gross you say, yes I reply, what is worse? He was my, then-at-the-time girlfriend's Ex, so you know how they say you've had sex with everyone else that your' partner has had sex with? I think that means that, vicariously, I've fucked a dog.
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:37 p.m. CST
LOL I don't know, this is pretty fucked up stuff. The sequel will be filmed in Tijuana I'll hazard a guess.
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:47 p.m. CST
Should have lubed a little better, am I macabre because I think this sounds like an interesting movie? Anything has to be better than 'The Bridge'
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:48 p.m. CST
by El Mamerro
I need to get my hands on it. <br><br> No homo.
Sept. 10, 2007, 8:49 p.m. CST
by El Mamerro
No horse homo.
Sept. 10, 2007, 9 p.m. CST
I think you might be right. funny post. Vern nice review actually, your level of restraint was remarkable especially considering your usual lack thereof. I don't even want to comment on the topic. I couldn't possibly.
Sept. 10, 2007, 9:07 p.m. CST
Fantastic review. Really. You almost made me want to see a movie about horsefucking, in spite of your anti-horsefucking stance. Excellent work.
Sept. 10, 2007, 9:15 p.m. CST
to see this show. Everyone said you gotta see this show! And, its a woman fucking a horse. We think, this'll be awesome, and we get there, and it was not awesome. You think "a woman fucking a horse", and you get there, and, "its a WOMAN FUCKING A HORSE!". Felt bad for her. We all felt bad for her. Kinda felt bad for the horse.
Sept. 10, 2007, 9:36 p.m. CST
Sept. 10, 2007, 9:54 p.m. CST
by The Real MiraJeff
This just in... Uwe Boll to direct Zoo Two: Electric Zoogaloo.
Sept. 10, 2007, 9:55 p.m. CST
I'll be back later to see what sort of insane twists and turns this talkback has taken.
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:01 p.m. CST
was v well written. as was the rest of the review. but especially that part. <p> ever see Kissed? it's about a lady who fucks dead dudes. (non-doc)
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:18 p.m. CST
I had no clue what this movie was but I was excited to read that it took place in the Seattle area until I got to the topic of the film... sonofabitch. Well, I guess I'm glad I left Seattle for the beauty of Lake Stevens up north here. Lake Stevens, Vern, it's Heaven if Enumclaw's Hell. By the way... is there a local Seattle area movie lover group around this town like there is in Austin? Or am I the only one local geek who sees the good flicks over here?
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:21 p.m. CST
....just google Mr. Hands. Though if you do, you may end up finding out a great deal more about this fucked up world than you'd like.
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:38 p.m. CST
Really weird and I feel bad for Vern for having to watch it. I honestly laughed out loud when Vern talked about the close up on the guy's ass and horse dick slaying him. Oh geeze...
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:39 p.m. CST
You people are SO judgmental! >:O <p>Didn't Harry Potter's artistic bravery in Equus teach you narrow-minded neanderthals ANYTHING about tolerence?!!
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:41 p.m. CST
by The Real MiraJeff
Apparently that was not the title of the Zoo sequel. Instead, the sequel will focus on cows, not horses, and be titled CATTLE IN SEATTLE.
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:54 p.m. CST
I glazed over at about the 28th paragraph or so.
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:56 p.m. CST
by Bob of the Shire
Ahahaha, oh my god. I am reminded of a forum SomethingAwful linked to once that was all about dog fuckers. They had guides to penetrating your dog and poems to certain dogs they've fucked and it was, overall, the most disturbing thing I've ever seen. I've been on the internet for awhile and I've seen a lot of fucked up shit but that was the only thing to ever make me actually gag.
Sept. 10, 2007, 10:56 p.m. CST
Maybe if Rob Zombie had cast a horse to play Mike Myers, it would truly have been a horror movie. <BR> <BR> BTW, this was the funniest review in a long, long time. "one that we who have chosen to keep our assholes free of horsecock cannot possibly understand" nearly made me shat my pants. <BR> <BR> Chances are I'll never see it. (Not that I want to). But I'm glad it's out there...probing the depths of people's desires...diving into those dark holes full of lust...stretching the limits of society's threshold... <BR> <BR> ...with a giant horse cock.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:01 p.m. CST
a few of us have been known to tie one on and try to see if any of us could ring the door bell of the next door neighbours then run away without getting caught, but being fucked by a horse I bow down to you sirs, Seattle has my deepest respect.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:03 p.m. CST
I hope the horse used protection.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:03 p.m. CST
But then you could say, "Gimme four horsefuckers for a dollar."
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:08 p.m. CST
by ye olde shiza
You should have mentioned the one where the zookeeper gets raped to death by the Grizzly Bear. For the sickest read ever, here ya go! <br><br> <b>Black Bear Attacks, Rapes, Zookeeper</b> <br><br> <i>Grin and bear it! Barry, an 850 lb. black bear, got a little frisky with zookeeper Ron Gilks. The anal rape is believed to be the first inter-special coupling in Metro Zoo history. <br><br> Here's a little dog-bites-man tale we couldn't resist. Except replace "dog" with "850-pound black bear"! And "bites" with "anally violate"! <br><br> Yes, last Saturday a zookeeper at the Metropolitan Zoo had "claws" for alarm when he was attacked and raped by the same black bear he had raised from a cub! Geez, talk about gratitude! <br><br> "It was horrible, just horrible," sobbed an eyewitness. Guess she sure got an eyeful! <br><br> The bear, named "Barry," attacked zookeeper Ron Gilks as Gilks entered the cage to give him dinner. Barry lunged at his throat, goring him with his huge claws and razor-sharp teeth. Some of the claw marks were three-quarters of an inch deep. Ouch! <br><br> Then, astonished onlookers could "bearly" believe what happened next--Barry began to brutally rape zookeeper Gilks! <br><br> Frantic zookeepers rushed for rifles as others tried to divert the bear. But there was no stopping Barry! This bear kept "bearing down," and Gilks just had to grin and "bear" it! Maybe Barry was mistaking him for his "honey"! <br><br> Gilks was pronounced dead upon arrival at the hospital. A full quart of bear semen was extracted from his ruptured chest cavity. And that's no small Boo-Boo! <br><br> Barry's 27-inch phallus, armed with guard hairs as sharp as red-hot needles, shot through Gilks' rectum, shattered his lower spine and skewered his colon, causing his entire lower torso to "cave" in! Yikes! Bet that wasn't the type of "cave" you had in mind when you took up zookeeping, Mr. Gilks! <br><br> And can you imagine Gilks' surprise when Barry's putrid ursine semen flooded his ruptured chest cavity? (By the way, Mr. Gilks, whatever cologne you've been wearing, where can the public get some?) <br><br> Finally, zookeeper Eric Pulliam shot Barry with a tranquilizer gun and pulled Gilks from the cage. The unconscious bear was later destroyed. Hey, this "Yogi" made a major "Boo-Boo"! <br><br> "I have worked with dangerous animals before," zoo director Kate Donegal said. "But never have I seen any animal sexually assault a human being." "Barry"? Try "Scary"! <br><br> Meanwhile, Gilks was pronounced dead at an area hospital--but at least he died grinning and bearing it! No doubt, this episode gives new meaning to the term, "Do not feed the bears!"</i>
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:13 p.m. CST
Good job, Vern.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:15 p.m. CST
Really, you can't go to the megaplex these days without being faced with a barrage of horsefucker movies.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:16 p.m. CST
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:24 p.m. CST
by Bob Cryptonight
I mean, don't you Aint It Cool guys have a deal with them...to make toys out of the movies you promote? Just askin'...
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:27 p.m. CST
I am disturbed to the core.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:28 p.m. CST
Very interesting picture...
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:40 p.m. CST
Was the horsefuckee a Republican senator?
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:41 p.m. CST
but you misspelled "probably". That's disturbing.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:43 p.m. CST
by half vader
At least they could comunicate though and it would have been con-sensual.
Sept. 10, 2007, 11:49 p.m. CST
Sick sons of bitches, .. A HORSE?
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:14 a.m. CST
by Bob Cryptonight
..because that's pretty much WHY those toys are popular and have given Barbie a run for her (Mattel's) money. If anything, Mudede should be smacked for unoriginality by regurgitating stuff that has already been talked about on the morning news shows, NPR, etc...anywhere that a story about BRATZ has been done. In this case I don't think he's so much being clever as just repeating stuff that he has heard/seen reported elsewhere (although he DOES mention that he can see the proof in the BRATZ popularity by way of why kids like the toys over that ol' raggy ass skank Barbie). Otherwise, great review as usual and all the horsefuckers out there can be proud!!!
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:20 a.m. CST
by half vader
Morgan Freeman coming down hard on my arse (so to speak). Morbid curiosity being what it is I also want to see Kissed 'cause it's got the chick from Deadwood and Twitch City in it. But I'm scared because of the aforementioned stuff I learned in Seven. Not to mention I do actually have 2 copies of Triumph of the Will (1st one didn't work so Amazon sent me another). <p> Buffywrestling that was great. <p> Does anybody know which queen of France or whatever was supposedly a horsefucker? Can't remember. <p> I know the Jackass guys will be interested in this one though. The shitting in J2 was gross but drinking the horsespunk made me gag. By which I mean... uh nevermind.
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:22 a.m. CST
by half vader
Well, once you've had Black Beauty, you can't go back.
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:22 a.m. CST
by The Dum Guy
I guess this is the adult version of Sea Biscuit?<br><br>What is funny, or the most funny part, is that this is what it takes to get laws enacted, someone stupid enough to fuck-up cross-species love and end up dead...... As far as that zookeeper's murder/rape, I can't help but wonder if there is video of that, and if so, will it be on the new Faces of Death?<br><br>On a side note, does anyone else feel weird masturbating near your' pet(s)? I'm always afraid my cat will think that my balls will make for a good toy, or scratch-post.
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:25 a.m. CST
by Bob Cryptonight
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:25 a.m. CST
That was actually really enjoyable, Vern. Thanks.
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:52 a.m. CST
by Andy Warhol Jr
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:05 a.m. CST
starts reviewing hardcare bestiality movies? I say within 4 months we will see a review called "Vern gets it on with Anal Rodents 2!"
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:11 a.m. CST
but id rather fuck that animal known as YOUR MOM hahahhahahhahaha
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:49 a.m. CST
Bring me a VIIIRGIN!!
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:55 a.m. CST
Chip and Clydesdales Rescue Rumprangers
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:57 a.m. CST
by Will Not Reply To Your Post
How come more of those idiots haven't died????
Sept. 11, 2007, 2:18 a.m. CST
can someone delete the post 'ye olde shiza' made above. i think it's actually beneath AICN. if there was ever a post that was too low that was it. it reads like it was supposed to be funny but it's horrifying. it was worse than the time I watched a fireman laughing telling stories of finding decapitated babies in car accidents. can we be spared the post from the complete sick fucks, please? this may not be a classy site, but it Aint Cool to post detailed descriptions of a person being mutilated and raped and killed by a bear just to have a laugh. grow the fuck up 'ye olde shiza'.
Sept. 11, 2007, 2:27 a.m. CST
by andy kaufman
enumclaw is twin peaks/devils rejects/david lynch creepy and hill billie flavored. i was born and raised here and the place is fucked to the core. place gives me the creeps.
Sept. 11, 2007, 2:41 a.m. CST
When society persues stimulation and 'the new' rather than enjoyment then whatever they use (things, experiences, relationships) gets old after a while and they need something more extreme (i.e. new) just to give the same (but in reality diminishing) satisfaction, much like drugs. This principle is true for the horsefucking degenerates but also for the 'curious' public. Some how, some way someone will find a justification to make a 'fascinating' and even sympathetic portrayal of Paedophiles, and i don't mean the likes of the movie 'The woodsman' or whatever it was called. I mean something that will, if not win the public over, then at least ameliorate the subject to some extent. It's already started with mainstream comedians such as Leno and Letterman joking (as in, making light of and therefore, with repetition 'making light') paedophillia when it comes up in certain news stories. Once the public has been conditioned to overcome their initial revulsion at the mere mention of the subject by the humorous presentation of it then the next stage begins wich is 'taking a closer (and now 'serious') look at the subject. After that a minority will even feel safe enough to 'give it a try' and others will feel less justified in condeming them. A debate will then rise as to how anyone has the right to define, down to a certain age such as maybe 11 or 12 years old, who can say if a child willingness to participate should be over ruled. At this point the majority of the public will still be against Paedophilia but the morality of it will have been made just fuzzy and gray enoughon the edges to allow certain levels of it to be practiced. It no longer bet the total horror that we know it to be today but neither will it be totally accepted. Paedophiles don't restrain themselves when faced with possible jail time so the ocasional 'tut tut' will be heaven to them. Beastiality, Paedophillia even government torture are all abhorrent things that a society can be conditioned to accept given a subtle enough approach and enough time. The time to act is when the slide starts not when it gains too much momentum that nothing can be done. Human dignity is a real thing and a valuable quality. Watered down and vague concepts of 'tollerance' might help people to feel that they are 'good citizens' and 'good people' but when you eventually have a truly 'anything goes' society then well, as the great Leonard Coen says in his song 'The future' "Things are going to slide, slide in all directions Won't be nothing Nothing you can measure anymore". Sheeet, i'll give you the whole lyric. It's quite insightful. . . . "The Future" Give me back my broken night my mirrored room, my secret life it's lonely here, there's no one left to torture Give me absolute control over every living soul And lie beside me, baby, that's an order! Give me crack and anal sex Take the only tree that's left and stuff it up the hole in your culture Give me back the Berlin wall give me Stalin and St Paul I've seen the future, brother: it is murder. Things are going to slide, slide in all directions Won't be nothing Nothing you can measure anymore The blizzard, the blizzard of the world has crossed the threshold and it has overturned the order of the soul When they said REPENT REPENT I wonder what they meant When they said REPENT REPENT I wonder what they meant When they said REPENT REPENT I wonder what they meant You don't know me from the wind you never will, you never did I'm the little jew who wrote the Bible I've seen the nations rise and fall I've heard their stories, heard them all but love's the only engine of survival Your servant here, he has been told to say it clear, to say it cold: It's over, it ain't going any further And now the wheels of heaven stop you feel the devil's riding crop Get ready for the future: it is murder Things are going to slide ... There'll be the breaking of the ancient western code Your private life will suddenly explode There'll be phantoms There'll be fires on the road and the white man dancing You'll see a woman hanging upside down her features covered by her fallen gown and all the lousy little poets coming round tryin' to sound like Charlie Manson and the white man dancin' Give me back the Berlin wall Give me Stalin and St Paul Give me Christ or give me Hiroshima Destroy another fetus now We don't like children anyhow I've seen the future, baby: it is murder Things are going to slide ... When they said REPENT REPENT ...
Sept. 11, 2007, 2:48 a.m. CST
by half vader
You don't know what the Onion is after all this time? And as for beneath AICN I guess you haven't been HERE that long either. Or missed Harry's famous "dead raped deer". <p> Besides, don't you realise how redundant your post is, or did you somehow wander into this TB without reading the actual review itself? You just read a long and funny review about a man getting fucked and killed by a horse! Bears are 'crossing the line'?! Yes I'm exagerratin' but Jeezuss dude! It's THE ONION. <p> Your Fireman story is MORE offensive as it's actually real (if we believe someone as gullible as you) and you didn't hesitate to share it with US, you 'complete sick fuck'! We should be spared your post - by your own argument.
Sept. 11, 2007, 3:37 a.m. CST
by El Borak
to even suggest that horsefucking is wrong. we're all going straight to hell.
Sept. 11, 2007, 4:09 a.m. CST
by Sledge Hammer
...and the human (or a rough approximation of one) as the fuckee, can it really be called horse fucking? Plus which, from the horse's point of view, with the horse being the fuck-er, I'm sure he considers this act human fucking, or, alternatively, man splitting. At best I'll give you that this guy was horse fucked, as in fucked by a horse, but he certainly wasn't 'horse fucking'. I mean that would be just silly...
Sept. 11, 2007, 4:21 a.m. CST
by fight this generation
wasn't the Queen (in her damned undies) of France, but rather Catherine II, the Great, of mother Russia. Was a Venture Brothers gag last season (don't wince!)...
Sept. 11, 2007, 4:39 a.m. CST
Like that new movie whose poster you see and get vaguely intrigued... and then you notice "starring Adam Sandler" or "directed by Kerry Conran", and the interest is immediately gone.
Sept. 11, 2007, 5:15 a.m. CST
"They just like to have giant horsecocks in their butts."
Sept. 11, 2007, 5:46 a.m. CST
Sept. 11, 2007, 6:21 a.m. CST
Pedantic, but spot fucking on.
Sept. 11, 2007, 6:24 a.m. CST
You're gonna have to finish Seagalogy if you want my 15 bucks. Mush, mush.<p> I remember renting Woman Chaser at one point. That was really on tape? Time flies.
Sept. 11, 2007, 6:27 a.m. CST
Odd. Affecting. Kinda touching. Makes me wish I'd let my little brother tag along more.
Sept. 11, 2007, 6:29 a.m. CST
by barnaby jones
Haven't women been fucking horses on tape since the 70's ? Gay men are so slow.
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:04 a.m. CST
the horse wants some small human penis????? I don't think so, on both counts.
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:16 a.m. CST
...and are against horsefucking." AHAHAHAH! That cracked me up!
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:39 a.m. CST
and the idea that someone could make a "serious" film about it means they're either incredibly disingenuous or have no sense of humor. The horesefucking jokes flowed like wine back in the day...like wine!
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:51 a.m. CST
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:54 a.m. CST
Ain't no horsey hung enough<p> I crack myself up, I tell you.
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:55 a.m. CST
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:55 a.m. CST
Do horses suffer from penis envy?
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:58 a.m. CST
Being a 'Horse Fucker', and being a 'Horse Fuckee' are two very different things. This MUST be differentiated. Secondly, Vern... I get the impression that you have been accused of some type of horse-fuckduggery, as your entire review (as good as it was) does seem to be very defensive. Nobody suspects you mate.... at least.... we didn't before we read the review... <p> One more thing... my wife is a hoarse fucker.
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:12 a.m. CST
and its dead fucking good... so to speak. To be honest, the other 'Molly-starring' film by that Canadian lady director was damn good too: 'Suspicious River'. <p> Xiphos is absolutely right. It is unfair. Horse-fucker should be a title achieved after 10 or more horse-dalliances. Less than 10 fucks and people should just refer to you as "that guy who fucked a horse one/two/a few times".
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:27 a.m. CST
by half vader
Nissenakke, Vern knows there are probably quite a few furries lurking here at the moment. <p> Darfur, I'm not absolutely sure but I had a little white Welsh Mountain pony (stop it!) when I was a kid and he did look sheepishly and maybe enviously at the black stallion next door from time to time. Of course he also used to run by the new mares to show off when a new lot came, his fat buttcheeks making him fart with every stride. Hey, Ladies! <p> Fight. Thanks for that. I dunno, why, but at least you've put my mind at ease. Wouldn't wanna get that one wrong in polite company. <p> Seph, maybe he's defensive because, well, his name is Vern, fer cryin' out loud. What more do you need to be suspicious?! ;)
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:31 a.m. CST
The horse's name was "Rusty". <
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:40 a.m. CST
Hey, everybody! Let me tell you a movie called ZOO, but right after I get that started let me tell you about the city it's set it, but right after I get that started let me tell you about a writer in that city. But right after I get that started let me ramble on because I'm a fucking artist and every word I write equals Shakespeare. What a horrible 'review'. Worst than Harry's usual dribble. Moriarty is the only one keeping AICN from being complete shit.
