• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Animal Abusers

  • Thread starter Deleted member 82554
  • Start date

stablercake

a bubblegum pink nose
I think it's kind of amazing that there was so much time spent on the cruelty of American gelding in this thread when someone said they at least give local anesthetic whereas from what little research I've done, steering a bull does not really care about the animals discomfort and only cares about getting the damn nuts off unless you're using a rubber band method which despite the discomfort, the guide I read states the discomfort and maggot risk (barf) is lower with that method.

I'm not playing ball-removal Olympics im just saying if we want to look at a practice where the animals discomfort is pretty low on the list of concerns, steering a bull seems like a great example.

Not that I'm condemning either practice, I feel like having an unpredictable and dangerous domestic animal would be at best inconvenient (pardon my word usage) and at worst actively harmful to the in tact animal and the animals around it.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
Well of course animal loving is considered taboo and many would rather chose to not know that someone practices it as they would love to be unaware of someone's certain fetishes, because they can be very disturbing. But the whole difference is you don't go to jail just for having a weird sexual attraction even if it's taboo. And also when a person gets caught his/her pet (or should I say partner?) is taken away, gets his balls cut off and is thrown to a cold cage supposedly for his own good.

Diseases should not be a bigger issue than it is between humans. Maybe even smaller, because some STDs does not effect both species. In any case safe "love" is a way to go.

Diseases jumping between different species are actually much worse. Measles, sars, mers, ebola, influenza. They all originated in animals.
 
It's almost worse than someone abusing a human. Because peoples pets don't do anything wrong, and they have no voice to speak out. All any pet I've ever had has wanted was some attention, and I was always happy to provide.
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
Diseases jumping between different species are actually much worse. Measles, sars, mers, ebola, influenza. They all originated in animals.

Get tested. Many diseases can be spread through air, touch or by eating infected meat. Also measles is human only disease.
 

Volkodav

Dad****er
Let me tell you, even though it astonishes you that people don't automatically agree with you just because they read what you type online, yeah I read your content, often several times so that I could refer to different parts of your argument.

But I'm so sorry for you that you feel that you've failed in your obligation to educate me; it must be frustrating for superior intellects such as yourself to be surrounded by dullards like me. :V
I can tell you haven't because you continuously refer to how it only benefits people, despite me explaining MULTIPLE times how it benefits the animal.
 

Yago

Ambered Amaranth
Little late to the party.

Zoophilia is in no way, shape, or form, intrinsically immoral. I'm always quite pleased to see this debate rise up. And more than happy to win it.
 

stablercake

a bubblegum pink nose
oh man

ess6W8Q.gif
 

amethystos

boo hiss
Don't worry, someone already clarified the difference between bestiality and zoophilia, so no drama is about to interrupt because of that statement.

On the topic of zoophilia, if we're going by the definition which is an attraction to animals then it is harmless in itself. As long as it remains a fantasy then I don't see an issue.

Bestiality though, makes you a sick fuck.

Well, unless someone gets confused...
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
I can tell you haven't because you continuously refer to how it only benefits people, despite me explaining MULTIPLE times how it benefits the animal.

*sigh* gelding a horse is done to make it more easy for the animal to be managed in human captivity.

The purpose is domestication, not because losing its gonads is in the animal's best interests; living with humans is not in your best interest if they sterilise you.

Humans do not go out into the wild and domesticate elephants, then chop off their tusks to make them less likely to hurt each other because it's 'in the elephant's interest'. De-tusking elephants was a pragmatic solution to the problem of persistent gorings by rogue elephants, that was associated with initial attempts at domestication.

This is a perspective compatible with your comments, and is not 'evidence I haven't read them,'.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?

Volkodav

Dad****er
*sigh* gelding a horse is done to make it more easy for the animal to be managed in human captivity.

The purpose is domestication, not because losing its gonads is in the animal's best interests; living with humans is not in your best interest if they sterilise you.

Humans do not go out into the wild and domesticate elephants, then chop off their tusks to make them less likely to hurt each other because it's 'in the elephant's interest'. De-tusking elephants was a pragmatic solution to the problem of persistent gorings by rogue elephants, that was associated with initial attempts at domestication.

This is a perspective compatible with your comments, and is not 'evidence I haven't read them,'.

Gelding a horse is done because they're dangerous, they will kill each other and severely injure one another to get to a mare in heat. Stallions left to free roam amongst a herd or left within vicinity (jumping fences) can inbreed with their mothers and sisters.

I've never heard in my life, humans going and detusking elephants to make them as pets.



Btw brucellosis is a disease sexually transmitted between animals, that can be passed to humans. Many breeders will demand brucellosis tests before a breeding even takes place.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
Gelding a horse is done because they're dangerous, they will kill each other and severely injure one another to get to a mare in heat. Stallions left to free roam amongst a herd or left within vicinity (jumping fences) can inbreed with their mothers and sisters.

I've never heard in my life, humans going and detusking elephants to make them as pets.



Btw brucellosis is a disease sexually transmitted between animals, that can be passed to humans. Many breeders will demand brucellosis tests before a breeding even takes place.

Humans detusking elephants occurred in their domestication to produce war-animals. Typically a pregnant female was targeted, and its tendons severed with axes so that it was essentially an immobile lump. The offspring it bore were then raised into war-animals.

