Scented Nectar wrote:

> chico chupacabra wrote:
>
>>>>Why would it be immoral?
>>>
>>>I guess it isn't.
>>
>>What would be moral about letting it have its way with you or any part of your body?
>
>
> If the human consents to letting the animal wank on them, that's gross,
> and sends out warning bells,

Consenting to that sets off more than bells.

> but it's a lot better than if the human
> wanks to the animal.

I have a very strong feeling Karen was "helping" her little friend a lot
more than she's let on so far. Her previous posts, going back a couple
years now, about the subject conveyed a little too much familiarity with
the issue of "interspecies" relations. Now we know...

>>>Just grosses me out.
>>
>>That pervert Karen got off on it.
>
> I don't think that can be said for sure. She didn't specify feeling
> sexual on her part.

She wrote:
I thought it was rather sweet, in fact. He certainly was a
happier bird with me than with the other 'tiels.

A *normal* human would've been uncomfortable with that kind of thing,
especially letting it go to completion (much less aiding and abetting,
as Karen seems wont to do).

>>>>I lived with a cockatiel who regularly masturbated on my hand.
>>>>Poor little guy, he was never going to have another bird as a mate,
>>>>he was quite old when I adopted him, and he was definitely oriented
>>>>toward humans. Why should I make his last few years less pleasant
>>>>for him by denying him this release, when it did him no harm, and it
>>>>did me no harm?
>>>
>>>I used to have a cockatiel who kept trying to do that to me.
>>
>>That was the last decent date you had, too, Skanky.
>
> How's that

How long has it been since you gave some guy booty so you could score
some weed?