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:43 a.m. CST
by Al Swearengen
I heard tell of some hooplehead, that went by the name of Steve the Drunk, s'posed to have had intimate relations with Bullock's horse down by the livery. But our upstanding Sheriff never did rightly say one way or the other.<P>Now, I'm all for Man having dominion over the rest of God's fuckin' creatures. However, taking a fuckin' stiff horse-prick up you large intestine hardly seems to be the way to express your fuckin' gratitude to the Lord fuckin' Almighty. God bless the soul of that poor cocksucker who was too weak to resist the overtures of the equine. Cause that's all a good assfucking requires; a submissive posture of weakness or temptation. Neither of which I will abide.
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:43 a.m. CST
Shake and bake..... Shake and bake baby
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:45 a.m. CST
Do horses experience morning wood in when they wake up?
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:45 a.m. CST
Oh wait, you ARE a horse. never mind.
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:50 a.m. CST
Ok i don't want to be guilty of making light of this subject my self but i couldn't resist getting a Deadwood reference in. By the way. How do you insert spaces in this talk back. My massive block of text is an eyesore but i'm sure i was doing paragraphs etc. Oh and it maybe be pedantic ButtF but unless you pin these subjects down and spell out logically why you think as you do then people just call you a frikkin prude or soemthing.
Sept. 11, 2007, 8:56 a.m. CST
...is a better title, methinks. Co-starring Rob Schneider. Is Sunny in Philly on yet?
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:21 a.m. CST
1.- Great reading Vern, obviously. 2.- I can't believe this movie actually exists. 3.- Somebody mentioned the CHAOS talkback. I went to check that gem again and it's gone. There's this new smaller talkback, but nothing I remember... What the hell happenned to that? Please somebody tell me it is saved somewhere.
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:33 a.m. CST
made me howl.
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:33 a.m. CST
made me howl.
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:34 a.m. CST
"no sir, i don't like it."
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:44 a.m. CST
by Lance Rocke
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:51 a.m. CST
That one line made me laugh out loud.
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:54 a.m. CST
People who like to watch people fuck animals should also be killed. Tolerance is one thing but raping an animal.....there are some sick people in this world, if we would just start curing them with 45 magnum shot to the head, the news paper wouldn't be such a bad read anymore.
Sept. 11, 2007, 10:17 a.m. CST
Well done getting another equine reference in there, but this review is about a thousand words too long for a horsefocking movie.
Sept. 11, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST
by Stuntcock Mike
Sorry to be judgemental, but these morons need to be jailed
Sept. 11, 2007, 10:53 a.m. CST
by half vader
for another Deadwood ref. <p> At least he wasn't a government official.
Sept. 11, 2007, 10:54 a.m. CST
by half vader
"Neigh means Neigh".
Sept. 11, 2007, 11:56 a.m. CST
This film already made its way through a small metro area (Tucson AZ) in early July. Why even bother reviewing it here and now other than to make or invite snickering, adolescent comments? Isn't there some fan-boy super-hero movie coming out that you can jerk off to instead?
Sept. 11, 2007, 11:56 a.m. CST
Lets be clear on the terms here!!<p> Also, death by horse cock? Probably up there in my top 8 worst ways to die.
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:18 p.m. CST
by just pillow talk
Because<p>1)Some of those "snickering, adolescent comments" are pretty funny <p>2) Some of us enjoy Vern's reviews, horse fucking and all<p>3)It's a fucking talkback. <p>4)Did you see this, and did you jerk off to it? Do you prefer horse fucking over "fan-boy super-hero" movies?
Sept. 11, 2007, 12:38 p.m. CST
My mistake bud. For some reason I thought anybody who would be interested in an arty experimental documentary about bestiality would be able to read an essay with thoughts and shit in it. What in God's name was I thinking bringing up the setting and writer of the movie? Here is a do-over, please forgive me, for now on I will write moronic Entertainment Weekly style blurbs with no substance to appease you.<p> ZOO (THINKFilm, $29.95, available September 18th). Talk about a horse of a different color! Director Robinson Devor combines poetic imagery of the Pacific Northwest with taped interviews to discuss a notorious incident involving horses. Is it for the squeamish? Neigh! Also it has no setting or writer so don't worry. I love that show Lost it's so great! What about that new Kanye single!
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:12 p.m. CST
Are you defending the movie,pissed that Vern reviwed it, or just hating on the site and all of us talkbackers? I only jerked off to one superhero movie and it was Batman and Robin, I have a thing for Alicia Silverstone and the way her ass looked in the Batgirl suit,not to mention Uma Thurman as Posion Ivy. I'd rather jerk off to that than Mr. Ed any day.
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:13 p.m. CST
I shouldn't say that, All the pretty horses was a good movie and severely underated in my book.
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:17 p.m. CST
You need to check that shit out. Maybe I'm late to the party but it has one of my hometown's favorite "local boy makes good' in a starring role....Richard Tyson. I'm not finished with it yet but so far it is a classic horror rip off(Snakes on a plane) D grade film. Vern you gotta see this movie.
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:19 p.m. CST
And the horse that rode in on him.
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:41 p.m. CST
...had been the overlord of a giant horsefucking ring instead of a dogfighting ring? How would things have been different?
Sept. 11, 2007, 1:51 p.m. CST
Vern, that Entertainment Weekly review was so spot-on. God, I hate that magazine. Also, Gimp Pants, I'm sorry you were forced to read. I mean, couldn't you enjoy Vern's essay as a comedic bit of writing? Or were you ACTUALLY looking for a straight review of this film?
Sept. 11, 2007, 2:57 p.m. CST
A very disturbing read. But great, as usual, Vern.
Sept. 11, 2007, 4:17 p.m. CST
at the Atlanta Film Festival back in April. I thought about reviewing it, but didn't quite know where to begin. I will say, I think Vern's review is pretty spot-on, horsefuckery-wise. It is a beautifully-filmed movie, and that is one of the jarring aspects of it. Since all the story is told via narration, there's never a sense of urgency about it. It's very laconic. I too was unsure how to 'feel' about this film. I found it well shot, and interestingly told, but I also felt a separation from the topic that seemed to come from the fact that there wasn't any 'holy shit, LOOK what these people did' ... a la Moore's documentaries. To quote Rorschach, "Hrrm"
Sept. 11, 2007, 5:17 p.m. CST
sounds awesome in the cheesy way that Snakes was great. I must see that shit. Now if they would only make a movie about horsefucking on a plane!
Sept. 11, 2007, 5:53 p.m. CST
...Vern has portrayed his favourite hobby in an unsavoury light. ;^)
Sept. 11, 2007, 6:15 p.m. CST
horserfuckery! It's just fun to say. I often use clusterfuckery in my daily cussin... and mayhap ad horsefuckery to that... as in... "What is the deal with all these snakes on this plane? What a bunch of horsefuckery here!!!"
Sept. 11, 2007, 6:30 p.m. CST
the comment about the pony was this: in the film, when they animal resuce people come to take it away, a pony comes up to the stallion and gives it a BLOW JOB (!). You know he'd have to been trained to do that shite as well, and that's just as bad. And...stuntcock mike... you made me grin at your comment. well played sire, well played.
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:27 p.m. CST
I had high expectations for the talkback and the winners were.... <p> 1.) "Neigh means Neigh" from HV <p> and <p> 2.) "Fuck Mr. Hands and the horse that road in on him." By DocP <p> Your Golden Saddle Awards are in the mail. Congrats.
Sept. 11, 2007, 7:36 p.m. CST
...You don't have LOVE and HATE tattooed on your knuckles or anything do you?
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:18 p.m. CST
I agree, "Neigh means Neigh" was the best one, I shoulda thought of that. Competition is over though, no more horse puns from this point on, violators will be enumclawed.
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:36 p.m. CST
I think this is the sequel to Brokeback Mountain.
Sept. 11, 2007, 9:52 p.m. CST
by 'Cholera's Ghost
Oh wait. They're playing catcher? Oh. Your. God. That's takin' it to whole 'notha level.
Sept. 11, 2007, 10:16 p.m. CST
Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhall quit each other, can't quit their horses!
Sept. 11, 2007, 10:48 p.m. CST
All you 'horsefuckee' haters should just step off. Yes it hurts a lot, and yes I cry, and yes I wonder why I let it keep happening, but that doesn't mean y'all should hate. When did we become so mean? Do everyone a favor and focus on the horsefuckERS. They're the reason terrorists hate us.
Sept. 11, 2007, 11:15 p.m. CST
OK I realize that this isn't really a serious forum, but I'm going to post a few enlightenments. Feel free to flame away. #1 - Vern: Actually the zoo community existed a long time before the internet. Ads were taken out in the backs of magazines and tabloids, thinly coded but easily decipherable for people into the same things. #2 - Vern: Your disbelief that some of these people actually are emotionally and spiritually involved with their animals doesn't make it not so. I realize that it's hard to wrap your brain around but there actually are some people who's wiring is a bit off. Or they have limited social skills (this is only one subset of the zoo community, many are professional, successful and social). There is a division within the ranks. People are classified as "zoophiles" or "bestialists". Zoophiles are those that are emotionally and spiritual bonded to their animals and sex is one manifestation of it. "Besties" are those who are just using animals for a warm wet place to "stick it" (or have it stuck in them). Again, hard for "mundanes" to comprehend, but it's real. Finally, "liljuniorbrown", you want to start "curing" us with a .45 handgun to the head, I welcome you to try and you can say hello to my .454. If you want to kill someone for something you perceive as rape, then how about someone returns the favor everytime you participate in a murder by eating a hamburger. I'm not a vegetarian, but the same lame argument applies both ways. Here's the deal. The Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that we cannot pass laws simply based on morality (the sodomy laws were repealed). Animal cruelty laws are already in place that would prosecute people for sexual acts that involved cruelty. People exploit animals for profit all the time. Would that cow rather have a small human dick in her or be made into hamburger? Did that breeding farm ask that mare if she wants to be pregnant then take her foal away from her? Please don't tell me that you think it's fine to masturbate your horse for profit (for AI breeding) but wrong to do it for pleasure or smile when you do it. Our society allows the non-cruel use of animals for human needs, and that's that. If it's cruel, existing laws would take care of it. If it's not cruel, go away. It's unconstitutional to pass a law simply based on the "moral majority", and if someone had the balls and money to fight it, WA's new felony law would be overturned. A felony? Please. Go fight some real crime, douchebags.
Sept. 11, 2007, 11:31 p.m. CST
That's 'Greatest of all Time', just so you know. Serious Vern, I dont do this type of shit ever, ever, but for anyone that does not about my man- I've copied and pasted! This is really funny . . . GARFIELD the asshole cat Man, what a fuckin week. On Tuesday Bush got either "re"-elected or re-"elected," and I've been stumbling around muttering to myself ever since. Stabbing at my porridge with my spoon, staring blankly out the window, mouthing the word "why" to myself over and over again. One thing I know, there are some things in this world that just cannot be explained. Sometimes bad things happen to good people. Sometimes people vote for a president that couldn't be trusted to put on his own pants. And sometimes a guy gets the blue state blues, walks around town in a daze, suddenly finds himself at home having rented the movie "GARFIELD," not really knowing how or why. I know for a fact this happens because you're lookin at the guy who it happened to. Me. It was weird. What this is is a movie based on the popular comic strip from the 1980s called Garfield. Like all comic strips it is not funny and about a talking animal. This is a cat called Garfield who is orange. The thing about Garfield, he is real fucking fat, he eats lasagna. That's funny because real cats eat cat food, but this one also eats lasagna. Also he says "I hate Mondays" at the beginning although this does not turn out to be important. But it is that sort of detailed characterization that makes him, you know, Garfield. I guess. I mean, think about it. Why the fuck is a cat gonna hate mondays. Especially this particular cat, this Garfield. What he does, he sleeps, he eats, etc. For a cat, even a talking, dancing asshole cat like this, he is not gonna give a fuck if it's Tuesday, Thursday, the 12th of February, anything. It doesn't matter. He doesn't have to work. He doesn't have to get out of bed. Every day of the year is the weekend to him. There is no beginning of the week for a cat with that particular lazy asshole cat type of lifestyle. Even when he is expected to eat a mouse, he just fakes it. There is no fuckin reason this cat even knows what Monday is, let alone hates it. And yet he says it explicitly that he hates Mondays. You see. That is why it is funny. Because why would he hate Mondays. Oh, that Garfield the asshole cat. He hates Mondays. The weirdest thing about Garfield, he looks like some kind of fucked up Nazi medical experiment or something. Like they took an ordinary cat but painted him bright orange, surgically removed his skeleton, injected him with 15 pounds of human assfat and then gave him a new plastic skeleton with a skull designed to contain a pair of huge, wet, human eyes the size of baseballs. I don't think that's really how they did it for the movie, but that's what it looks like. They might've used a real cat wearing a padded suit or something but I think it was probaly computers. But I think this is a poor and unethical use of computers. You gotta make up your mind if it's real or cartoon, you can't do both. It is real unnatural to see a wacky cartoon cat wearing real fur. Anyway, Garfield is a cat who lives with his owner John. This is a guy who has no job or activities. His only interests are his pets and the hot veterinarian he's had a crush on since high school. In the opening shot we see a collection of photos of John, and in every single one he is holding Garfield. Now it would be weird enough for a guy to be that obsessed with his cat, but especially this particular cat. Because this cat is a total asshole. He steals John's food, flushes the toilet when he's in the shower, destroys all of the furniture, constantly pushes the puppy off the chair, scratches him, or beats him with a pillow, even bullies the other cats in the neighborhood. He just watches TV all day and never leaves the house. He eats too much, he burps too much, he sleeps too much and insists on having his own bed and even a god damn teddy bear. And he fucking whines. He is constantly complaining from the first minute of the movie to the last. Nothing is good enough for Garfield. He hates everyone and everything. Except himself. John pampers him so much he even makes home made lasagna for him, and lasagna is a pretty time intensive pasta in my opinion. But even that's not good enough for fucking Garfield. And he makes bad puns too. He makes Elvis jokes and JERRY MAGUIRE references. He says lines like "I think I'm going to blow cat chow chunks" and "maybe I'll get a CAT scan." When Garfield disappears for a while, you'd think John would breathe a sigh of relief. But he's like one of those common law wives you see on COPS all the time, he thinks he loves his abusive cat because he says, "I can't live without Garfield." Another thing that is weird, Garfield never shuts up (he has the voice of academy award nominee Bill Murray) but John has no idea that he talks. Only animals can hear animals talk, not humans. But paradoxically, animals can hear humans talk. Whooooah. It's not explained if the humans can see that Garfield's mouth is moving or that he is always gesturing and dancing around and crap. At first I couldn't tell if John could hear Garfield or not, so when I realized he couldn't, I started thinking maybe there was some twist where John is actually a ghost, or Garfield is actually a ghost. I'm not sure which way it would work. Anyway, since this is a movie about pet animals, that means a bad guy is gonna steal a dog. It happened in AIR BUD and it happens here. And it's Garfield's fault, so the one positive thing he does in the movie is go clean up his own mess. For the first 45 minutes nothing really happens, he just sits around the house, sort of a slice of life kind of deal. I almost thought it was supposed to be like FRIDAY but with a freaky looking obese asshole talking cat. Then the puppy gets stolen, and this Garfield finally gets up off his fat cat ass and makes the courageous move of leaving the god damn house. Then he goes on an epic adventure that involves going to a building where the dog is, etc. Alot of the comedy in this movie is Garfield runs around, he falls, there is screaming. At one point he runs up a lady's dress. And then he'll say something about an HMO or a primary care provider or something like that. Because what would a cat know about health care? That's why it's funny. Ha ha, the cat said HMO. It's like in those cartoons where they put in jokes that the adults will understand and the kids won't. But here it's not jokes, it's just words. In a way this is the perfect movie for the 2004 election. Garfield is a horrible, useless asshole bully. But the music tells us he's some kind of charmer and I guess the movie made a bunch of money. So apparently everybody loves this asshole. There is nobody on earth that could explain why Garfield is supposed to be a lovable character, but there he is. Just like Bush with his 51% mandate. Hooray. God bless America. I think that's what it's supposed to be about, isn't it? No, probaly not. But the key to the meaning of GARFIELD may lie in presidential history. President James A. Garfield was only president for 200 days before he died. He was shot by a lawyer who thought God told him to do it. The bullet itself didn't do much damage, but the doctors couldn't find it in there. They had Alexander Graham Bell make them a metal detector to find it, but he mistakenly detected the springs in the matress beneath the president. The doctors dug around so much they created a huge infected wound which caused the heart attack that killed Garfield. Which, hmmm, I'm not sure if that has any parallels to the story in this movie. Man, I gotta be honest, I don't think I really get this movie GARFIELD. I'm not sure what the deal is. I listened to some of the director and producer commentary track but they never really get into explaining what the deal is. I mean, I guess they sort of do. In one part the producer says, "Now, this is a really fun sequence in the picture, because Garfield is about to destroy the lasagna." That pretty much explains this movie, I guess.