Anyway, I think whatever disagreement you have with me is semantic; I think that preventing your livestock from being dangerous, killing eachother or breeding to produce inferior offspring is something done because it benefits the livestock owner. If it did not benefit the livestock owner they wouldn't bother doing it. Any argument that it benefits the animal is rather arbitrary, because it's apparent that being sterilised livestock isn't in an animal's interest anyway.
 

Volkodav

Dad****er
Humans detusking elephants occurred in their domestication to produce war-animals.
This is completely unrelated to what we're talking about. We're discussing doing things that some may consider harmful or wrong (vet visits) for the benefit of the animal.

If it did not benefit the livestock owner they wouldn't bother doing it. Any argument that it benefits the animal is rather arbitrary, because it's apparent that being sterilised livestock isn't in an animal's interest anyway.
I'm sure you could say this about many things I've brought up, but you seem disinterested in arguing for anything but what you have sunken into your brain.

because it's apparent that being sterilised livestock isn't in an animal's interest anyway.
Neither is going to the vets or groomers for a nail trim, but we do it because we assume a dog isn't going to want to live with ingrown toenails.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
This is completely unrelated to what we're talking about. We're discussing doing things that some may consider harmful or wrong (vet visits) for the benefit of the animal.


I'm sure you could say this about many things I've brought up, but you seem disinterested in arguing for anything but what you have sunken into your brain.


Neither is going to the vets or groomers for a nail trim, but we do it because we assume a dog isn't going to want to live with ingrown toenails.

>>comparing having your nail trimmed to having your balls chopped off.

Fallow and I like to debate; is there an issue?

*You enjoy insisting that nobody reads your comments.
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
Fallow and I like to debate; is there an issue?

It doesn't look like a debate to me anymore, more like a pointless argument.

And no, nails trimming is as important as balls cutting when the animal needs to survive under unnatural conditions.
 

Volkodav

Dad****er
>>comparing having your nail trimmed to having your balls chopped off.
You're not understanding my comparisons.
I'm comparing ignoring the animal's interests for the benefit of the animal. How have you not understood this yet?
Many dogs are completely traumatized by nail-trimming to the point that they have to be restrained and muzzled. They scream and thrash around, bite the veterinarian, and are a mess. Some dogs who need matts cut out of their hair but are too terrified and aggressive to get that done will be put under just for that procedure.

Neutering? Dog gets put under and wakes up without his balls. I'd say the nail trimming is far more traumatizing for a dog.


Groomers get bit a lot by dogs who hate getting trimmed. You get these smaller dogs with mats in their hair that will maul you for cutting them out, the only option is to put them under just to do that.

This cat sure as shit doesn't want to be handled by the vet, but too damn bad! Time to be man-handled into a towel for it's own good.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
There's a big physical difference between trimming nails and removing gonads obviously.

Clearly having gonads removed is not in the animal's interests; those are the seat of its biological imperative. Humans remove animals gonads in order to make them more docile and manageable and to avoid unwanted offspring; it's something we do for our own convenience.

If someone really cared about animals, they wouldn't subject them to being pets.
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
There's a big physical difference between trimming nails and removing gonads obviously.

Clearly having gonads removed is not in the animal's interests; those are the seat of its biological imperative. Humans remove animals gonads in order to make them more docile and manageable and to avoid unwanted offspring; it's something we do for our own convenience.

If someone really cared about animals, they wouldn't subject them to being pets.

Yes, exactly. End of the story
 

DianiTheOtter

We're Tiny, We're Toony, We're all a little loony.
Clearly having gonads removed is not in the animal's interests; those are the seat of its biological imperative. Humans remove animals gonads in order to make them more docile and manageable and to avoid unwanted offspring; it's something we do for our own convenience.

I disagree. While it maybe true for the majority of reasons people neuture their pets, testicular cancer in males is a problem. It's also in the animals best interest to be neutured if someone can't afford or allowed to have offspring.
 

Volkodav

Dad****er
There's a big physical difference between trimming nails and removing gonads obviously.

Clearly having gonads removed is not in the animal's interests; those are the seat of its biological imperative. Humans remove animals gonads in order to make them more docile and manageable and to avoid unwanted offspring; it's something we do for our own convenience.

If someone really cared about animals, they wouldn't subject them to being pets.
You're arguing with someone who doesn't support speutering unless absolutely necessary (pyometra, for example)
 

stablercake

a bubblegum pink nose
You're arguing with someone who doesn't support speutering unless absolutely necessary (pyometra, for example)
I can see where you wouldn't support it, but I think the overall spay and neuter for pets is a net good because people who are super dumb or bad at pet care will still have pets and if no one told them to spay or neuter I imagine we'd have a lot more neglected animals around.

I guess that counts as inconvenience sort of but the animals aren't super having fun by being a neglected baby critter that can't fend for itself.

THEN AGAIN if a person is super dumb and bad at pet care he will think that breeding animals is a get rich quick scheme and that's how puppy mills are made so...

what was my point again?
 

Volkodav

Dad****er
I can see where you wouldn't support it, but I think the overall spay and neuter for pets is a net good because people who are super dumb or bad at pet care will still have pets and if no one told them to spay or neuter I imagine we'd have a lot more neglected animals around.

I guess that counts as inconvenience sort of but the animals aren't super having fun by being a neglected baby critter that can't fend for itself.

THEN AGAIN if a person is super dumb and bad at pet care he will think that breeding animals is a get rich quick scheme and that's how puppy mills are made so...

what was my point again?
I agree with speutering for idiot pet owners, but this puppy speutering shit needs to stop.
 
Top