• theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Pet animals and other animals are no different in and of themselves, objectively. A pet dog is no different than a stray dog. A pet cow is no different than a domesticated cow.

    Agreed. This is completely irrelevant though. If someone was fucking cows, that would also be wrong. Duh?

    The difference in these scenarios is one scenario was artificial insemination of an animal and the other scenario was a person having sex with an animal. These are not the same actions.

    I guess the vast majority of people on the planet are “psychopaths” because the can tell the obvious difference between these 2 things? Honestly, if you cannot tell the difference between this, then you seem more like a psychopath.

    • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      If someone was fucking cows

      That’s the exact issue we’re talking about in this thread actually.

      Intercourse does not have to involve a penis, vagina, and rectum. It can involve many more things, human related and other.

      Do you think that it isn’t rape if you do it to someone with, say, a hand/fist/arm? How about a bottle?

        • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Good to know we’re at the end of the line here.

          You’re not willing to define rape, which is convenient for your argument because you get to worm your way out of being pinned down with good arguments. You have an inconsistent world view that undermines your qualifications to speak on this topic.

          At least we didn’t waste ALL of everyone’s time getting you to reveal this.

          • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Keep pretending that you don’t know the difference between artificial insemination of livestock and rape of a person. You do know the difference, but admitting it would prove your worldview false.

            Good to know we’re at the end of the line here.

            Because you don’t have a response.

            • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Rape doesn’t have to involve a person. Rape must involve a sentient being that can communicate its wants and desires. Humans and cows are both of those things.

              You’re losing the argument btw because you’re falling into reactionary contrarianism without providing positive meaning yourself. Keep digging your own hole.

              • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Rape doesn’t have to involve a person. Rape must involve a sentient being that can communicate its wants and desires. Humans and cows are both of those things.

                Yeah, agreed. Go ahead and quote me where I stated that an animal cannot be raped. Artificial insemination of an animal is not rape though.

                You’re losing the argument

                You’re not floundering at all.

                • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  We’re trying to get to the bottom of why you think forcible impregnation of someone is rape while of a cow isn’t.

                  You said that dogs can be raped, and specifically pet dogs.

                  I pointed out that there are no differences between pet dogs and stray dogs, and likewise between pet cows and stray cows.

                  I called you out for holding a subjectivist world view because the outcome of raping a pet dog and a stray dog, or pet cows and stray cow is the same. Something happens to them that they would’ve have sought out for in the first place if it wasn’t forced on them. That is the objective reality.

                  Subjective views of reality where empathy doesn’t apply by virtue of no personal connection sends society back into barbarism. Your world view is compatible with allowing black women to be raped in a world with chattel slavery because slaves were once though to be property of a white male.

                  Plain and simple: your world view is wrong and morally indefensible. If you like it that way, so be it. But you’re sick and twisted if so.

                  • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    your world view is compatible with allowing black women to be raped in a world with chattel slavery because slaves were once though to be property of a white male.

                    Imagine thinking you have the moral high ground while trivializing and using the suffering of actual rape victims and slavery by falsely equating it to something as harmless as artificial insemination of livestock. That’s genuinely disgusting. No self awareness? Just none at all? And I’m allegedly the one with an incorrect and morally indefensible world view…

                    Do you really think this makes you look good? Get help.