Sept. 11, 2007, 11:33 p.m. CST
sorry for the double post, but dude's page is the best day I've spent goofing-off at work on the computer thing . . . GARFIELD the asshole cat Man, what a fuckin week. On Tuesday Bush got either "re"-elected or re-"elected," and I've been stumbling around muttering to myself ever since. Stabbing at my porridge with my spoon, staring blankly out the window, mouthing the word "why" to myself over and over again. One thing I know, there are some things in this world that just cannot be explained. Sometimes bad things happen to good people. Sometimes people vote for a president that couldn't be trusted to put on his own pants. And sometimes a guy gets the blue state blues, walks around town in a daze, suddenly finds himself at home having rented the movie "GARFIELD," not really knowing how or why. I know for a fact this happens because you're lookin at the guy who it happened to. Me. It was weird. What this is is a movie based on the popular comic strip from the 1980s called Garfield. Like all comic strips it is not funny and about a talking animal. This is a cat called Garfield who is orange. The thing about Garfield, he is real fucking fat, he eats lasagna. That's funny because real cats eat cat food, but this one also eats lasagna. Also he says "I hate Mondays" at the beginning although this does not turn out to be important. But it is that sort of detailed characterization that makes him, you know, Garfield. I guess. I mean, think about it. Why the fuck is a cat gonna hate mondays. Especially this particular cat, this Garfield. What he does, he sleeps, he eats, etc. For a cat, even a talking, dancing asshole cat like this, he is not gonna give a fuck if it's Tuesday, Thursday, the 12th of February, anything. It doesn't matter. He doesn't have to work. He doesn't have to get out of bed. Every day of the year is the weekend to him. There is no beginning of the week for a cat with that particular lazy asshole cat type of lifestyle. Even when he is expected to eat a mouse, he just fakes it. There is no fuckin reason this cat even knows what Monday is, let alone hates it. And yet he says it explicitly that he hates Mondays. You see. That is why it is funny. Because why would he hate Mondays. Oh, that Garfield the asshole cat. He hates Mondays. The weirdest thing about Garfield, he looks like some kind of fucked up Nazi medical experiment or something. Like they took an ordinary cat but painted him bright orange, surgically removed his skeleton, injected him with 15 pounds of human assfat and then gave him a new plastic skeleton with a skull designed to contain a pair of huge, wet, human eyes the size of baseballs. I don't think that's really how they did it for the movie, but that's what it looks like. They might've used a real cat wearing a padded suit or something but I think it was probaly computers. But I think this is a poor and unethical use of computers. You gotta make up your mind if it's real or cartoon, you can't do both. It is real unnatural to see a wacky cartoon cat wearing real fur. Anyway, Garfield is a cat who lives with his owner John. This is a guy who has no job or activities. His only interests are his pets and the hot veterinarian he's had a crush on since high school. In the opening shot we see a collection of photos of John, and in every single one he is holding Garfield. Now it would be weird enough for a guy to be that obsessed with his cat, but especially this particular cat. Because this cat is a total asshole. He steals John's food, flushes the toilet when he's in the shower, destroys all of the furniture, constantly pushes the puppy off the chair, scratches him, or beats him with a pillow, even bullies the other cats in the neighborhood. He just watches TV all day and never leaves the house. He eats too much, he burps too much, he sleeps too much and insists on having his own bed and even a god damn teddy bear. And he fucking whines. He is constantly complaining from the first minute of the movie to the last. Nothing is good enough for Garfield. He hates everyone and everything. Except himself. John pampers him so much he even makes home made lasagna for him, and lasagna is a pretty time intensive pasta in my opinion. But even that's not good enough for fucking Garfield. And he makes bad puns too. He makes Elvis jokes and JERRY MAGUIRE references. He says lines like "I think I'm going to blow cat chow chunks" and "maybe I'll get a CAT scan." When Garfield disappears for a while, you'd think John would breathe a sigh of relief. But he's like one of those common law wives you see on COPS all the time, he thinks he loves his abusive cat because he says, "I can't live without Garfield." Another thing that is weird, Garfield never shuts up (he has the voice of academy award nominee Bill Murray) but John has no idea that he talks. Only animals can hear animals talk, not humans. But paradoxically, animals can hear humans talk. Whooooah. It's not explained if the humans can see that Garfield's mouth is moving or that he is always gesturing and dancing around and crap. At first I couldn't tell if John could hear Garfield or not, so when I realized he couldn't, I started thinking maybe there was some twist where John is actually a ghost, or Garfield is actually a ghost. I'm not sure which way it would work. Anyway, since this is a movie about pet animals, that means a bad guy is gonna steal a dog. It happened in AIR BUD and it happens here. And it's Garfield's fault, so the one positive thing he does in the movie is go clean up his own mess. For the first 45 minutes nothing really happens, he just sits around the house, sort of a slice of life kind of deal. I almost thought it was supposed to be like FRIDAY but with a freaky looking obese asshole talking cat. Then the puppy gets stolen, and this Garfield finally gets up off his fat cat ass and makes the courageous move of leaving the god damn house. Then he goes on an epic adventure that involves going to a building where the dog is, etc. Alot of the comedy in this movie is Garfield runs around, he falls, there is screaming. At one point he runs up a lady's dress. And then he'll say something about an HMO or a primary care provider or something like that. Because what would a cat know about health care? That's why it's funny. Ha ha, the cat said HMO. It's like in those cartoons where they put in jokes that the adults will understand and the kids won't. But here it's not jokes, it's just words. In a way this is the perfect movie for the 2004 election. Garfield is a horrible, useless asshole bully. But the music tells us he's some kind of charmer and I guess the movie made a bunch of money. So apparently everybody loves this asshole. There is nobody on earth that could explain why Garfield is supposed to be a lovable character, but there he is. Just like Bush with his 51% mandate. Hooray. God bless America. I think that's what it's supposed to be about, isn't it? No, probaly not. But the key to the meaning of GARFIELD may lie in presidential history. President James A. Garfield was only president for 200 days before he died. He was shot by a lawyer who thought God told him to do it. The bullet itself didn't do much damage, but the doctors couldn't find it in there. They had Alexander Graham Bell make them a metal detector to find it, but he mistakenly detected the springs in the matress beneath the president. The doctors dug around so much they created a huge infected wound which caused the heart attack that killed Garfield. Which, hmmm, I'm not sure if that has any parallels to the story in this movie. Man, I gotta be honest, I don't think I really get this movie GARFIELD. I'm not sure what the deal is. I listened to some of the director and producer commentary track but they never really get into explaining what the deal is. I mean, I guess they sort of do. In one part the producer says, "Now, this is a really fun sequence in the picture, because Garfield is about to destroy the lasagna." That pretty much explains this movie, I guess.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:05 a.m. CST
I can't believe AICN actually zooiphile activists in its ranks. Thats cool, in a sad, sick kind of way.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:16 a.m. CST
Tolerance in our screwed up world for pedophilia and beastiality is inevitable following homosexual tolerance. As long as things are done without 'harm' and 'consensually' it's all good. Fuckers will find a way. And yea Vern, there are stories of people attempting to marry animals since ancient times till today. Where've you been? Just look it up in Wiki. We all fucked up... Only thing that'll set us right is Judgment Day.
Sept. 12, 2007, 2:18 a.m. CST
EQUINAS: Thanks for all the info, I didn't want to know that. Er, I mean I didn't know that. I wonder what the secret codes were in the back of magazines? I'd hate if some poor bastard tried to order some Mr. Ed videos and wound up in over his head.<p> Did you happen to catch ZOO yet? I'm curious what you thought of it. Because it sounds like you are more familiar with the horsecock topic than most people. I'm assuming you did a report for school or something?<p> JOHNNO: By "Judgment Day" do you mean TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY or that one where Emilios Estevez gets stranded in the ghetto?
Sept. 12, 2007, 2:31 a.m. CST
Well, Vern - you could say I've done a lot of "research", but it wasn't for report-writing purposes. ;) I haven't seen the movie yet; I was hoping it would be released on DVD and now that it is, I'll be ordering ASAP.
Sept. 12, 2007, 3:16 a.m. CST
by andy kaufman
it was judgement night. but besides that your spot on. we will all be judged by arnold and sarah conner.
Sept. 12, 2007, 3:31 a.m. CST
Oh, for scientific research or something. I get it.
Sept. 12, 2007, 4:50 a.m. CST
by half vader
for "Equine ass"? <p> Hey, you said we could flame away!
Sept. 12, 2007, 6:14 a.m. CST
Something like that!
Sept. 12, 2007, 7:32 a.m. CST
Is to summon the subject of his review to the TB.<p>It is uncanny how often this happens: Demon Dave, Bruce, Horse guy...<p>If only he could find a way to use these powers to fight crime!<p>Then Hollywood could make a film about it for us to jerk off about, thus satisfying Gimp Pants own strange kink...
Sept. 12, 2007, 8:49 a.m. CST
Now got to go take a shower.
Sept. 12, 2007, 8:57 a.m. CST
You sound like an intelligent and eloquent person. And I think that is what is disturbing me the most. The difference between adults and children/animals is that adults have the power of informed reason and therefore; responsibilty for their actions. Therefore an adult dominating or subverting a child or animal for sexual gratification is just plain wrong.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:03 a.m. CST
I understand your point of view. However, the difference between animals and children is simply this: It is legal in our society to kill animals - not children - for food (obviously). I believe animals can consent (if the horse doesn't like it they simply kick you into orbit, for example), but assume for the moment that you're right and animals can't consent. Does that stop us from killing them? No. Does it stop us from breeding them and taking their offspring to sell? No. We can put hobbles on a mare and forcibly have her impregnated for profit - that's legal. The law stops us from cruel or painful treatment of animals. Most zoos I know have animals better cared for than any owned by their "normal" neighbors. Sure, there are inbred hillbillies who tie up chickens and rape them. I'm not defending that. I think it's pretty easy to determine what's a cruel, painful act, and what's not. And if it's not cruel, then the question comes down to one of simple morals, and everyone has different shades of morality. Morality is a very tenuous foundation for a law. Especially a law that blindly lumps everyone with this sexual orientation into the same "abuser" category. And when you strip away the "shock and awe" of "but...but...it's just WRONG" you're left with a millenia-old practice that - on its face - causes no harm to anyone, human or animal. People should mind their own business and spend the effort on real criminals.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:46 a.m. CST
Dude, you like having sex WITH ANIMALS.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:42 a.m. CST
by Al Swearengen
You heathen, degenerate cocksucker. Tell me, how fuckin' low do you have to be before you decide you'd like impale yourself upon the member of the equine?
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:48 a.m. CST
by Stuntcock Mike
O.k, you've convinced me. Mr.Ed, your ass is mine.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST
Well, Al, that's a bit too painful for my taste, but since you're curious, feel free to try it out!
Sept. 12, 2007, 12:08 p.m. CST
good to see things have got (if anything) stranger round these parts... And Equineas: The law is based largely on morals. However, most societies around the world would have a moral objection to sex with animals. What do you think that indicates about your own particular 'different shade of morality'? I'm sure I won't convince you of anything, just trying to get my head round where you are coming from...
Sept. 12, 2007, 12:17 p.m. CST
by Al Swearengen
Now that's an interesting expression, Equinas. Do you prefer to suck the prick of the equine?<P>I'm sure you might understand my complete lack of fuckin' empathy towards your beastial endeavors. I prefer cunt or pussy of the human type. Never take from an animal what you can be given by a whore.
Sept. 12, 2007, 12:18 p.m. CST
maybe lighten up on the inbred hillbillies. Or are you saying that there is a prejudice within the horsefucker community against chickenfuckers? Because chickens are a less intelligent animal? If so I guess pigfuckers would be higher up, and gorilla lovers, but I'm betting the dolphinblowers are considered snobs.
Sept. 12, 2007, 12:44 p.m. CST
HAHAHA Vern! You're exactly right. They ARE snobs! Al: Not gonna touch that one with a 10-ft. horsecock. You have more issues than I do, man. Get some help.
Sept. 12, 2007, 12:55 p.m. CST
Valentine: I'll say it one last time. Are you allowed to kill and eat a "3 or 4 year old child or semi-conscious drunk girl"? The answer is no. Are you allowed to kill and eat an animal? The answer is yes. Your "just plain wrong" is different from mine". The very act you describe, "taking advantage of someone/thing/whatever who doesn't have the mental reasoning capacity to judge right from wrong" is done every single day by breeding farms. The simple differences is they do it for profit, not pleasure. Which is worse? You consider sex the "sickening violation of someone's body", but you don't feel the same about the slaughterhouse? The argument is self-defeating. Our society allows the humane use of animals for food and profit, but not for pleasure? There's no logical justification for such a distinction except the horrified shrieks of the sexually "normal". Now, this is my last post along these lines; we're talking in circles and how many different ways can I say the same thing? If you're going to scream about consent or rape, please refer to this post and the previous 3. And Bryce, you're wrong about "most societies". There are a good few (Holland and Denmark to name two right off) where it is an accepted practice.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:03 p.m. CST
I haven't "dodged your point". a) I was writing a rational response to your ravings and b) you don't have a point. You can keep talking in circles if you like, but I've already vaporized any argument you can come up with except for your moral outrage. Enjoy.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:14 p.m. CST
Is beastiality actually "accepted" in countries like Holland and Denmark without any social stigma whatsoever, or is it just legal?
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:16 p.m. CST
Never had a dog hump your leg, Valentine? You may be vegan but society isn't.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:18 p.m. CST
m2298: You'll have to research that on your own. My friends who live there are "out" with no damage to their careers or social life, as far as I know. I think I've hijacked this thread long enough. I now return you to your regularly scheduled psychotic ramblings. Ciao!
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:24 p.m. CST
Equinas there's no way in <strong>HELL</strong> you're for real. Seriously dude, somehow you have ruined the TB experience for me. I can deal with people who love Michael Bay, shit I can deal with people badmouthing every single movie that I love, but A DUDE THAT LIKES TO FUCK ANIMALS? No. Fucking. Way. Not to be disrespectful buddy, but would you please get the fuck out of here, you infrahuman piece of shit? Thank you, now do humans and animals a favor and go commit the most painful suicide your degenerate rotten fucked up mind can think of. Cheers.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:28 p.m. CST
If I ever come across some sick ass hole like you fucking a dog, cat,goat,horse or anything else in the animal kingdom your going to live the next few moments of your horse fucking life in misery. Thats a promise. You can try and justify it all you want but fucking an animal is just as cruel as the people who skin baby seal alive to make coats. It messes with there bodys and no telling what type of damage it does to there minds. I'm of the Ted Nugent school of thinking and you HAVE to protect the enviroment and it's creatures because they cannot defend themselves. So consider it an idle threat ,go puff up your chest and consider yourself a bad ass if you want but next time your raping something you might want to look over your shoulder.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:30 p.m. CST
Uh...anyone from Denmark or Holland (or anywhere else) that can confirm Equinas' statement?
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:30 p.m. CST
So what you're saying is that if we're gonna go ahead and kill them anyway, we might as well fuck them first? <p> No matter how many "rational" NAMBLA-esque arguments you provide for your defense, you're still a very, very sick fuck. Even your argumentation proves it. <p> For the record, it may not be illegal in the Netherlands and Denmark to fuck animals, but it sure as hell isn't considered normal, healthy acceptable behavior. <p> By the way, there are also countries where cannibalism isn't punishable by law. Does this make it okay to eat someone? <p> Fucking freak.
Sept. 12, 2007, 1:42 p.m. CST
I believe that was in the Bible somewhere. My problem with it is not so much the morality part, it's the fucking animals part. If the Bible said you gotta fuck a horse to get into Heaven I still wouldn't be able to get it up. This guy thinks he has a spiritual connection with animals, then he fucks them and eat them. Might as well have spiritual relations with a sandwich too.
Sept. 12, 2007, 2:25 p.m. CST
Whoops, too late. And I don't know of any country where it's considered 'OK' to fuck animals.
Sept. 12, 2007, 2:52 p.m. CST
by just pillow talk
you are really a disturbed, disturbed fuckstick Equinas.
Sept. 12, 2007, 4:05 p.m. CST
I was unaware of the Rush comment. I don't particularly like the man (and I presume most of you froth with roiling hatred for him), but on this he is correct. The horse simply doesn't know any better and lacks the sentience required to make the decision whether or not to consent to sex or anything else for that matter.<P>I can't believe some folks have such beliefs. I mean, What about all the horse masturbation that goes on? Do the horses consent to that? Using their logic, we should put a stop to that too. And yet, if it weren't for insemination, horses would go extinct. But at least the 'rights' of horses everywhere would be protected!
Sept. 12, 2007, 4:26 p.m. CST
I think the outrage expressed in those terms is mostly due to the attempts of Equinas to elevate what he and his ilk partake in to some sort of spiritual level where the animal is a proactive partner on some deeper plane. <p> As for me, I'm mostly interested in pointing out what a fucking monstrous freak he is, and not so much protecting the horse's rights. <p> However, I do see the humor in Limbaugh hating animal rights activists so much that he'll stoop to defending horsefuckery just to avoid having to agree with them on anything.
Sept. 12, 2007, 5:01 p.m. CST
I saw that as more of a logical approach and not Rush going into contortions trying to figure out a way to disagree with them until you you put it that way.<P>This is one of those things that as a Libertarian... I just don't know what the hell to think. On a personal level, I certainly do think that this stuff is sick, the same way I feel about abortion. But animals are considered property from a legal standpoint. These people do this stuff in private away from the public. They understand the risks and suffer the consequences.<P>Consider Michael Vick. He procured the animals legit, housed them on his own property, and encouraged them to engage in something that is natural for them by instinct. Sure, I think he's sick and depraved. Of course those animals didn't deserve their fate. I do not condone nor support such actions. But when you really look at it, all he is ultimately guilty for is animal cruelty and perhaps tax evasion.<P>Bow hunting is legal. Ever see an animal struck with an arrow in the neck or in the lower abdomen? How is that less torturous? And we all know how veal is produced.<P>It wasn't long ago, certainly within my lifespan, that lots of folks felt the same way about homosexuality. Yes, there is a difference between two sentient beings consenting vs. this. Yet I guess I just don't understand the outrage here, given that so many of the offended likely have no problem with abortion. Cruelty only counts once you've completely escaped the birth canal and/or the fuzzier and cuter you are. No one gives a shit about the percentage of lobsters lost because they tore themselves apart struggling, but that's okay since lobsters are yummy anyhow.<P>This is one of those things that sends my mind into loops the more I think of it. Sick, yes. Unethical, yes. Immoral, yes. But illegal? I'm just glad I'm not in a position where I have to cast a ruling on these types of decisions.
Sept. 12, 2007, 5:57 p.m. CST
If you had a choice between being a chopped up fetus that didn't even have a chance and the stud that tore apart Billy Joe McHenry using only your massive cock, which would you pick?<P>There may be no gray area to you about abortion, just like there may be no gray area about picking up a 10-piece bucket at the local KFC. But if we aren't talk about death here, then what are we talking about? When you compare and contrast that with this, wholesale slaughter is less of a crime than bringing Mr. Ed to a climax.<P>I can't believe I'm typing this shit. Yeah, the guy certainly is fucking horses. I can't believe we have someone like Equinas among us here at AICN. It's all messed up no matter how you slice it. However, I'm not going to march in pro-life parades and enforce my personal beliefs on society. And as reluctant as I am to type this, that extends to folks like Equinas and Mr. Hands.<P>BTW, thanks for not misinterpreting me or trying to pin something on me. A rare thing in TB. There are few times when I urge myself to reconsider before hitting "post comment" and this was one of them.
Sept. 12, 2007, 6:24 p.m. CST
one for the books.
Sept. 12, 2007, 6:30 p.m. CST
by El Borak
i've ever seen. i don't know whether to clap or run.
Sept. 12, 2007, 6:41 p.m. CST
This is a good talkback. I've no idea what spawned it, as I was just sent a link to it. However I will say that I have respect for Equinas regardless of whether he does or doesn't fuck animals, just to raise the point of view (re: laws being largely morality, and is morality sensible for the most part) and have people think about it. So many people will just come back with "it's wrong!" and not think it through. For the record, I don’t fuck animals, although if Ariel from the little mermaid was real and I had a chance, I guess I'd be breaking the whole don’t fuck animal and don’t fuck kids law in one go...
Sept. 12, 2007, 8:50 p.m. CST
by El Borak
Sept. 12, 2007, 9 p.m. CST
Paz, you are cracking me the fuck up.
Sept. 12, 2007, 9 p.m. CST
Because that car gives me a boner every time I see it.
Sept. 12, 2007, 9:31 p.m. CST
so normal people can stay the fuck away from them. Zoophiles Vs. Bestialists? What's the difference, you FUCK ANIMALS and create new diseases. Someone please make an island for animal fuckers and just dump these pervs on it.
Sept. 12, 2007, 9:49 p.m. CST
...making sweet love to an animal he cares for. Is that wrong? Likely. But his detractors have brought up torturing him, having him violently raped, branded, shipped off to an island, and shot in the back of the head. <p> Dear God in heaven, see what you've done? You've driven me off to the Horsefuckers side. This is how revolutions begin people. Someone find me a pretty little mare with a good disposition... I don't want to be on the side of the "norms" any longer. I'm sure I can learn to love it, over time. My understanding is that horse pussy tastes a great deal like regular old human pussy. You know, like fish.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:01 p.m. CST
It'll match zoophiles and farm animals on 25 levels of compatibility. I'll make millions!!
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:05 p.m. CST
he should get a black box. i hope he comes back.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:19 p.m. CST
There is only one way to be sure. Someone set up an ichat. Although, I do wonder how he'll get the horse into his basement. If the horse can manage stairs, that's a pretty smart motherfucking horse. Maybe it can clomp out it's consent.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:37 p.m. CST
Why do you horse fuckers wanna do that?
