Dutch wrote:
> "Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
....
> > He might escalate and do something like rape the animal, thinking it
> > likes it too (dogs can't say yes or no).
>
> Rape is a violent act, there is no supportable reason to believe that he
> would harm his dog.

I hope not.

> > A mindset that sexualizes
> > animals is on very shaky grounds.
>
> You're presuming something that doesn't necessarily follow, I'm surprised a
> *** person would do this. There is a stereotype among straight people that
> all gays have tendencies towards pedophilia. This is also an unsupported
> conclusion. I agree that one must be weird to do what he did, but it doesn't
> make it necessarily immoral except in a social context. Just because
> something seems icky does not make it immoral.

You're presuming I'm ***. I presume that most people, *** or straight,
would not think too highly of what that friend of your's is doing.

> > I would recommend to anyone has that
> > mindset, that they try to refocus their libidoes on something safe,
> > like those Furries or Plushies people or whatever they're called.
> > They're weird, but nonharmful. They dress up as animals and have sex
> > with each other. Some have sex with stuffed animals, I think. One of
> > the weirdest fetishes I've heard of, but morally they are completely ok
> > as they harm no one.
>
> As far as I know his dog was never harmed at all. Licking his master's dick
> meant he got whatever yummy treat was smeared on it, I doubt if it had any
> more significance than that to the animal.

It's still wrong, just like it would be wrong if he were to smear his
dick with candy and invite children to lick it off. I see it as
comparable.