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:54 p.m. CST
Travelling right now, so I just woke up and saw all the posts. I'm not going to restate my arguments to the screamers, it stands on its own. Just a few comments. LilJuniorBrown: threatening me on the internet is pretty gay, but any time you want, just bring it, baby. Bring it. I just spent 2 years in Iraq and I'm pretty cranky at the moment. Valentine: Your last argument makes no sense at all, get real. Gilkuliehe: I'm for real. I have as much right to be here as anyone. You have no idea what kinda "sick fucks" are already posting to this forum, I just happened to mention my particular weirdness. It's not like I posted this in the Fantastic Four movie review. "Zoo" was reviewed on a public forum open to comments and I have the right to say my piece. So, blow me. "BringingSexyBack": You have no idea what you're talking about. New diseases? Please, stop talking out your ass, do your research on zoonotic diseases, and get back to me. I can assure you that horse sex is a lot safer than human sex. Try not to embarrass yourself like this in the future. TomBodet: Actually, some of my friends would enjoy the treatment you're talking about. The outrage is in your minds, people, not in logic. Maybe learn something about the subject before you start ranting and raving. I recommend sexual abuse authority Dr. Hani Miletski's book "Understanding Bestiality and Zoophilia", or the 2001 study by the University of Indiana College of Sociology. There IS a difference between people who tie down animals and rape them, and those who have loving and sexual relationships with well-cared-for-animals. Deal with it, or don't.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:56 p.m. CST
I'm afraid for this world. I really am.
Sept. 12, 2007, 10:58 p.m. CST
are okay? Does the military have a Don't Ask Don't Tell policy for people. who. have. sex. with. ANIMALS?
Sept. 12, 2007, 11 p.m. CST
just told me to stop talking out of mine. A penis of a horse.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:04 p.m. CST
or they too will learn that sex with animals is okay.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:06 p.m. CST
It tastes like hay, FYI.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:06 p.m. CST
argument get in the way of simple common sense. Sex with animals is bad. Period.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:08 p.m. CST
democracy to their country, I'm sure the Sunnis and the Shiites would find a way to settle their differences.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:16 p.m. CST
You've already used up your dime with me. Unless you can come up with something more compelling than stamping your feet and crying "it's bad!" Those university professors have more intelligence in their index fingers than you apparently have in total. Why don't you actually do some research? Because you're too scared that it might shed some enlightenment on your narrow little mind?
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:26 p.m. CST
Now, Vern is one step away from taking it full swing into the "forbidden zone." Of course there will be people to defend this. People defend Nambla. That pedophile in Cali who runs a website about being a pedophile and not getting caught. We have members of the ACLU being found with kiddie porn and snuf films. BTW, there i no way that Limbaugh quote was NOT taken out of context or was part of an overall point about some moral doctrine. I dont agree with much of what he says, but ive listened enough to know that he is an animal lover only in the old-fashioned sense of the term.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:29 p.m. CST
First part of that was a joke.
Sept. 12, 2007, 11:30 p.m. CST
a debate about the merits and moral justifications of animal sex, he's got a lot of typing to do. I don't waste time talking to horse fuckers.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:12 a.m. CST
AICN, I give you your new catchphrase. That's right, somebody actually just said that.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:12 a.m. CST
You said "Blow me". I would, dude, but your dick tastes like horse. Zing!
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:13 a.m. CST
Horse sex is a lot safer than human sex!
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:18 a.m. CST
but sex with a human who thinks horse sex is safer than hhuman sex is very dangerous indeed. Im not one for Scarlet letters, but Im thinking a big HF on those offending would not be unreasonable.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:29 a.m. CST
Women do get off on cucumbers and bananas. Do we draw the line at sentient beings? Can someone please cite me a university study on the moral implications of relations with root vegetables and fruits?
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:32 a.m. CST
Where did u go to school? Ever see a vicious cucumber or a banana with psychological issues? Animals WILL be effected by what is done to them. They need to be protected, as children do from evil perverts like bringingsexyback.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:39 a.m. CST
could be quite pleasurable, each kernel a ridge of sexual delight. If we can turn the horse-fuckers on to corn, we can put an end to this insanity.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:45 a.m. CST
up a tight vagina, so it must be okay. Unless it's Rosie O'Donnell's vagina, then there's a case for vegetable cruelty.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:57 a.m. CST
Horse sex is a lot safer than human sex!!!
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:02 a.m. CST
You can get a load of warm, all-you-can-fuck breadsticks at The Olive Garden while dining on the soup and salad.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:03 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
...having read some of this thread earlier today, I can rightly say that this is the most fucked up Talkback I've ever seen on AICN. It's definitely archive material.<P>A talkbacker...called EQUINAS (clever!)...who FUCKS ANIMALS.<P>Where is JuggFuckler when you need him?!
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:03 a.m. CST
But the salt can be a serious irritant on the colon lining, I'm sure. Better stick with the horse cock then.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:07 a.m. CST
Carrots get horny too.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:14 a.m. CST
for fucking. http://www.muttonbone.com/
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:23 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
Is this you?<P> http://tinyurl.com/26y9cw
Sept. 13, 2007, 2:09 a.m. CST
....a horse fucker is attempting to lay claim to the moral high ground in this talkback. Un-fucking-believable. Well done, talkbackers, for keelhauling this creep.
Sept. 13, 2007, 2:13 a.m. CST
Gaius: I'm guessing that link is a pic I shouldn't look at on a work connection. I'll get back to you! Cromwell: Show me your degree in Animal Psychology and then I'll allow you to debate me on how animals are "effected" (I think you mean "affected") by sex with humans. Because you don't know what you're talking about.
Sept. 13, 2007, 2:43 a.m. CST
That's the answer to Telf's question way up there about how I can use my powers to fight crime. We would've caught the Zodiac killer right here in the talkbacks. Too late for that though so I guess the great horsefucking debate of '07 is a pretty decent feather to put in my cap.
Sept. 13, 2007, 3:31 a.m. CST
by Eunuch Provocateur
Fuck you and the horse you got off on! Yea, stupid... This also reminds me of the "What is Sodomy?" Section of "Everything you wanted to know about sex* but were afraid to ask."
Sept. 13, 2007, 5:45 a.m. CST
Just because some people have dicks, it doesn't mean you go shoving it into everything; just as some people that have cunts shouldn't go around shoving everything into it. Don't blur the line!! If you do, you'll end up knowing that horse jizz tastes like hay, like our friend, Equinas. Cautionary tale -tail?- time has ended.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:14 a.m. CST
This is not about horse fuckers. This is about people they get fucked BY horses; i.e. horse fuckees. Check out the opening statements of the review.<P>Although I've had no experience with any of this, I presume that both are mutually exclusive.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:25 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
this insanity. And I think TomBodet is on to something...do you fuck camels too?
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:27 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
if you are a card carrying member of one group, it's also good for the other group as well.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:56 a.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Sept. 13, 2007, 7:44 a.m. CST
Good to know.
Sept. 13, 2007, 8:52 a.m. CST
A lot of you are having fun with this. However, none of you appear to be willing to debate with any consistency. Oh, and by debate, I don't mean the 'taking sides' kinda debate, but more of the, 'hey let's compare that with this' kinda debate. I'm in no way taking the side of bestiality here, but I can't help but compare this in similar fashion as other trains of thought.<P>Drug legalization, specifically marijuana. Perhaps some of you may be in support of this, comparing and contrasting its use with alcohol. "Where is the victim?" is a common argument. The way I see it, only the government is because they don't get their cut by way of taxing the sale. Granted, there are family members that may be victims due to a user becoming addicted, or accidents involving vehicles, etc. But all the arguments supporting the sale of alcohol could also apply here. If a user wants to use in the privacy of his own home then why can't the product be taken to market? Where is the victim?<P>Swingers, wife swappers, bondage and discipline, and other sexual deviants (I mean these as a term of art and not a slam) are considered sick by many. But again, where is the victim when everyone is a consenting adult?<P>One thing is certain -- this is nothing like pedophilia where it is clear that there is a victim. Some of you drew this comparison, but I personally don't see it that way. I suspect the animal is willing to oblige in most cases simply because the animal doesn't know any better. Especially if we're talking about them being the ones that are doing the fucking.<P>Nearly all of you sound like so many morally outraged conservatives back around the 80s (and admittedly up to today) when more and more homosexuals began to out themselves. BangoSkank summed this up perfectly when they wrote, "his detractors have brought up torturing him, having him violently raped, branded, shipped off to an island, and shot in the back of the head." Sounds exactly the same to me what the far right-wing homophobic nutjobs have said about homosexuality. Bestiality certainly is extreme, but its one of several speed bumps on the road of tolerance.<P>Is polyamory okay? Why can't three adults love each other just as much as two? Where does tolerance begin and end?<P>I think it is worth noting that former governor of my home state of MA, Michael Dukakis, tried legalizing bestiality several times when in office. There were many jokes made at his expense at the time, especially considering that his wife's nickname was Kitty. I leave it to the reader to Google up his party affiliation.<P>So many of you likely are in favor of a woman's right to choose. Why is it less of a sin for an 11 year old girl to terminate a child's life without consent of her parents -- but its not okay for a man to purchase an animal, which is legally considered his property, for the purpose of having that animal defile him? I can't see where the victim is here. As an aside, I recently had to sign a release granting a doctor permission to remove a wart my daughter had in the nail bed of her big toe. Shouldn't it be more important for me as a parent to know if she's having a fetus removed?<P>Like I wrote earlier, I know that these words can be construed as support for the other side and I can't believe I'm actually typing this shit. However, there is some major league contradiction when you broach this topic the same way as you do other topics, as I've briefly touched upon above. I'm not accusing anyone of hypocrisy here, but there is a level of discernible inconsistency. To me, tolerance knows no end.
Sept. 13, 2007, 9:12 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
I sort of understand the points you're trying to make...but you're overthinking this (IMHO).<P>Quote: "I suspect the animal is willing to oblige in most cases simply because the animal doesn't know any better."<P>Would you use the same rationale if referring to someone taking advantage of a mentally handicapped person?<P>The bottom line is this guy probably has some serious psycho-social behavioral disorder. He acts out upon it by procuring sex OUTSIDE HIS OWN SPECIES. It's a sickness.
Sept. 13, 2007, 9:12 a.m. CST
by El Borak
with your debate. what's wrong is wrong you sick fuckers. there is no debate.
Sept. 13, 2007, 9:44 a.m. CST
So a few comments to what's been posted since my last post. TomBodet: You know nothing about me, my education level, my profession, etc. So calling me inbred and stupid really has no validity, nor does your argument. Also, if you think Iraqis would be shocked about bestiality, do a Google search for "mule.wmv" and you'll find out that at least some of them are very experienced! Gaius: as to whether it's a sickness or not, it probably is. In my opinion, ANY sexual attraction other than that which propagates the species is unnatural. Including homosexuality. I said to begin with that it's probably a result of some bad wiring. That doesn't make it WRONG. Wrong-ness, and "where do we draw the line" is established at the point where someone or something is being treated inhumanely or becomes a victim. None of you can prove that non-painful sexual acts with animals is inhuman or hurts the animal. I'm not talking about rape or holding things down and fucking them. I know that I can't convince you that there are different types of animal fuckers. Some guys like seeing their women fucked by dogs because they like the degradation. Some people (men and women) do it because they enjoy degradation. That's not my movie, but I do't hold it against them if they animal isn't hurt. Believe it or not, as you choose. Finally, those of you attacking me (and that's OK) would be horrified to know just how many zoos are around you, holding down professional jobs, maybe making more money than you, maybe even your supervisor! Shocking thought eh? Especially if you're in I.T. (which I'm not). By the way, I'm also a Libertarian, and anti-abortion. So there.
Sept. 13, 2007, 9:55 a.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Hey, I know that the horsefucking talkback might not be the most appropriate place to say this, but I dig the cut of your shit. Keep on keeping on.
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:13 a.m. CST
How many times do I have to say it? How many different ways? Animals are not children, they do not have the same protections under our law, and they do not suffer emotionally from sexual contact, as would a handicapped child. So, the answer is 1) NO, it's not OK, and 2) it's not relevant to the discussion. Geez, stop beating a dead human will you?
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:34 a.m. CST
In 27 states. Look it up, wiseass. Let me say it, one more time. You can keep saying that an animal is emotionally abused. I say it isn't. You make yourself look like an idiot to continue to compare this to child abuse when it is legal to use ANIMALS humanely for human needs, not CHILDREN. I know that you can see this, you just choose to keep using the same argument over and over because you can't come up with a better one. It's OK, I'm used to such narrow-mindedness. But you're simply making yourself look like a fool by continuing to bring up irrelevant comparisons.
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:48 a.m. CST
Animals are not qualified to consent to being killed and eaten, yet we do that. I give up, dude. Maybe you really are that stupid that you can't see the difference. And I don't for one minute believe you actually care about the animal's wellbeing, but are just using that argument to impose your morality on me while you eat your next cheeseburger. Whatever the reason, continue to beat your drum, by all means. I'm done talking in circles with you, and I have a plane to catch.
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:48 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
...the victim is you. You are ill. Your behavior makes further victims of those unable to understand the nature of the situation you place them in. And I'm sorry - sex between two consenting adults (gay or straight) is vastly different than an adult/child receiving sexual gratification from an animal that lacks reason and choice. Their passiveness is no excuse for your sickness.<P>Your concession that your sexual "preference" is probably a sickness should be the first step in getting yourself some serious help. It also pretty much negates any further denial-based argument you may try to put forth on this matter.
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:51 a.m. CST
I'm happy, successful, and have an active social and professional life. I don't have any intention of going through the mind-fuckery involved in trying to get "cured", thanks. If someone was being victimized (and they are not) I would refrain from the activity instead of seeking "help". But they're not, so I don't. Peace-out.
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:55 a.m. CST
horsefucker now. I don't see how anyone can keep comparing animal sex and screwing children. <p> Animals are considered property, children and the disabled are not. Also anyone who has dealt with animals to any extent can tell if an animal has been damaged "emotionally"... it's why they kick or bite or freak-out around humans. <p> I feel like a white suburban middleclass youth who has become a Muslim extremist because he saw what kind of war crimes were being committed by a small portion of his countries soldiers. <p> Go team horsefucker.
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:56 a.m. CST
Just ask Mr. Hands how "passive" the horse was.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:05 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
...I suppose "Mr. Hands" would tell us that the horse used a charming pick-up line and bought him a drink before taking him back to his place.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:17 a.m. CST
fuckers rationalizing their behavior, the world is indeed headed towards an apocalypse. <p>And apparently airports are filled with a wide assortment of freaks. I'd rather sit next to Larry Craig than someone who takes a gallon of horse jizz in the ass.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:18 a.m. CST
Truthfully, this TB gave me a nightmare last night. I dreamt that I met David Lynch and we were talking about horse sex. I'm not even kidding - this is what AICN is doing to me.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:22 a.m. CST
This guy is crossing a line that devil-worshippers won't cross. Imagine that.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
It's really that simple, no matter what type of spin is put on it.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:30 a.m. CST
they hate us for our horse fuckers.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST
<p>has a point though.Sick and depraved he may be, but at the end of the day its only our sensibilities being offended.</p>I can't believe I'm sticking up for a horse fucker though. Fucking hell
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:10 p.m. CST
It's not often one gets to use the word "horsecock"
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:12 p.m. CST
But, Kurzinski, that would either make him helpless or dead, both of which would qualify him to be fucked by another...which is probably not included in his delusional sickness.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:46 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:47 p.m. CST
"Would you use the same rationale if referring to someone taking advantage of a mentally handicapped person?"<P>Is this person past the age of consent or under? I'm not trying to merely flip this back at you. There is merit to the question.<P>My wife worked at a group home for about 8-years. All staff were expected to treat the individuals as adults. Some still behaved like children, wanting their hands held on walks and the like, yet all were encouraged to act their ages. From a sexual standpoint, they couldn't get all grabby and were educated to understand that that is unacceptable behavior. However, if two residents approached their sexuality in an adult like manner, the staff could do nothing to stop them. Personally, I think that's absurd. How do you effectively educate safe sex practices? These are the laws of the land, however. On the other hand, she had no experience of "regular" people courting any of the residents during her whole time there. I can only suspect, given the rest, that the activity wouldn't be discouraged, providing the "normal" person wasn't forcing themself.<P>BTW, I think you underestimate the mentally handicapped. Although I understand what you meant in your question, I still wouldn't put them on the same functional level as animals.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:50 p.m. CST
Does that making eating a burger comparable to cannibalism? <p> We enslave animals, experiment on them, pen them in their own filth while they wait to be carved up for consumption... but a dude making sweet love to his pet deserves to be shot? A dude, who -if he speaks the truth-- has fought for his country in war? Face it, it is a matter of moral sensibilities <p> And yes, he is certainly suffering from some type of psycho-sexual deviation, he admits as much.
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:51 p.m. CST
Ever I say!
Sept. 13, 2007, 12:54 p.m. CST
Thank you. It's evident you have a firm grasp on exactly what I've been attempting to accomplish here. It's the classic slippery slope scenario. The only difference is that I'm running away from drawing such a hard line for others while you embrace it. Ultimately, doesn't that make you narrow minded and intolerant? This should be a frustrating rhetorical question for you. As a conservative, liberals encourage me to consider similar questions all the time. And it is very frustrating.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:01 p.m. CST
I think the pedophile analogy has some merit. I submit that animals are not able to communicate with or form meaningful relationships with humans.<br>When a so-called "zoophile" manipulates an animal into having a relationship with him (I am going to assume most are men), he is taking psychological advantage of the creature. One could even guess that this kind of dominance is -- for some anyway -- part of the allure. At the very least, it is not an equal relationship.<br>So do I think it is 'wrong'? Well, it is less wrong than animal testing or even, as Equinas pointed out again and again, killing an animal for food. But it certainly isn't right, either.<br>Personally, and I speak here of the so-called zoophiles and not the chicken rapers, I think being attracted to animals is more about control and maturity than love. Relationships are difficult mostly because they involve complex feelings and the chance that you can get hurt, emotionally, by the object of your affections. A relationship with an animal can never reach that depth, no matter what you tell yourself. It is a safe place to hide. And you can tell yourself, like many pedophiles do, that you are giving love to the animal. But you aren't.<br>So is it wrong? If you aren't hurting the poor beast, I guess it isn't the worst thing you could do to let it fuck you up the ass. Now, doing the same to it is not so defensible. And convincing yourself that this is anything but a poor substitute for an actual relationship is just sad.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:03 p.m. CST
"There is no debate."<P>Why? Because you say so? Am I keeping you from spewing further bile in your roiling hatred of something you don't understand like so many rabid weasels in a burlap sack? Perhaps you are too afraid to look in the mirror and see the inconsistency of your own thought process, which have gotten you by this far? MNG and mode 7 have. Meanwhile, all you're capable of "Fuck, fuck, fucketty, McFuck, fuck."<P>You must realize that many far right conservatives have used the very same thought process about homosexuality that you have made here. That isn't enough to make it the only correct and logical answer, or the only one to matter.<P>Again, there is no light at the end of the tolerance tunnel. It just goes on, and on, and...
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:05 p.m. CST
Add the bits between the asterisks to the above:<P>MNG and mode 7 have *attempted to draw a line in the sand somewhere*. Meanwhile, all you're capable of "Fuck, fuck, fucketty, McFuck, fuck."
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:07 p.m. CST
the Horse Fucker is KING! I find it amusing that they have their own sects and cliques and look down at others... "Oh, don't talk to him Equinas. I heard he likes to rub turtles all over his cock while tickling his asshole with a parrot! Sick freak..."
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:08 p.m. CST
by Stuntcock Mike
Welcome back, officer Maclane.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:22 p.m. CST
How is that different from anything else?<P>I live in Massachusetts. I won't stoop to the tired line of, "I have homosexual friends..." but if you work in a larger company, you can't help but rub elbows with them every so often. Earlier this year, I overheard two of them speaking about the upcoming Gay Pride Parade in Provincetown. No eavesdropping, this was cafeteria talk. One asked the other if they were going. The reply was, "I wouldn't associate with any of those freaks."<P>Things are the same all over.
Sept. 13, 2007, 1:41 p.m. CST
It's nice that the talkback has been a (somewhat, anyways) serious debate, and some great points have been made (some have even taken up the cause), but (maybe because I don't comprehend Equina's POV (right or wrong)enough to jump on the bandwagon), I just can't stop snickering. <p> Another case of someone thinking that something that is obviously dangerous, is so good, then it turns out horribly wrong. Isn't that comedy? <p> Remember, "Sleeping Dogs Lie"? I still haven't watched it (mainly because they'd never have it in my little part of the world), but there was the same debate then, too.
Sept. 13, 2007, 2 p.m. CST
I remember one of the first mass-emailed joke pics that got sent to me was related to the Darwin awards. It was a guy who was doing a chicken in an alcove in the rocks when a slab of rock fell on him and killed him. Although I generally find pics of dead things disgusting, I couldn't stop laughing all day.
Sept. 13, 2007, 2:06 p.m. CST
I have never seen someone so passionate about sex with animals before. You will hear similar arguments made by the NAMBLA sickos applied to their desires. Honestly I have read only one of your posts, and its the one in which you give me the parameters for being allowed to debate you. Well, I don't even know who the hell you are besides the fact that you love sex with animals. Im not going to read your posts because, besides being a pervert, you are a smug and snivelling worm. If you can prove to me that your existance is of any value whatsoever to myself or anyone else, aside from being amazed, I may indulge you by reading your posts, at least until your spewings confirm your sickness.
Sept. 13, 2007, 2:13 p.m. CST
I made a syntax error/ you like fucking animals. I will leave it up to the readers as to who deserves more derision.
Sept. 13, 2007, 2:55 p.m. CST
"I'm not narrow minded or intolerant, I'm just realistic."<P>I'm not accusing you of either. When I posed that question, and a rhetorical one at that, I was drawing analogy to how it is the same question that liberals pose to me when other topics are being bantered; e.g. prostitution, abortion, homosexuality, marijuana legalization, etc. And from both sides of the aisle. Depending on the topic, I'm labeled either too tolerant or utterly intolerant. This is frustrating to me. I think I've convinced at least you that I attempt to approach and place most things on a level playing field. Given that, which side is ultimately the intolerant one?<P>"Society has to have lines and boundaries in order to function."<P>Absolutely, but ceaseless preaching of tolerance coupled with a heavy dose contradiction can only break society down, not build it up.<P> "One last thought, I don't quite understand what you mean when you make reference to your endless tolerance."<P>Oh, no, no, no. I'm not claiming to have boundless tolerance at all. I've written here earlier how I do not condone nor support Mr. Hands or our own Equinas. However, when one gets on a high horse and smacks everyone across the face with the mighty hammer of tolerance about other topics, then those debating points can be easily used against that person. Different subjects are all scrutinized under a subjective microscope for some reason. Tolerance can be a slippery slope that never ends. That's what I meant, sorry.
Sept. 13, 2007, 3:25 p.m. CST
no one commented on how Johhno said " Tolerance in our screwed up world for pedophilia and bestiality is inevitable following homosexual tolerance. " ... WHA?!?! A: - what year are YOU living in? and b: - how disgusting are you for equating this act with love between two people. Get it...? PEOPLE. So I guess those Sodomites were to horsefuckery after the buggery? Is this why ATHENS fell as a city-state? They were lovers of men as well... Jeebus, you're so small minded. Judge THIS you dickhead. I am (btw...) a woman who is straight . I have many queer friends and find the whole subject of equating animal-loving-violations to homosexuality gross and indecent.
Sept. 13, 2007, 3:43 p.m. CST
by El Borak
debate it be my guest. chicken vs horse or whatever. have fun when the devil is cornholing you in hades.
Sept. 13, 2007, 4:03 p.m. CST
The Garden of Earthly Delights- The lessons of the old masters. Vile evil endures and has been reborn as enlightenment.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:01 p.m. CST
by Larry of Arabia
Stay for the hilariously serious talkback about the emotional toll on the horse. Not about the issues that drove the man who gets fucked by the horse, mind you. That could be a great documentary movie, a real life version of Equis. The director seems to have missed a great opportunity. I nominate Werner Herzog to direct the new documentary.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:03 p.m. CST
I don't subscribe to that particular notion wholesale, but I grasp the intent and support some elements of it. Here's my interpretation...<P>Homophobia existed for quite a long time, certainly within my lifespan. Granted, there were pockets of society within history that allowed some form of homosexuality, but tolerance of such was nothing like it is now and our society grows only more tolerant as time marches on. Whether or not this is a good thing is irrelevant to the discussion.<P>This is the slippery slope theory I'm certain you must have heard by now. Hence, if accepting homosexuality is the first step toward sexual deviance and depravity (again, not my personal stance, but stay with me here), then what is next? I believe I will see a large movement toward the acceptance of polyamory at some point during my lifetime. Honestly. After all, using YOUR OWN debate points, these are people that love each other. Now, perhaps you are with me and don't think polyamory would be a good thing for our society. But let's say you are for it. That's another step toward depravity again. What is the next step after that? So on and so on.<P>Needless to say, this constant backtracking away from what many consider to be traditional core values that are an essential cornerstone of our society are perceived by many to be a slippery slope that eventually will lead way to sympathy and possibly acceptance and legalization of pedophilia. The proverbial shooting for the moon in our lifetimes, but what about our grandchildren? My grandparents never would have thought that homosexuality would have ever been as wifely accepted as it is today. Is it really that much of a stretch for us to imagine what our grand kids will be debating?<P>BTW, I could interpret (hopefully misinterpret) your typing the word "Jebus" as a betrayal of your own for of intolerance of certain organized religions. Thus, I could also ask you what year you are living in. See how this works? Prolly not the case. Prolly written in jest, but as you can see, tolerance is a subjective animal.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:03 p.m. CST
I bet every one of you bitches laughed your asses off (pun intended) about the Donkey-fuckery in the movie. You thought that was Teh SHIT. How is this different, in a documentary that it seems that only Vern and I have seen? I am not pro-horsefuckery, believe me... but you all did find humor in it last year when that movie came out. I know you did. That said, I still disagree with Equinas and his or her lot. Someone mentioned how 'veal is made'... well, it's the same for 'burgers and chicken fingers. Maybe this will encourage people to more fully think about how your stuff get to you. Be it food, or clothes or sneakers. Anyway... you don't want to screw animals? Then don't. It's pretty much that simple. As for the comment about some laws being based in morality... DUH...they ALL are. Don't kill people = bad ...so there's a law against it. Don't hurt kids = bad, - law against it, etc. All the laws in every land are based on moral judgments. Most in the western world come from Judeo-Christian values. We're indoctrinated from day one.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:11 p.m. CST
actually... it's a reference to a Simpson's episode. Homer is stranded on a tropical island and made to preach to the natives, and he says, when in distress "Jeebus, I don't believe in you...but Help Me ! Jeebus!" - I use Jeebus rather then Jesus in conversation so as not to offend those who would think saying a name is not kosher. As for the Polyamory stuff... it doesn't bother me, as long as everyone's equal. In watching eps of Big Love (and talking with some ex-mormon friends) I can see the general appeal, but the lack of women's equality would drive me up a wall. For that reason alone I don't think I would be interested. I am not a jealous person, so that part doesn't bother me. And... many ancient cultures had Polyamory, and were they all 'degenerate'? - or... was it the social norms of the time? I think it's the latter. Our (Western peoples) general cultural normality doesn't go that way, but who's to say it won't shift. Until the collective Churches/Mosques/Temples get out of the Dark Ages morality-wise I don't see that happening. But, as I do see a shift from everyone in church/temple on Sundays to sleeping in late and living 'in sin' with a partner, it may happen sooner then I think. And, so much the better for all. This country was started by religious fanatics who were very pious and it has carried on for centuries here. I tire of it.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:43 p.m. CST
I care more about the horse than I do the "person" who would engage in bestiality. I care about the dogs wellfare more than I do he that beats the dog. I care more for the monkey than he who spanks the monkey. So and and so forth.
Sept. 13, 2007, 6:47 p.m. CST
that people are raping the land?
Sept. 13, 2007, 8:07 p.m. CST
It just feels right! So damn right!
Sept. 13, 2007, 10:11 p.m. CST
This paragraph nth degree review should have been more concise. I can only read so much before I get so bored and disturbed at the same time that...ah screw it, it's not worth finishing.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:19 p.m. CST
you know it's true.
Sept. 13, 2007, 11:36 p.m. CST
by The Dum Guy
I don't have time to read the entire TB, so could someone take the time to summarize what has happend? I leave reading a few jokes, and come back to see a debate... I'm lazy and somewhat busy, so I would appreciate an update. <br><br>I now have to see Mr. Woodcock, I'll check back when it is over.
Sept. 14, 2007, 12:36 a.m. CST
so like there's this guy posting on here who's called equinas or something he's sort of (if you put it in technical term) he's i guess you could call it a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:04 a.m. CST
by Super Nintendo Chalmers
"I can assure you that horse sex is a lot safer than human sex. Try not to embarrass yourself like this in the future." Oh my fucking god, I can't believe that this talkback exists. Horse fuckers, people defending horse fuckers, people threatening to kill horse fuckers, people comparing horse fucking to gay sex; fucking pandemonium!
Sept. 14, 2007, 2:03 a.m. CST
I'm defending a horsefucker, but the talkbackers are going crazy. I don't get the animal thing, myself, but I also don't think you can equate fucking a horse to raping a child. Animals have sex! They don't have the same moral issues with sex that we humans do. Have you seen animals fucking? The dude doesn't take the lady-horse out to a romantic dinner...he just climbs up there and does his thing. All animals do that. Hell, YouTube has about 37,657,003 videos of dog on cat, cat on bird, horse on pig, bat on walrus, etc. Animals will fuck whatever is nearest to them when they get in the mood. What I'm saying is, a horse probably isn't going to have any emotional scars from having some dude stick his microscopic dick into it's junk.
Sept. 14, 2007, 2:55 a.m. CST
but I believe the good doctor Pazuzu put it best when he said, "Dude, you like having sex WITH ANIMALS." Morality, psychology, history, the proportion of Equinas penis to horse ass... there is a whole lot of territory covered here and we can keep on going but at the end of the day the guy is still fucking a god damn horse. THE GUY IS FUCKING A HORSE. It will be hard to get past that one, in my opinion.<p> Personally I think the most interesting part is the prejudice against chickenfuckers. He also used the term "gay" disparagingly which is interesting too. I would like to know if horsefuckers are grossed out by the sight of two boys holding hands. Also, have horsefuckers ever beat up a guy for being a chickenfucker. And why did he laugh off my theory about dolphinfuckers. I think maybe I was getting too close to the truth.<p> Question for Equinas: the first time you fucked a horse were you pretending it was a human? Subquestion, do you think the horse would be offended if it found out?<p> Also, do you ever worry about making centaurs?
Sept. 14, 2007, 3:22 a.m. CST
Sept. 14, 2007, 3:58 a.m. CST
"You aint catchin me fuckin' no one in the ass. Mr Ed dont get down like that. Chyyyyyyuch !" * slams stable door*
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:39 a.m. CST
...............you may be a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:40 a.m. CST
........you just may be a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:43 a.m. CST
......I'm thinking you might be a horsefucker
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:45 a.m. CST
.............Theres a pretty good chance.....that you are a horsefucker
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:47 a.m. CST
Wow, OK. I'm in Amsterdam at the moment (not for deviant sex, just a plane change) but, just as an aside, Zoophilia is accepted here. I have a friend who married his horse here. There have been the occasional attempt to arrest someone or pass a law, but they have all been defeated IN THEIR PARLIAMENT based on the same arguments I've put forth before. And now, I'm not going to move here, so stop. I'm a patriotic American. Now then, I'm enjoying a cuban Montecristo #2 so I'm feeling pretty mellow and not going to wade into all the attacks (thanks to those of you who are more tolerant) but I'll answer Vern's questions. 1) Have NO problems at all with homosexuality. How could I? My thing is girl horses but hay, each to his own. My problem with chicken fuckers and the like is the activity hurts the animal and is inhumane. I'm not going to get into specific sex acts but I think we can all easily determine what would be painful and what wouldn't. No, my first horse was a horse and not an imaginary human. And no, I don't worry about Centaurs, although if you read Piers Anthony, his origin of Centaurs in one of his worlds was 3 soldiers and their 3 mares. OK, back to the airlines. Next stop, the USA! (Liljuniorbrown, wanna meet me at the airport?)
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:48 a.m. CST
......I have a feeling you are more than likely a horsefucker
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:51 a.m. CST
................You can be assured that you....are a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:53 a.m. CST
............More likely than not...you are a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 4:59 a.m. CST
.....Im beginning to think you could very well be....a horsefucker
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:01 a.m. CST
.......when you look in the mirror, you may very well see a horsefucker
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:03 a.m. CST
a heavy makeout session.....I think you can conclude.......that you are.....a horsefucker
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:07 a.m. CST
around the mountain is erotica.....My magic 8-ball is reading......you may be a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:18 a.m. CST
First Lady........Its afe to say....you are indeed.....a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:20 a.m. CST
during intercourse.......Its time to consider....that you may be....a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:26 a.m. CST
..........all roads lead to horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:41 a.m. CST
Eating meat and disagreeing wih horsefucking makes me a giant hypocrite? I can live with that, because at least I don't fuck animals.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:47 a.m. CST
what would the NEIGGGHHHHHHbours say?
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:25 a.m. CST
Our eloquent horsefucking friend is putting his violence-threatening detractors to shame. I wouldn't say I've been won over to Team Zoo, but to my surprise I've yet to see a convincing logical argument against this crazy shit. Mostly people just seem to be offended, presenting only their indignation as a defence. That's fine, but it doesn't help us understand each other.<p>A lot of folks are concerned about the wellbeing of the horses, but I think they're underestimating these animals. Comparing them to people - young, disabled, whatever - is ridiculous. Horses are a different species, and they're not shy about letting you know they're pissed off. Rabbits, for example, freeze when they're in distress, so if you were sufficiently motivated I guess you could rape one without being mauled to death like those Monty Pythoners. But horses are fucking terrifying. I wouldn't slap one in the face, let alone try to fuck it, because these things will stomp you into the ground if they get upset. Equinas, I won't pretend to understand the attraction of these beasts but if you can survive a whole sexual encounter then you must be doing something right.<p>As Thomas Servo points out, only (most) humans are shy about interspecies sex. The rest of the animal kingdom is an absolute fucking orgy. These things will stick their cocks in anything, from same-sex siblings to knots in tree trunks. We'd probably be the same if we didn't have such a high sense of identity, and therefore shame.<p>One thing that intrigues me is the idea of a full loving relationship between human and horse. Anyone who's ever owned a dog will know that they are able to differentiate between people, and hold more affection for one than another. But offering an animal "love" (as opposed to just sex) seems a little presumptuous. Like trying to apply a human characteristic - the desire for love - to a different species. How can we know if horses have any sense of romantic love? Even if they do, how could this be manifest in a way we can understand enough to reciprocate? I can barely understand women. I suppose I'm asking Equinas if he's gained some higher understanding of horses, and exactly how fulfilling a romantic relationship - or, say, marriage - with one could be. For either party.<p>Finally, thank you Vern for this astonishing debate.
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:55 a.m. CST
The idea that this behavior is the norm in nature and that the world is one big orgy is preposterous. Animals are all around us. How often have u seen interspecies sexual activity. Im sure it happens, but it is not the way of nature. It wouldn't make sense if it was. I ask anyone reading this to ask themselves the same question. Is this something you really see in nature as norm? Do you watch National Geographic? I suggest seeing nature as a giant orgy has tells us more about the viewer then the viewed? My problem with Eq. is that his view is just the natural extension of man's arrogance and exploitation of everything he touches. The "It exists, so let me find a way to use it for my pleasure" thought process serves the self and only the self. But since it "intrigues" some, lets treat it as if the perpetrators are just making a lifestyle choice. I don't believe Equinas has made even one enlightening point that isn't already refuge for some already existing behavior of similar offense. i.e. pedophilia. But wait, lets hear from someone who is "intrigued" because they have so much good to add to our world. You can't even leave your kids alone in your own front yard anymore because of our increasing permissiveness.
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:01 a.m. CST
then they can fall for the WMDs in Iraq line too. Stupidity continues to flourish. And Cromwell, thanks for the morning laughs bud!
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:06 a.m. CST
I can't believe we're witnessing the birth of another horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:07 a.m. CST
by El Borak
there is no such thing as tolerance concerning bestiality, child molestation, rape, murder, etc. sorry if i come off as opinionated but COME ON!
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:07 a.m. CST
We, as society have determined that a child CANNOT consent to sex in a way that legally exonerates and adult who engages in such activity with him/her. Why do you think this is? Do you think it has something to do with mental capacity and decision making ability? Perhaps the inability to decipher right and wrong because of an underdeveloped perception? Cant you see how this applies to animals as well? Does a horse consent? Can a horse consent? Is the commencement of activity itself consent? I think any reasonable person would not be befuddled by such questions.
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:17 a.m. CST
by El Borak
"i like how people are scared to even suggest that horsefucking is wrong. we're all going straight to hell."<BR> <BR>gee i must be psychic.
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:20 a.m. CST
There's an inherent sense of absolute selfishness to impose upon an animal for sexual gratification. Again, this guy and his supporters will justify it with the same arguments used by pedophiles - i.e. "love", but what they're really doing is making a mockery of any sense of morality. What does mankind have left after it's lost that? <p> Slaveowners have been portrayed to, at times, have a sense of affection for their slaves. And masters had sex with their slaves on a regular basis, for pleasure and procreation. Does that mean the slave women enjoyed it? If they didn't (or couldn't) object, was it justified? No, it was coersive and rapacious all the same.<p> There's a point where over-thinking something just throws common sensibilities out, and that's pretty dangerous. The day anyone takes a horsefucker's arguments seriously is, as you say, the day people need to keep their children out of public view.
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:41 a.m. CST
Was that a typo or a Freudian slip, Equinas? <p> Stop trying to use the lack of legislation against bestiality in the Netherlands and Denmark as some sort of measuring stick. In neither of those countries is it socially acceptable to fuck horses, I assure you, despite the lack of laws prohibiting it. <p> Cannibalism isn't illegal in Germany, either, but you don't see people finding it socially or morally acceptable to fucking eat people there.
Sept. 14, 2007, 7:58 a.m. CST
The argument that horses will tell you when they're pissed off isn't wholly accurate. They're a domesticated animal and generally they want to get along with people. Hell, we make them carry us places while we sit on our ass and they don't complain, so it doesn't completely surprise me that someone could get a horse to do this (okay, maybe it surprised me more than a little). Anyway, I still think it's abusive and the idea of consent is non-existent. By the way, I'm pro-gay marriage but anti-horse fucking.
Sept. 14, 2007, 8:33 a.m. CST
Would love to see how outnumbered the horsefuckers really are. And hey Equinas, we get it, you're an important guy...you don't need to constantly mention that you're on a plane.
Sept. 14, 2007, 8:37 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
I wonder if the chickenfuckers would vote for the pony pokers or for us non-animal fuckers?
Sept. 14, 2007, 9:17 a.m. CST
Where Equinas's argument falls down is that we as humans have the capacity to take responsibilty for our actions, and perceive the motivation of those actions. Just because something feels good doesn't mean we should necessarily do it (see date rape, sticking your cock in a beehive, whatever). It boils down to the fact that someone who knows it's wrong to impose their will on another animal for the tawdry purpose of getting their rocks off, but rationalizes it as 'love and affection and no one gets hurt'. You demean yourself and the animal that you are useing as a sex toy. As humans we should be able to step up and be better than that. And the argument of 'well you kill and eat the animals', is completely useless. We eat to survive, we don't masturbate to survive (well, those of us who aren't 14 any more).
Sept. 14, 2007, 9:31 a.m. CST
Of course I'm intrigued by this. Don't you find it fascinating that people can seem entirely ordinary and then do something as bizarre and unfathomable as fuck a horse? Being intrigued doesn't mean I want to do it, and trying to understand someone else's crazy behaviour isn't a percursor to joining their club. If you told me you'd robbed a bank, I'd want to know why. What led you to this, etc. Just because I wouldn't immediately call you a reprobate and attempt a citizen's arrest doesn't mean I'd be attracted to bank robbing. I'm more interested in hearing someone state their case. Or put it this way, since Vern mentioned the film Zodiac, are serial killer nerds like Robert Graysmith really wannabe serial killers? Not at all. They're just fascinated by something most people wouldn't want to know about.<p>For the record, I'm not pro-horsefucking, but as long as there's a debate on the subject, what does "Dude! You fuck a horse!" do for anyone? From Vern's review it sounds like the documentary avoided that kind of thing. It's too easy to shout someone down or ignore their point of view. Also, in a discussion about exploitation, there's also a lot of exploiting Equinas and his ilk for laughs, which doesn't seem fair.<p>I have seen different species of animals fucking, and I've also seen what I can only describe as non-consensual animal sex (same species; cows if you care). I like hillwalking, and that's the kind of thing you get in the countryside. I was mystified when I saw it, but it's pointless to judge animals from a human moral standpoint.<p>My main problem, as I said above, is when the idea of love comes into it. I want to know a horsefucker's opinion on this because love requires a certain level of mutual understanding and I don't believe you can achieve this with a horse. It sounds like the self-delusion of that idiot who thought he could live with Alaskan bears, until they ate him and his girlfriend. I think it's dangerous to think of animals in human psychological terms (who knows if the word "consensual" even really applies?) but Equinas knows a guy who's married to one. So I'm asking if he really believes romantic love is possible between species.<p>I guess I just want to understand extreme behaviour. I wouldn't go near a horse's crack, much less with my cock out, but some folk out there have no problem with it. That's what intrigues me. Not the act itself, but a person's ability to go through with it.
Sept. 14, 2007, 9:41 a.m. CST
...equating horses to children and disabled people, BringingSexyBack has added African Americans to the subgroup. Well done my friend, well done. <p> I know, I know, it's not exactly what you meant, but essentially it is what you're saying. Your argument that "THEY'RE ANIMALS!" works both ways. As in "THEY'RE ONLY ANIMALS!".... Again, it's okay to grind them up into glue or dogfood, but not for E to stick his cock into one? <p> And yes, I'm playing devil's advocate here. Sheesh.
Sept. 14, 2007, 9:50 a.m. CST
I didn't say it, but I see it as the reasoning reached by a person who sees nothing but immorality no matter what road is taken. It is the minimalist version and prsentation of "It should be obvious without in-depth explanation why this is wrong." It is equivelant to breaking down any reasoning to one fundamentally obvious conclusion. Kind of like "Yeah, but you are eating someones shit" or "Yeah, but you are molesting children." It doesn't need to convince you of a new point. It is asking you how one could be so twisted as to not see the fundamental and blaring immorality in these actions.
Sept. 14, 2007, 10:01 a.m. CST
"And the argument of 'well you kill and eat the animals', is completely useless." <p> Why? Because you love bacon? <p> If you equate horse-fucking to child-molestation, you have to equate eating a burger to cannibalism. You don't get it both ways. <p> I know, I know, two wrongs don't make a right, and we do have to draw a line in the sand somewhere, but I still haven't seen anyone argue that there is a true victim in this crime. <p> Property is property, and animal cruelty is animal cruelty. I just don't think it's been properly proven that E's horsefucking falls into that later category. Especially if you compare to what else we can legally do to the same animal. Sure it's fucked up, sure it goes against everything we've been taught to believe, but I guess it's the level of moral outrage I've seen here that has me defending his actions. To me, comparing the act of fucking a horse to child pedos, or raping a "slave" or someone in a coma is what's offensive.
Sept. 14, 2007, 10:08 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
Quote: "I still haven't seen anyone argue that there is a true victim in this crime."<P>Check out my earlier post to Equinas = the horsefucker is the initial victim. The behavior he is perpetrating (and apparently enjoying the defense thereof) is a result of a severe psychological-behavioral disorder. IT'S A SICKNESS. Nothing more. Anyone trying to defend it or prop-up even more dubious notions of inter-species romance is fooling themselves.
Sept. 14, 2007, 10:27 a.m. CST
by Mr. Nice Gaius
Sept. 14, 2007, 10:29 a.m. CST
You know full well no one is comparing a horse directly to children, Africans, or anyone else. <p> The issue is: imposing oneself upon another living thing for the purpose of fulfilling one's sexual gratification.
Sept. 14, 2007, 10:33 a.m. CST
1.- Do you have a girlfriend, wife, human sex partner? 2.- If yes, is she/he aware of your horse shenanigans? (If yes, for the love of God explain how the hell you got her into that) 3.- Do you enjoy having sex with humans or are you entirely into to the wild side? And finally 4.- Dude, what the hell? Sorry, but my intolerant narrow mind keeps telling me fucking animals is fucked up. But now I'm not angry at you and I'm curious. Curious about how you seem to be a smart normal guy, not horsefucking, so don't be calling me horsefucker on the making, thank you very much. Or Horsefucker Begins, that would be even worse.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:03 a.m. CST
The moral outrage of those who cry "Dude, you fuck horses!" is a legitimate reaction; it just doesn't help. If a friend of mine confessed to fucking a horse, I'd be shocked, but I wouldn't shun the poor bastard. I'd want to know why the hell he did it. If only to try and understand how two moral standpoints can be so different.<p>On the subject of exploitation, I've used a horse as transport more than once, I've eaten horse meat and I've gambled on the occasional race. So while I've never imposed myself on a horse for sexual gratification (quite the opposite when your happysack's the victim of violent saddle bouncing), I have exploited them for food, money and to get from A to B. None of which was necessary, only appealing or convenient. So it's hard to be too judgemental of a man who uses them for sex.<p>I still have questions, though. How the fuck do they put up with all the flies? I've never seen a horse that wasn't surrounded by a hundred buzzing bloodsuckers and that shit cannot possibly be a turn-on.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:50 a.m. CST
Some things you simply don't need consent for. When horses fuck each other, they don't ask for consent. The male just hops up there. A child molester, in my opinion, gets a bullet to the head. End of story. But a horsefucker...eh... As I see it, as long as Equinas hasn't, like, broken the horse's legs in order to restrain it-- if the horse is totally free to walk away when it wants--then there is no issue. I don't think the horse loves Equinas (though he may actually love it...who knows) but I don't think it cares it's being fucked.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:51 a.m. CST
And by the way, my whole fucking family is from the Netherlands, and horse fucking is NOT an accepted norm there. The Dutch are a tolerant people, but Jesus...who marries a fucking horse?
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:51 a.m. CST
Very astute point. In arguing the ethics of the act itself we seem to be putting the (ahem) cart before the horse, as it were.<p> And well done everyone. Although it says a lot about us that the most reasoned and erudite TB in recent memory has been inspired by this topic...
Sept. 14, 2007, 12:16 p.m. CST
Dude, you're being dense. "IT'S NOT ABOUT WETHER [sic] IT IS HURTING THE HORSE EMOTIONALLY OR PHYSICALLY." And then, right afterward-- "It's about the degradation and abuse the animal is suffering." What was that? Look, I'm not a horse fucker, but you called me slow-minded, so you're forcing me to argue- once again- for this stupid topic. You just compared the act to brainwashing. You don't have to brainwash the horse...the horse just doesn't fucking care. And I'm sorry if you're naive, but having sex, even with another human, is ALWAYS about your own desires. A horse doesn't have an orgasm-- there is no reciprocation to consider. Yes, maybe the dude has some gross horse hang-up, but come on, admit that you just think it's gross, and quit trying to make it an animal-rights issue. Mentally, the only person that is suffering *may* be Equinas...not the horse.
Sept. 14, 2007, 12:35 p.m. CST
I understand the respect thing, I really do. What I'm saying is...for horses, respect doesn't come into play. I totally understand your argument-- you and BSB and cromwell-- but you're giving these animals way too much credit. You guys keep saying it's "wrong," but why? I think I'm reacting to this as strongly as I am because it's been an argument for so many other things in history: "It's bad because it's wrong because it's bad." And the jewelry argument doesn't work: if you steal something, you got it without earning it. If you manage to fuck a horse without it killing you, well, you EARNED that shit. (Though, hell, I could argue with you why stealing something that the victim never found out about isn't all that bad, either.)
Sept. 14, 2007, 12:40 p.m. CST
Eh, wait. My comment about stealing only applied if you meant the victims never even noticed the thing was stolen. But I think you meant they never found out YOU did it. I retract my statement. Stealing is wrong, kids. Stay in school.
Sept. 14, 2007, 12:56 p.m. CST
This began with a movie about man-fucking (by a horse) and then quickly turned into a horsefucking debate. <p> I stand by my stance that the horse doesn't give a fuck. I've hesitated in admitting that I was born and raised on a horse farm in a community filled with horse owners.... because of the obvious accusations that I thought would follow.... yes, I'll stick up for the horse-fucker, but I don't really want people to think I am I horsefucker.... And let me tell ya, I find it hard to believe that if the horse didn't want to be fucked (or at least minded), it wouldn't allow it. I have seen --at, frankly, too young an age-- a Arabian mare kick the ever-loving-shit out of a stallion trying to be bred with it. If we can eat a horse, feed it to our dogs, have it "raped" by a stallion with shlong MUCH MUCH larger than a human, ride the fuckers around for our amusement, or strap them to farm equipment to be used as "slaves".... fucking it can't be that big of a deal. <p> Yes, it's fucked up. No, it's not natural. Yes, there is something wrong with our friend E. No, I don't expect people to ever be accepting of horsefuckery in polite society. AND yes, I have enjoyed fanning the flames of this talkback. <p> And Bringsexy, PLENTY of people have compared having sex with a horse to raping a kid in this talkback. Suuuure, I manipulated what you said, but that doesn't change what others have posted.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:02 p.m. CST
emailed everyone I know with a link to this talkback, and they're all enjoying the ever-loving shit out of it. <p> If there is a sudden surge of people signing up as AICN members.... you're welcome. <p> And as far as I know, not a single one has fucked a horse. Or a chicken.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:02 p.m. CST
by El Borak
someone needs to watch it and describe it on here. i'm too scared to look. is what you do equinas?
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:04 p.m. CST
no, you call it GREAT!
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:04 p.m. CST
no, you call it GREAT!
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:07 p.m. CST
Our friend E is, apparently, a hetro-horse-fucker, enjoying the mare to the stallion. A pitcher versus catcher, as they say.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:09 p.m. CST
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:14 p.m. CST
by El Borak
i cannot do it.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:32 p.m. CST
Because the unconscious chick is a human chick, and not a horse, it's infinitely worse than what Mr. Hands or Equinas do. Say, in the future, the drugged-up chick remembers what was done to her, it may cause her psychological harm. (It already cause her physical discomfort.) The horse will have no such side effects. And for the record, I don't like the idea of hunting, myself, but I DO love a good steak.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:37 p.m. CST
See, the problem here arizes from the fact that we're all anthropomorphizing the animals. We're applying human standards to them. Say there's an alien culture completely opposed to looking at each other. In their society, even a glance is considered a form of rape or oppression. Say they then come to Earth, and some deranged alien starts looking at us humans left and right. The aliens will shout "freak! pervert!" but we humans will shrug and go about our daily lives. We look at each other all the time.
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:44 p.m. CST
by The Dum Guy
It turns out I've got an STD that previously only existed in some sharks... There is a reason they tell you not to get drunk and go swimming.<br><br>All jokes aside, I think (if that is possible) that this really comes down to one's philosophical beliefs as to what man is and what is "right and wrong". Now, that may seem obvious, but lets say one believes in God, i.e. man is created above the animals, then one would assume it would be sinfull to engage in horsefuckery. On the other hand, if one believes only in evolution, then man is just another animal, and everythings up for game.<br><br>Personally, I'm not for having sex with animals, but then again, I'm a heterosexual male who wouldn't screw every women I could just because I would screw others. Maybe, it is my narcisism, but I have a sense of self respect.<br><br>Although to play devil's advocate, I do see how one could be open to fucking a horse, if they are fine with eating a burger... I cannot believe that this TB exists, and that I've put even an iota brain power in thinking about beastiallity or reading about it, althought I've seen that video with the fat chick sucking off a dog, so...
Sept. 14, 2007, 1:54 p.m. CST
by El Borak
animals have minds and feelings. your dog or cat might start turning weird if you messed with it.
Sept. 14, 2007, 2:16 p.m. CST
- it depends, was the mountain lion attack unprovoked? If so it generally means the animal was a danger, and could be again, so should be destroyed - if it was provoked, the animal was defending itself, and shouldn't be 'dealt with'.<br><br>Now, I'm totally against myself fucking or getting fucked by a horse, but what about a veal calf? Those animals are immobilized and locked up in a box, so they're about as emotionally damaged as they're going to get. Are they okay to get it on with?<br><br>It's topics like this that shine the light on what hypocrites we all are. I for instance can't stand the idea of African bushmeat eaters, but I'm in a talk balk defending a horsefucker/ee.
Sept. 14, 2007, 2:37 p.m. CST
by El Borak
it's said that lions, sharks, etc, that kill a human become more dangerous because their fear of man is gone. and they know they can eat you. granted, most animals could kill you anyway but usually preservation is the first instinct. now who's to say what the horse felt about his interactions w/ mr. hands? maybe the horse was fed up and proceeded to unleash the pain.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:04 p.m. CST
a good WW II film. Maybe something like "The Big Red One."<p> Maybe it will attract some real former Nazis who will try to spin the Holocaust.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:21 p.m. CST
...end up the same way as Mr.hands. what they do is utterly repulsive and there is no word to describe it frankly. what i would like to know is Why? and How they become like this? what was there first experience...in college? or what. seriously just curious at how these freaks get to be like this. last time i checked this type of thing is condemned by..well..everybody in the whole fuckin world. this is beyond psychology. plus why was mr.hands the only dead from this type of thing i would expect this a bit more common among them. do they use protection seriously. wasn't AIDS a result of this kind of thing. bacteria/disease/infection sheez to name a few that can result from putting an animals cock in ur ass. As for Equinas, i hope he never returns but i bet he will under another name. I must admit that as a race we all have our wacky fantasies, and maybe fetishes but nothing that goes beyond that line that these freaks cross everyday and its probably over the internet. which is sad cause that means more people might be encouraged to do try that kind of thing. on anther note, i remember seeing on CNN years earlier a women getting married to a dolphin and another to a snake. whats so cool about dolphins and snakes. and now i'm probably gonna second check what each cunt i see has been through..just to be sure u never know.
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:23 p.m. CST
by El Borak
Sept. 14, 2007, 5:44 p.m. CST
up with a victim, but I've read at least a dozen posts that have a well reasoned argument why the horse is still a victim. I understand that it's a bit of hyperbole to equate human rape with bestiality, but I think that it is along the lines of statutory rape. Even if a thirteen year old thinks she really wants to have sex, that does not mean she has the life experience to make that decision and an adult should know better. The animal is abused, even if it is coerced into the act. What if someone stuck a different foreign object into the horse, would you consider that abuse? I would in a heartbeat. How about putting a horse's member into some other kind of opening? Again, no question that's abusive. The punishment should not be as severe as statutory rape, but it should definitely be considered legally and morally wrong. I believe in treating animals as well as possible, and buy free range meat often. I've even toyed with the idea of being a vegetarian. There are some actions that animals unfortunately have to endure in order for us to be fed, but that does not open the door to any kind of abuse. As someone mentioned, we have to eat to survive, these people did not have to abuse this horse.
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:20 p.m. CST
...but obviously only EXTREMELY FUCKED UP people do this....I mean really, how many people are out there in the world doing this? I would guess, maximum, 100 or so dedicated weirdos.
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:26 p.m. CST
honestly, I think its more. and sadly, someday it wont be taboo anymore.
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:28 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
And by 'this topic,' I mean horsefuckery.
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:40 p.m. CST
I don't think there are that many people doing this shit. Also, am I the only one who thinks that Equinas is just pretending so that he may play devil's advocate and piss a few people off?
Sept. 14, 2007, 6:50 p.m. CST
who would pretend to be a horsefucker...even on the internet. believe me whoever pretends to be a horsefucker, is probably a horsefucker.
Sept. 14, 2007, 8:52 p.m. CST
"but to my surprise I've yet to see a convincing logical argument against this crazy shit."<P>That's what I've been (stubbornly) striving for since my very first post in this thread. Some have come close, but all have ultimately betrayed their stance as subjective feeling aka an assault on one's own moral values and sensibilities where this topic is concerned. And let's face it, this is an easy topic to dismiss with what one perceives as humor.<P>I've tried long and hard here to present tangible criteria how preaching of tolerance on other topics of a sexual nature could easily pave the way for acceptance of bestiality (and all of its various forms) from the same moral grounds, but few are willing to entertain the notion. Why? 'Cause, like, DUDE!!! They're fucking ANIMALS!! See Vern's last post that quoted Doc Pazuzu. Ultimately, morality is relative if tolerance is our only guide.<P>No, I am not condoning nor am I defending what they do. I am a conservative yet mostly a libertarian. In everything, I question where the victim is. Frankly, I see no victim here, given the defense of other pet sexual acceptance of the liberal left when I peer through the same prism of tolerance.<P>Contrasting and comparing bestiality with abortion, rape, pedophilia, etc. (where there is a discernible victim) -- as well as where each party statistically stands on the legalization of bestiality is concerned -- it is very clear to me that there is a major level of contradiction if not hypocrisy. The kind that demonizes Mark Foley while re-electing Gerry Studds multiple times.
Sept. 14, 2007, 9:21 p.m. CST
"I've read at least a dozen posts that have a well reasoned argument why the horse is still a victim"<P>You have? Which ones? Where? I've been fascinated with this thread and I have yet to see one. Perhaps you intend to cite the ones that compare bestiality with rape of the handicapped? I countered that one handily. Briefly, in the states of MA and RI, the handicapped are considered to "be" their ages. Hence, if they are at or above the age of consent, and they consent, then there is no rape. And if they are not at the age of consent, then they are the victim of pedophilia. The law makes no special provision. Perhaps the law differs in other states and/or countries.<P>And that's where that particular comparison is concerned. Again, what well reasoned argument has been made? I've seen none.<P>As disgusted as I am about the Michael Vick case, it's ultimately about the vilification of what one man did with his property. Granted, there are animal cruelty laws as well as tax evasion that he is guilty of -- neither of which make the man a role model by any stretch -- but those animals were his property BY LAW. It sickens me to type this, but he can do with his property as he sees fit as long as it falls under the law. And if the law in his state allows for pit fighting, well... Then only the cruelty and tax evasion laws can stick. We can carry on all day about how our moral sensibilities were bruised, but at the end of the day, black and white rules.<P>If I am expected to believe that two bearded overweight men making out in plain sight in the middle of a playground while their twin adolescent adopted daughters swing on swings and slide down slides in the park will have no impact at all on the groundwork that our founding forefathers envisioned for our society -- well, then, by that same logic, neither will Equinas's fucking of barnyard animals in the privacy of his own home where he is hurting no one else, hopefully including his property (i.e. the animals) he is in company with.<P>BTW, Equinas if you are reading this, I hope you realize that you were given the benefit of the doubt not by a card carrying member of the party of tolerance, but by a libertarian conservative. I don't like what you do and would never condone it. Were you to meet my daughter, I would immediately introduce you to the backside of a shovel and the trunk of my car. Despite this, I feel compelled to quote Jefferson... "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."<P>My interpretation -- The liberals have already damned morality, so do what you will under the tenets of law, but understand that you may never be understood.
Sept. 14, 2007, 10:53 p.m. CST
"how does one decide that an animal is a victim here<P>Damn, that is a compelling argument. What I've been waiting for.<P>Your gorilla angle difficult to overcome. The only thing I could hope to banter is the domestic vs. not angle. After all, if a creature willingly obliges, then there is still no harm, no foul.<P>At the end of the day, you are comparing the rape of a cognizant, sentient being with that which is not. Not by my own personal determination but by that which is law. I may not like it. You may not like it. But law is law. And animals are considered property. And their owners may do with them what is fit under law. Again, we all know where veal comes from.<P>I wrote this before, but it appears lost -- Do any of you realize just how much your accusations sound like the homophobic right?
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:11 p.m. CST
Animals aren't just property. They're protected under many laws and furthermore these laws are mala in se so I'm shocked why people seem to miss why this is wrong. It's animal abuse plain and simple. My analogy to statutory rape I think is on target (although the victim isn't as protected under law because people are still viewed as more protected than animals). As I mentioned earlier, horses are domesticated animals and will do almost whatever a human will coerce them into doing. They have been bred for their complacency. I believe in curtailing any abuse towards animals, and while I don't go as far as PETA, I believe laws should go further to protect animals within the farming industry. I also don't think this has anything to do with homophobia. Look at the arguments people have been making. They deal with consent and abuse and few deal with whether it's natural. Although we could bring in that argument and it's easily discernible. I once read a paper where it posited that homosexuality (found in every species on earth by the way) becomes more common when societies are bunched together like in cities. So, it's kind of like mother nature's way of population control. Back to the horse. It cannot consent to having it's body used for someone else's sexual gratification. It is a living, thinking, breathing creature and should be respected, not abused.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:17 p.m. CST
You call the Left intolerant but are quick to threaten to kill Eq. should he ever be in the presence of your daughter. Well, he has been, is, and will be, in the presence of *someone's* daughter. He's hiding in plain sight. Does your argument give everyone else the right to take a shovel to his head and shove him in their trunk for a trip to the lake? <p> And you strive to support tolerance for bestiality, when even Eq. makes a clear distinction between Zoophiles (like himself, who have sex with animals for 'love') and Bestialists (who have sex with animals for other reasons). Do you support both camps, or do you subscribe to that distinction too?<p> Since you obviously didn't bother to read Eq.'s own descriptions of Zoophiles and Bestialists, and lump them both together, I think you're in this TB not to participate in a debate, but to use the issue to bash the Left. It goes right along with the tactics used by most right-wingers. Issues are only important when they're a convenient tool to use. Otherwise you wouldn't give them the time of day. And the hypocrisy is written all over your faces, just like it was written on Larry Craig's and Mark Foley's and Ted Haggard's.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:26 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:30 p.m. CST
Everyone on the Right was indignant and furious about Terry Schiavo when it was politically expedient to be so. But as soon as the elections were over, the issue vanished instantly. And in this case, the issue being exploited is horsefuckery. It's laughable. On the one hand, he'd kill Eq. for even being in the presence of his daughter, but on the other hand, use him to bash Liberals. There really is no limit, apparently, to the levels some will stoop to.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:40 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Oops. Sorry guys, wrong talkback. But he is. Against it, I mean.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:44 p.m. CST
Mola Ram ain't got nothing on horsefuckers.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:46 p.m. CST
Somewhere out there, a man is married to a horse. Indy's seen a lot, but he ain't seen this.
Sept. 14, 2007, 11:55 p.m. CST
Wow what a TB debate, anywho my two cents. As far as I'm aware animals generally have sex solely for the purpose of making more animals, we are one of the few species who has sex for sexual gratification. So it seems to me the only side getting any sense of enjoyment out of this is the guy doing the fucking.
Sept. 15, 2007, 12:15 a.m. CST
Is Charles Mudede the guy who wrote the piece in The Stranger about killing animals and eating them? I remember reading that article shortly after moving to Seattle. I found it deeply disturbing, which, I suppose, was the intent.
Sept. 15, 2007, 12:47 a.m. CST
I don't know, I vaguely remember the hunting article but I can't remember who it was. If I had to guess I would say no, this guy is more of a college poetry professor type. Recently he is notorious for the piece about Kubrick allegedly hating humanity. Roger Avary actually wrote an angry letter about it, after Jim Emerson wrote a really good rebuttal.
Sept. 15, 2007, 1:27 a.m. CST
to comparing horsefucking to child\disabled rape.... which was the reason I was driven over to Team Horsefucking in the first place..... if that's the best you've got than you ain't got shit. <p> The only people whose argument holds any water are the vegans. Everyone else is just making the same moral debate they brought out against the gays a hundred years ago. It's wrong because it ain't right. Dudes doing dudes butholes? Well, God couldn't have wanted it that way.... so *bam* it's wrong.
Sept. 15, 2007, 1:45 a.m. CST
OK I'm back and thought I'd answer some questions asked of me since I was last on. First, Camilla: I'm not "letting everyone know how important I am" be referring to planes. I was in the middle of a long-haul transit back to the US and wanted to let those who were asking my questions know why there were long delays for the answers. That's all, sheesh. Pazuzu: "hay" was neither freudian or typo. I use it when I chat or post because it's a horsey-joke. Cromwell: Onomatopoet is correct, you need to do some more animal studies. There is plenty of evidence of recreational and non-procreating sex in the animal kingdom. One such report was recently published, here's a synopsis from the paper: http://www.wweek.com/editorial/3326/8919/. Bangoskank: You are correct about hypocrisy. In my opinion the only people who can justfiably be horrified against bestiality are vegans like Valentine. Otherwise, if my little dick is accessory to horse "rape", a meat-eater's hamburger is accessory to murder. Gilkuliehe: Actually my first equine sex experience was with a human female partner. And she was pretty damn good looking, too. Admittedly there are a lot fewer female zoos than male, but they're out there. I know two who are veterinarians. Onomatopoet: I consider letting my horses be covered with and tormented by flies tantamount to abuse, and absolutely unnecessary. My stables are spotless and I use fly controls in my pastures. No fly problems here. Valentine: the stallion involved in Mr. Hands' case belonged to an unknowing neighbor (yes, Hands was trespassing), so no, he was not put down. Dioxholster: You need to do your research. 1) Zoonotic diseases are not common, especially those that would be exclusively transmitted by sex and not other forms of animal contact (eating, grooming, being bitten, etc.). 2) The Green Monkey/Human sex HIV origin has been discredited by the CDC, WHO, and every other reputable medical organization I've ever read. But thanks for the deathwish, asspipe. You think you can scare me away from the forum? Please. Valetine: Gorillas actually have small penises and frequently make sexual advances towards human researchers, male and female. Read Dian Fossey's work and that of her students. Quoting rbatty204: "What if someone stuck a different foreign object into the horse, would you consider that abuse? I would in a heartbeat. How about putting a horse's member into some other kind of opening?" Dude, that is done DAILY at breeding farms. Foreign objects for AI (syringes, the breeder's entire ARM), and AV and mounting dummies for stallions. Anchorite: since you mention Brokeback: check out this YouTube for some funnies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMWNTA1UKmc. Onomatopoet, and all: The question of whether animals can reciprocate the human emotion of love is much debated among zoos. As a person of science, I don't believe they do. I interpret my relationship with my mares thusly: They see and relate to me in the role of the herd stallion. I fulfill those duties: protection, provision, procreation. Obviously I can't make Centaurs, but in return for those duties I receive companionship and pleasure (in the form of saddle riding and sex). My horses like me. They are well treated. I love them with the same emotion I would apply to a human partner. They don't reciprocate it, but they give me what horses give. And I accept that. It's a good relationship. Finally: scream all you want, but none of you can provide any scientific or medical evidence that my (comparably) little dick is causing cruelty or abuse. Because it isn't.
Sept. 15, 2007, 2:07 a.m. CST
Animals' sex lives anyway. Usually, in the home setting, they don't get to HAVE sex. At all. We mutilate them, cut off their genitals or segregate them from the opposite sex for OUR convenience of not having to deal with the offspring (among other reasons). Most "normals" don't like to admit it, but animals do have sexual needs. My mares actively solicit me for sex (if you know horses you know the behaviors) when they're in heat. You may say they're conditioned, I say they know that I will scratch their itch (albeit in a small way). And mares come into heat every 3 weeks.
Sept. 15, 2007, 3:14 a.m. CST
And Vern could be VP, to broaden the demographic appeal and reach out to the anti-horsefucking folks. <p> I have to say, I am absolutely neutral on horse-fucking. Which is to say, I just don't give a damn about it one way or another. <p>There are about 80 million things in the world I care about to some degree, and people having sex with horses is not one of them. So Equinas, go on with your bad self. You have the tacit blessing of my indifference. But I would vote for you. It probably takes a mighty man indeed to fuck a horse, and our nation needs mighty leaders.
Sept. 15, 2007, 3:52 a.m. CST
I must say, as somebody who really doesn't give a flying fuck in either direction of this debate, Equinas seems to be making some damn intelligent points for his side. This coming from a neutral observer, but jeez. If you're going to attack the man for something he does that doesn't affect you and yours in any way shape or form then at least have some solid reasoning to back it up with. But hey, I didn't come in with flaming sticks and a pitchfork so I'm probably now a "latent horsefucker who's opinion means jack shit"
Sept. 15, 2007, 4:24 a.m. CST
Cant wait till the doc comes out about necrophilia and we end up arguing morals over that. Or a NAMBLA doc and we get to argue morals with child molesters. I dont have a problem with the above nor with the horsefucking (as long as I dont have to be involved or see any of it) but you cannot argue that it isnt perverse if only because the society we live in by and large says dont put your dick in animals, children or dead things. As far as the abusive tip goes I think the only abuse to these animals is what EQ denies them, he considers himself the herd stallion while Im sure the mares do not. However as far as this post is concerned I dont think it matters as after his last post Im really starting to think EQ is full of shit, and maybe someone who worked on the film trying to keep ZOO front paged for awhile.
Sept. 15, 2007, 4:38 a.m. CST
You. Are. Mental. <p> Seek help. <p> It was funny at first but you are getting WAY into this now. I can picture you whacking off o this talk back - and everyone who is enabling you to do so. Disturbing. <p> We are fueling you; giving you power. <p> I thought it was funny.... <p> Until now. <p> If you do the acts - and you come unto a PUBLIC forum to "suggest" (re: horsefuckery) and they are, no matter how much spin you place on them - a crime that if you were EVER caught, would be punished to the full extent of the law in the juristiction, and you *winkingly* admit to them.... <p> Well, you must know that when you register to talkback.... They might not have your name. But they have your server. They know where you come from... <p> You want to be VERY careful, horsefucker. Very careful.Ï
Sept. 15, 2007, 4:48 a.m. CST
"OH SWEET JESUS, SOMEONE SOMEWHERE IS PRIVATELY DOING SOMETHING HARMLESS THAT I PERSONALLY DO NOT ENJOY!" <p> Don't you people have any sense of priorities? This fucking country... people are being killed every day in wars all over the world, starving, and you're freaking out because some guy likes fucking horses? (or says he does... it's the internet after all). <p> And the idea of someone named "buffywrestling" trying to sound ominous and threatening... god, grow up. All of you people beating your chests and getting on your high horse (forgive the pun), go over to Iraq, they could use tough dudes like you there.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:05 a.m. CST
Do you think children have an exonerating capacity to consent to sex with an adult? Again, I say you have selfishly perverted and exploited for your own desires. I live and work with animals and have experience in dealing with both domestic and wildlife. As I said, Im sure interspecies encounters happen, but to make it out as it is the norm is very misleading and selfserving. Also, how do you prove exactly that an animal is having a sexual encounter for pleasure and not because instinct is telling it to breed? Sounds like pseudo-science non-sense. I can see how easily cults and people like Jim Jones can accumulate a following by how many think you are making good points about horsefucking. I don't see one argument that you have made that is not full of fallacies and lazy reasoning. Even using the most basic lessns of symbolic logic, it should be clear to anyone that your arguments are shallow and that you avoid the most damning questions through semantics. I will do a post on point-by-point examples tomorrow. Im going to bed.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:06 a.m. CST
...because I didn't read the whole talkback, but what if a man had sex with a dangerous wild animal rather than a domesticated or farm animal? Hunters in particular seem to enjoy the thrill, excitement, and danger of pursuing and killing wild animals...what if they were to fuck them instead? And not cute deer or antelopes....but coyotes, black bears, and lions, and such. <p> It would be difficult to do so without getting mauled and killed, so a man who could fuck a wild animal would clearly have accomplished something very daring and outrageous...so it seems like something hunters would enjoy, and could add to their weekend warrior status and braggadocia rights.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:14 a.m. CST
Would you rather live next to someone who fucked wild live animals fucked wild dead animals, or went hunting for food once in a while? Who would you rather have baby sit your kids? and Why to all of the above. I'd like to hear what all of the people defending this behavior say.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:23 a.m. CST
They do it for enjoyment. And I'm not defending bestiality, but I think the take-home message from all of this is that the supposedly wide canyon separating "normal" people from the horse fuckers isn't that wide...rather, we are just used to condoning some unethical behaviours more than others when it comes to the treatment of animals. <p> I'm not a veggiephile PETA member, but I think its pretty idiotic how a cat getting stuck in a tree is newsworthy and evokes 'Awwwwws' when pigs, cows, and chickens are on people's dinner plates. Its selective sentimentality....a lot of bullshit.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:24 a.m. CST
I wouldn't let any of those 3 categories you mentioned babysit them.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:36 a.m. CST
BuffyWrestling (heh). "They" know where I am?? OH MY GOD!. First off, I log on securely through SSH and my IP is not revealed. Secondly, even if someone tracked me down through postings what are they going to do? Get a warrant for something that's not even illegal in half the states? I could post my name and address right here and "they" wouldn't be able to make any credible argument to get me in trouble. What they hell would "they" say? "Stop posting about bestiality"? Please spare me the Big Brother threats. They have no effect. Cromwell: You are simply a broken record who can only repeat the same thing over and over again. You're like the halfwit bagboy down at Safeway who can only chant over and over again "eggs on top, canned goods on the bottom!" I haven't avoided anything through semantics, but rather I've systematically dismantled your "child" argument over and over again with basic logic, and other people here have as well. But it seems to be your mantra. I'm not going to answer the same question again, and you obviously have nothing new to say so don't bother posting your "point-by-point", I won't respond to it. I never, ever posted that inter-species relations is the norm. In fact, I have said otherwise. You're having to make up things and accredit them to me in order to make any points. And based on the dimwitted things you've posted, I seriously doubt your "experience" with animals goes beyond working as the neighborhood dog-walker.
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:41 a.m. CST
You see, sweetie, if he had kept it "private", no one in the TB would be bitching at him and trying to take him down. <p> Free speech? Free Country? Free Trolling? Damn right. That is why he gets to say Horse cum tastes like hay and I get to call him insane. <p> But you are naive if you think that no one is controlling the Talkbacks. And who registers. And they don't know who you are. <p. Go on. Confess to a crime. I dare you. <p> (But keep it to a horsefucking crime - we wouldn't want to get "off topic". That is a crime in itself. )
Sept. 15, 2007, 5:46 a.m. CST
Considering that most domestic mares don't EVER have a herd stallion (most people don't keep stallions, they geld them), I don't think I'm "abusing" my mares by not letting a stallion run pasture with them. Please, make some sense!
Sept. 15, 2007, 6:02 a.m. CST
from getting my zoo friends, most of them far more intelligent than I, in here to argue on my side, because that'll just make some people feel ganged-up on, and no one likes that! Oh...wait a minute... ;)
Sept. 15, 2007, 6:20 a.m. CST
Why don't you try answering ANYTHING in my post? Folks, he knows he's just a common pervert and once actual questions are presented to him which contradict his philosophies, he just finds an ad hominem escape. Equinas is not nearly as intelligent as he thinks he is. Please read my last post directed towards him and his last directed towards me. Why do you think he avoided every question? Read my last post and ALL of his posts and see if you think he addresses ANY of those questions anywhere on this thread. He is a vile and base thing and worse, he is dangerous and sick. A snivelling worm who would take his own deviant lusts so far as to carve a lifestyle out of it. The rationale he puts forth is empty and he responds to me by telling me not to bother tearing his ideas apart point by point because he won't respond. How do you(reader) interpret that?
Sept. 15, 2007, 6:25 a.m. CST
Because you are without substance, like mist.
Sept. 15, 2007, 6:28 a.m. CST
"I have refrained from getting my zoo friends, most of them far more intelligent than I, in here to argue on my side, because that'll just make some people feel ganged-up on, and no one likes that!" Translation- My arguments are falling apart, but someone with more intellience can justify my perversions, Im sure.
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:04 a.m. CST
Does that apply in a war situation?
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:30 a.m. CST
If you are naive enough to think that no one can trace you: Admit it. <p> Name the place. Name the FARM, horsefucker. I DARE you. <p> PS: Bring your friends.À
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:31 a.m. CST
Why are people here so afraid of letting their children near folks like Equinas? What do you think he's going to do? Assuming these are human offspring, they don't sound like a horsefucker's type. When I was in school, my parents were outraged to hear that my chemistry teacher was gay, saying he shouldn't be allowed near children. As if a gay man was any more of a threat to the boys than a straight teacher was to the girls. Not to compare zoophilia to homosexuality, or to paedophilia... but even if all of these are perversions in your eyes, that doesn't mean all perverts dabble in the same behaviour.<p>I don't have kids, but personally I'd feel more comfortable having a beer with a guy who fucks horses than with a guy who threatens to kill anyone in opposition to his own moral outlook. So the guy likes horses! He's not going to kidnap me and stick my cock in Black Beauty's holiest of holies. I'm sure he has other personality traits; for example, this is AICN, so maybe he also likes movies.<p>Equinas, thank you for answering my question about love. It seems a shame that the horses don't reciprocate your feelings but I've known human couples in the same situation, so fair enough. (Boy, I never thought I'd have to qualify the word "couples" with the word "human.")<p>Kurszinski, if I was a man of greater integrity I would be vegan (like some of my friends) and never exploit another animal, but I'm comfortable rationalising my meat-eating. And by the way, excellent work with the line "chevalling shit."<p>I'm still no closer to understanding the attraction of horses, but here's what I've decided about horsefucking being an act of cruelty. Like all questions of morality, it's subjective, so it comes down to what we can live with. It turns out, I can live with eating meat, which obviously involves killing animals. I've owned pets, and as Equinas points out, curtailled their sexual activity simply by keeping them away from other animals. I've stomped on bugs. And while horsefucking still seems like a weird thing to do, I don't think it's any crueller than my treatment (direct and indirect) of animals in the past. My dog never asked if he could be celibate his entire life, the poor bastard. So I don't see how providing an animal with a sex life is any worse than taking its sex life away.<p>I guess the only way to judge a horse's "consent" is to study the creatures for years, and then be able to tell from their behaviour whether or not they mind having a human cock tickling their geegee-spot. I still maintain that if a horse doesn't want you around, it will kick the living fuck out of you, but I will defer to horse experts on this one. Frankly, Equinas's mares seem to have a pretty sweet deal. No flies or anything, and I bet they don't end up breaking their legs during a steeplechase and then getting shot in the head. In a perfect world I suppose they'd be free to fuck stallions or horsedick-sized dildos or whatever they wanted, but in the same perfect world I wouldn't be eating steak tonight, and I like steak. So I'm happy to eat meat and not lynch dudes for sticking their own meat in horse holes.
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:36 a.m. CST
answering certain posts such as yours. He's throwing a convincing-sounding argument out there, but not a convincing one. Some are buying it, but it's the same as when dangerously naive people are actually convinced by Nambla-ers and pedophiles that they 'love' children for less-than-diabolical reasons. Anyone can frame a good argument for anything, and if one is a seasoned horse fucker, that person surely will muster his greatest argument to try to legitimize his actions.<p> He himself cited Dian Fossey, but conveniently neglected to mention that she DID NOT have sex with gorillas, despite their overtures. I'm sure she loved the gorillas, but was not SELFISH to use them for her sexual gratification.<p> And if we were to follow Daddylonghead's reasoning, we may as well not argue about anything. Just live and let live, and forget that civilization has developed precisely from humanity's collective debates about human behavior.
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:38 a.m. CST
the question about letting children near Eq. On the one hand, he supports Eq's position, but then says he would take a shovel to his head if he were to come near his daughter. With supporters like that ...
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:49 a.m. CST
www.horsesexblog.com ... enjoy
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:11 a.m. CST
OnomatoPoet would rather have a beer with a dude who has sex WITH ANIMALS than with someone who would KILL for a moral outlook. <p> How far are you reaching!! There is no tie between them! No tie!! Stop tying!!
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:19 a.m. CST
They are tied up, ridden like transportation, and forced to do what they are told. Their owners get sentimental about these animal slaves, and feed them sugar cubes and rub their muzzles, and name them cute names like Ginger or Betsy, but horses are always held to be inferior to man by horse owners. So having sex with horses is as ethical/unethical as having sex with slaves. They are under duress and do as their told, so it can never be called consensual, but as long as they are held to be inferior creatures in the eyes of man...man can rationalize any sort of treatment towards them...like racing them for the purpose of gambling. The real ethical question is the one regarding those who treat animals like property and inferior beings to be used however man chooses.
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:32 a.m. CST
My flatmates would probably thank you for it, but there's no way I'm typing "horsesexblog" into Explorer's address bar! Nice try, though.<p>I'm not supporting horsefuckery, but I am supporting Equinas and his right to do whatever he wants with his own horses, assuming he genuinely believes the horses don't mind (and I reckon he knows a lot more about horses than I do). I also support his right to explain himself without being threatened by dudes wielding hypothetical shovels.<p>If your sex life goes beyond simple procreation, I guarantee that someone, somewhere, will be morally opposed to what you're into. I think my tastes are normal, but some folks would call me a pervert for enjoying oral sex. So in their view, I'd be under the same pervert umbrella as these sick fucks who rape children. I mean, holy shit, I have standards. But the morally outraged can't see past their own disgust. They can't recognise the difference between being attracted to a sexual partner and being attracted to a sexual act. They only "moral" and "immoral."<p>If you decide fucking horses is immoral, that's fine, but please decide it; don't just trust your kneejerk reaction or use your own sense of normalcy as a benchmark. That's how "witches" used to get burned.<p>By the way, BSB, this isn't all directed at you. Just the first paragraph, really.
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:45 a.m. CST
That was inspired...and somewhat touching. I never expected for you to say...well. Good job. <p> I can still call Equinas "horsefucker" though, can't I? For mocking purposes? Because I hear through the grapevine: He actually FUCKS horses! <p> (He says it's for "research" but I agree with Vern. It's to make a centuars. A HERD of them. To take over the world. Peirs Anthony backed him up.)
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:49 a.m. CST
Yes, I would rather have a beer with a guy who has sex with animals than a guy who would kill for a moral outlook. Because if my own moral outlook is different from either of these folks', and I challenge them, only one of them is likely to kill me. This talkback apparently includes both kinds of people, which is why I compared them.<p>You might not agree with what a horsefucker does in his own stable, but that's no reason to fear him (or her). These people aren't psychopaths. I'm pretty sure that you will never be hurt by a horsefucker, and neither will your children.
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:59 a.m. CST
What a sick thought, but as an Irishman I actually am more offended by someone calling themselves 'Cromwell' than by what Equinas is describing.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9 a.m. CST
He may have some remnant of horsejizz on his lips.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:10 a.m. CST
I kind of like this debate, and the fact that a movie like this will come to the surface and make people outraged, because it forces them to address their own hypocrisies about the treatment of animals.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:54 a.m. CST
of statutory rape. I think it's rather apt, and multiple people have brought it up. I don't buy the whole, "I know when my mares want some" argument since it's entirely subjective. Furthermore, to compare bestiality with eating meat is false analogy. As many people have stated, we eat for sustenance and not solely for pleasure. Furthermore, a veterinarian sticking a horse with a needle for its own benefit has a positive outcome for the horse. Gelding a horse also has a positive outcome for all the horses around it. My family used to own some horses and once we bought one that was improperly gelded (how this happened I have no idea). Anyway, it was a tiny little bastard but started beating up on all the other horses. He was impossible to control. So, there are benefits to the horse or to humans that are more than just sexual desire in this "analogous" situations.
Sept. 15, 2007, 10:01 a.m. CST
I think you're right Bobo. People need to think about how their food gets to their table. My girlfriend is a vegetarian, and while she's never attempted to turn me, I have given it some thought. At this point ninety percent of what I buy is free range. I know it's not nearly as kind as not eating meat but it's a step in the right direction. It's damn near impossible to be hypocrisy free in this day and age. I've heard plenty of people talk about how much they hate outsourcing (as do I) but then they buy stuff that's made in China without even thinking about it. I've made an effort to buy from places such as American Apparel and No Sweat, but it's difficult since they're expensive and they don't really sell reasonable pants. The world is situated so that everyone is a hypocrite in one sense. Although, I think those who make fun of vegetarian/vegans and brag about eating meat and then claim that horsefucking is cruel to animals are going overboard with hypocrisy.
Sept. 15, 2007, 10:34 a.m. CST
because their ads are sexist and borderline kiddie porn. Have you seen some of their posters and billboards? I want to buy American, but I don't want to contribute to a company whose founder shows all indications of being a pedophile.
Sept. 15, 2007, 11:13 a.m. CST
You say that you will sit down have have a drink with another, over the other, because one is less likely to kill you? Then you go on to state that your conculsion is not about fear? <p> Irony. <p> I do not mock what I do not understand. I mock horsefuckers. I hear they taste like hay. ‡
Sept. 15, 2007, 11:51 a.m. CST
Cromwell's arguments (or Buffy's regurgitation of them) because I've already answered them multiple times in the thread. So have others. Say something new and I'll reply. Otherwise just read back in the thread and don't waste my time.
Sept. 15, 2007, 11:57 a.m. CST
Well, I was trying to be ironic when I said that one was "less likely to kill me" than the other. I wouldn't assume that either person would kill me. (As it happens, I have had a few beers with a murderer, and survived unscathed.) I was trying to point out that a moral outlook that justifies murder (if someone disagrees with you) is more worrying to me than a moral outlook that justifies fucking horses.<p>Bobo_Vision, you're right, this debate has made me aware of my hypocrisy towards the treatment of animals. I'd never really considered the extent to which humans control the sex lives of pets and livestock, when I'm not sure we really understand what sexual needs they may have. I feel bad for not letting my dog hump that collie whose unmentionables he was always sniffing. I feel bad for my friend's neutered cat. And I don't suppose this would have occurred to me were it not for a movie about horsefucking.
Sept. 15, 2007, 12:16 p.m. CST
I agree that American Apparel's advertising and clothing portray unhealthy images of women. Their models are all incredibly thin and freakishly young looking (although I assume they're eighteen or older). Their clothing for women are also smaller than their sizes indicate (or so I've been told). But it just goes to show you that everyone is a hypocrite to some extent. In today's world the market makes it impossible for you to fully live up to your ideals. I think recognizing it and making an effort to curtail any hypocrisy is all one can ask. Then there are hypocrisies that are so blatant that they deserve condemnation. Larry Craig comes to mind.
Sept. 15, 2007, 12:47 p.m. CST
OP: <p> I'm glad that you pointed out the irony...after I pointed out the irony. See what I did there? <p> E: <p> Thank you for pointing out my regurgitating. At least it didn't taste like hay.
Sept. 15, 2007, 1:42 p.m. CST
Some people pay extra for that.
Sept. 15, 2007, 1:56 p.m. CST
but cherry-picked others for which he apparently had easy replies handy.
Sept. 15, 2007, 2:23 p.m. CST
Give me an argument I haven't already answered at least twice in this thread, and I'll answer it. "Easy replies handy". That's your way of putting a negative spin on the fact that I can logically destroy your arguments.
Sept. 15, 2007, 3:26 p.m. CST
Not difficult to do, for some odd reason.
Sept. 15, 2007, 3:28 p.m. CST
...has peppered every talkback on the board with horsefucking comments has me wondering if perhaps he isn't protesting a bit too much.
Sept. 15, 2007, 3:38 p.m. CST
It's my new cause. Someone's got to speak for the horseys.
Sept. 15, 2007, 3:58 p.m. CST
you are the lowest being on the planet. i blame ur parents, u know they messed u up. and i feel sorry for u. and i think that u r the main victim. not the horse. because honestly, i feel safer knowing that Equinas is fucking a horse than some young child. so u degenerate horsefucker, u didn't say anyting about what started this. who cursed u. and did u fuck a woman recently, i mean a human woman u know the one with boobs and a cunt. i'm curious about knowing how pathetic ur lifestyle is and if u did fuck a woman then does she know u r a horsefucker coz u know its irresponsible to stick her with the same dick u stick ur horse with, u know what i mean. or u just strictly horses now fucker. BTW i think the name Equinas would become a new dis amongst AICN. anyone who speaks what of their asses would be refered to as 'Equinas' or u r being an Equinas' or 'i bet u like horsefucking as Equinas'. Or just maybe the traditional: 'at least u r not Equinas'. u know what i mean.
Sept. 15, 2007, 6:11 p.m. CST
"Name the place. Name the FARM, horsefucker. I DARE you." A threat? It seems to me pretty unwise to threaten someone you know nothing about. I could be a fat, pimply-assed dweeb living in my parents' basement, or I could be a force-recon Marine Corps officer. You don't know. Sure, I'm careful with my personal info, not because I'm afraid of going to jail for my sex life (you don't even know if it's illegal in my state), but because I'm afraid of going to jail for doing grievous bodily harm to some yahoo who decided to show up and hurt my horses or threaten me. It's a complication I don't need. And by the way, I registered for this forum from a coffee shop in the Middle of Nowhere, Arabia, so "they" can do all the looking they want. Which they won't, because it's not worth their time. Dick-holster: I'm afraid I don't have time to draw my arguments in comic-book form with 3 letter words just so you could follow the points I would make if I tried to respond to your illiterate (look it up) ravings.
Sept. 15, 2007, 7:10 p.m. CST
I have been told by a horsefucker to make some sense, thats pure gold. And he avoided everything else I had to say which seals it for me. EQ is a plant for the movie simple as that. Why would someone pose as a horsefucker you say? Because hes trying to get more press for a film hes involved in. I have mailed this tb to countless people as Im sure others have and we are basically promoting this film on the cheap. Great idea EQ and I really have loved the more character driven stuff in your posts. This in particular which is basically an add for the films dvd release: "Well, Vern - you could say I've done a lot of "research", but it wasn't for report-writing purposes. ;)(No it was for shooting this doc) I haven't seen the movie yet;(so your this into horsefucking and you travel alot yet you havent seen this movie, yeah ok)I was hoping it would be released on DVD and now that it is, I'll be ordering ASAP." What no amazon link??? C'mon EQ help us out here...Your full of more shit then Mr. Hands horses dick, but I still plan to see your film so good job.
Sept. 15, 2007, 8:49 p.m. CST
a guy who was shoving a horse'e dick up his ass. I guess it punctured his intestine. He died. I heard it was a group that did this. They enjoy having sex with many animals. Supposedly they tried to be sneaky and just drop off the guy at the local hospital but the police investigated and found a animal sex ring. Poor horse. Killed a man by doing something that is so rare among their species.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:04 p.m. CST
i don't know if equinas has been with a woman recently, but it's pretty apparent you never have.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:39 p.m. CST
by half vader
euphemism! <p> Back to the horseys though. Man, I can't believe what's happened in the TB since I was here last! As for Equinas and the disingenuous apples/apples (really apples/oranges) shenanigans, "intelligence" and "morality" is a funny thing. You guys who expound on his 'refined' discourse should be reminded that Hitler was let's face it, a genius (not necessarily a positive statement before you guys slam me), and convinced more than a handful to follow and agree with his version of morality. No, I'm not saying Aquinas is Hitler. I'm saying don't be swayed by some wordplay, and think it through for yourself before agreeing or conversely resorting to redneck rants. So called 'intelligence' is no antidote for prejudice or proclivities - those people just tend to be more articulate and persuasive in their justification. <p> And considering how Equinas is so fond of playing with the idea of perception it wouldn't surprise me either if he's just crapping on and doing this for fun. Which is wanking of a different kind! I know others have said similar things already, but that's my 2c anyway.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:45 p.m. CST
I don't know about dioxholster's experience with women but it's apparent you have experience with horses.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:49 p.m. CST
that there are so many stupid fucking ignorant pricks online ALL the time? <br><br> The odds of that happening on an hourly basis is just mindblowing to me. I don't give a good goddamn what gets your dick hard, but some of the shit you people post...its just beyond ridiculous. do you really have that little to do with your time that you spend all day on here debating the morality or lack thereof of sex with horses? <br><br>Get some jobs, get laid, get high, do some fucking thing. But get off the damn computer for a bit. Jesus.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:50 p.m. CST
just the asses on this site.
Sept. 15, 2007, 9:57 p.m. CST
Sorry, but it's true. :^(
Sept. 16, 2007, 12:28 a.m. CST
by Pound Sand
Let Woody have the last word on this, huh?
Sept. 16, 2007, 12:37 a.m. CST
by The Dum Guy
And now Equinas.<br><Br>Ya'll know it to be true.
Sept. 16, 2007, 1:19 a.m. CST
by half vader
I took care to point out that I specifically WASN'T literally/figuratively saying he was Hitler, for crying out loud. I was making a point about the danger of being too easily swayed, and also kneejerk reactions. Jeez. Read the thing please. Then again, my posts are either ignored or they end a thread quicksmart, so you're probably right Carmilla.
Sept. 16, 2007, 1:27 a.m. CST
by half vader
And also that while Hitler was an undoubtedly intelligent guy and convinced many with his rhetoric, he was still wrong. Geez, I thought it was an appropriate and pretty straightforward analogy. Oh well, I guess it proves the point about words and visceral reactions.
Sept. 16, 2007, 1:30 a.m. CST
by half vader
Old subject line tacked itself on to the P.S. <p> For Christ's sake I know it's a free site and all but can we please get a fucking edit function? Vern, use your old criminal skills to fix this for us! I know you walk the straight path now but use some persausion, can ya?
Sept. 16, 2007, 2:47 a.m. CST
there any talkbackers screaming TORTURE PORN for this? I don't believe Hostel or Saw had anyone get fucked to death by a horse as entertainment.
Sept. 16, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST
where in arabia are u horsefucker, u like Arabian horses then? I bet u jack off when watching black beauty. heck i think u like to fantasize about unicorns. what u r doing is the most degenerate thing a human can fathom. u should be on dr. phil seriously. ask for help. and dont try to disparage what i say. for crying out loud u r a horsefucker it doesn't get lower than this. are u religious? and yes i cant belive iam pulling the religious card but there is no other way to make u understand u lowlife being. and ya u know ur horse i bet she hates u. every time u do what u do the horse is probably cursing ur existence. in Abrahamic religions animals are depicted as sacred or messengers from God placed on earth. African tribes view animals as representations of Gods. So equinas if there is a hell, u r one of the first ones there. and if karma got it right those horses will stomp u to death. serves u right shitface.
Sept. 16, 2007, 11:45 a.m. CST
My meaning about the Hitler comment is this: generally, when ANYONE, pro or con, on ANY argument, invokes the name 'Hitler' my eyes glaze over. It generally stifles all other aspects of the debate and ends intelligent discourse...in my experience. Anyhow, this talkback was the most fun since Demon Dave imo. Farewell horsefuckers, don't let the barndoor hit your ass on the way out. ;^)
Sept. 16, 2007, 2:10 p.m. CST
it's too entertaining.
Sept. 16, 2007, 8:59 p.m. CST
by Super Nintendo Chalmers
"That's your way of putting a negative spin on the fact that I can logically destroy your arguments." And a horse could logically destroy your asshole. Imagine how horse genitalia smells. Blech. There is nothing logical in fucking a stinky horse pussy, even if your soul tells you there is.
Sept. 16, 2007, 9:44 p.m. CST
by The Dum Guy
I wasn't exactly going with or against what you wrote, I was merely saying that, like the above named, one can argue the validation of things that are abhorent to others in a manner that is logical and persuasive, i.e. horse fucking.<br><br>I'm not going on record as to say that I am now "Pro-Horsefuckery", but I can say that this Equinas fellow is intellectually able to justify his desires. Although, one can argue almost any point and be right, depending on the moral basis of the argument, like abortion or capital punishment (issues which are way too complex to elaborate on)... I'm just saying that this guy, however nasty his love of doing the nasty is, can argue his way around most arguments, depending on the grounds for "right-ness" [see my way-above post].<br><br>
Sept. 17, 2007, 10 p.m. CST
BringingLiberalsBack insults me by accusing me of that which his own political backing would do, as evidenced here in TB. Meanwhile, the ironny is ultimately lost upon s/h/it.<P>Folks, the answer lies in the evidence. Don't believe me. Please do google up which political affiliation has systematically catered to the bestials and learn. And amaze which bestial leaning acolytes later became presidential candidates. And then, amaze at who was the lieutenant governor for such a bestial leaning "animal" (by such a definition and no pun intented).
Sept. 17, 2007, 10:02 p.m. CST
i the last post. Sorry.
Sept. 18, 2007, 2:57 a.m. CST
by half vader
Thanks mate. I get what you're saying. I guess I was doing the same thing, using the 'H' word. ;)
Sept. 24, 2007, 1:46 a.m. CST
But ONLY with equines that have expired by natural causes. I would never want to hurt a horse. I'm not a weirdo or anything.
Sept. 29, 2010, 2:31 p.m. CST
This article was mentioned in Verns book BTW
Oct. 7, 2010, 2:58 p.m. CST
by Stuntcock Mike
I shall 'bate during this weekends viewing of Secretariat! <p> NEEEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!