Playin' Possum

Could this lead to a more interactive photo for the masthead here?

// a more interactive photo for the masthead //

How MUCH more?
Animal Lovers: Zoophiles Make Scientists Rethink Human Sexuality
Jesse Bering Mar 24, 2010

Reminds me of the pickled hard boiled eggs my buds and I used to eat with a few cold ones.

There where a lot worse things they could have found this guy doing to the dead opossum.
If he would have tried mouth to mouth with an alligator still moving. Now thats news lol.

Reminds me of the pickled hard boiled eggs my buds and I used to eat with a few cold ones.
Posted by: Gunney99 at March 27, 2010 1:51 AM

Don't forget the pickled sausage.
Now I'm just getting homesick.

dizzy - that was an utterly disgusting link - I could not finish the article. I don't care what anybody says - bestiality is a perversion. If this guy thinks its just another sexual preference and wants others to look at it that way, he's bonkers. There is no way a horse and a man can have a mutually agreed upon sexual relationship - the guy raped a horse and is deluding himself into thinking the mare wanted it. Next bestiality will be protected from discrimination under the charter of rights and freedoms. Eww.

I don't know, No-One, can horses be "raped"?

From dizzy's 1:45 link:

"Some scholars, such as University of Southern Maine criminologist Piers Bierne, contend that zoophiles incorrectly assume that animals are capable of consenting to having sex with them, and therefore human sexual relations with animals of any kind should be considered 'interspecies sexual assault.'”

Boy, that's an interesting contention, there's so many variables to consider - the size of the animal, for one thing. Would an elephant, for example, or a full-grown Guernsey, actually feel "assaulted" by some wayward farmboy, or merely frustrated? To further complicate the whole "consent" issue, suppose a gentle and affectionate farmboy regularly brought the object of his affection special treats - say, a hot bran mash with apples and raisins, with a few clover-heads thrown in, maybe a dash of cinnamon, perhaps some brown sugar and some seasonal root-vegetables, like maybe some honey-glazed roasted carrots with just a faint dusting of nutmeg, followed by peppermints for desert and a good rubdown with a currycomb - wouldn't that at least arguably make the interaction a form of interspecies quid pro quo?

I just don't know what the law should be on this issue. When I was fourteen or so - and I *swear* this is true, and that this is not an apocryphal story - one of the many rotating itinerant barn-hands at a stable I rode at got fired after he was caught by the stable owner in the wee hours standing on a wooden crate, with his pants down, behind the meanest, pinned-back ears, wild-eyed school-horse mare you ever saw in your life. I remember how everyone at the barn vacillated between laughing and feeling, erm, icky about the situation that led to his firing, but I don't recall anyone being even slightly upset for the mare in question, or feeling any urge to go comfort her, and we weren't insensitive people, I don't think.

Here's what's almost funny: the very same mare that he had been caught in flagrante delicto with had kicked loverman square in the face a couple weeks earlier - this during daylight hours - when he was bent over picking up the tie-stall's rope - gave him the ugliest-looking pumpkin-head you ever saw in your life - green to purple to blue and back again. I suppose it's at least possible that it was an act of revenge on the mare's part, but it's also possible that she was feeling neglected. I don't know. I'm pretty good at horse psychology, but those limpid, blinking brown eyes can be so unaccountable, so mysterious at times.

It's also possible that the farmhand's subsequent crate-standing activities were an ill-thought-out act of revenge for being kicked in the face. Or, maybe, he had been making his way around the stalls in the previous few months, and the mare was jealous. There's no way of sorting it all out at this point, or determining whether the relationship was consensual or not. The only way we could have known for sure was if the police had brought the mare in for questioning, but that's no longer possible, as she has long since passed.

The only dead certainty in the situation is that it was a case of love gone wrong.

Probably an Ont. Gov't employee on vacation. After all, if we can have "Butternut Health Assessors" who says we don't have "Opossum Resuscitators"?

Revnant Dream sparks an old synapse. Gator and Possum.

Perhaps it was just doing what possums do, playing dead. Or perhaps it enjoys mouth to mouth contact with drunken men? I don't see the problem here.

"*meat free global warming salvation."

The Red-Green Itchy & Choo-Chooy Show.
...-

"Man Destroys Meat In Supermarket Frenzy, Police Say ... He Ripped Through Meat To Save Chubby Girls

EDINBURGH, Ind. -- A knife-wielding man was arrested earlier this week in what police called a meat massacre at a south-central Indiana supermarket. Several people called 911 on Wednesday morning to report a man with a knife in the Jay C Food Store. “We have a gentleman here cutting into the meat and throwing it onto the floor,” one caller said.

(Excerpt) Read more at theindychannel.com"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2481080/posts
...-

"*ACS: going veggie won’t impact global warming
22 03 2010

IPCC’s Dr. Pachauri must be having a conniption fit about now, since he’s been an advocate of meat free global warming salvation.

From the American Chemical Society:

Eating less meat and dairy products won’t have major impact on global warming"

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/22/acs-going-veggie-wont-impact-global-warming/

I noticed this last night and didn't like where it seemed to be going.
I elected to shut down and go to bed.
Unencumbered by distrubing images...I slept the sleep of the just....
To maintain this serenity I will not investigate further.....

I do not know how two comments in the story of the really drunk guy trying to save a dead opossum went into the bestiality weeds but lets try and not get into the merits and legalities or the viability of inter-species relationships.

BTW That is one good looking ewe you got there.

EBD - another ethical issue to be considered: If animals cannot consent to sex with humans, how are we to presume that they are capable of consenting to intercourse with each other? We can't, and it may be incumbent upon decent people to agitate for the implimentation of measures to stamp out animal fornication altogether.

I would like to add that I have never given any dog the go-ahead when it came to having my leg humped - quite the reverse. No means no, Fido.

I was also disturbed - I did not expect a link like that posted on a lighthearted thread and did not read the entire article, as soon as it became clear where the article was going and that the author was making a case for these acts as being just another sexual preference, hinting at it being genetically decided, I left the site after reading a couple of the responses.

EBD,

The term "Zoophilia" is putting lipstick on a pig; a lame, yet obvious attempt to associate our warm fuzzy childhood memories of visiting the zoo with the act bestiality. Dogs, horses, and sheep are not zoo animals - they are farm animals or perhaps pets, so Petphilia or Farmphilia would be a more concise.

I do not think anyone can say performing these acts are harmless to both humans and the animal, HIV and Aids has been said to have started from some idiot having sex with a rhesus monkey who had the virus which is harmless to humans but has now killed countless millions of people around the world.

As one commenter on the site from the link said, just because someone has an urge, and I would add proclivity or desire, one does not have to act on it. How many times a week do people have thoughts or urges towards violence, stealing, cheating etc, and simply do not act on these thoughts or urges. Just because a thought pops into your head or a desire stirs your loins, you do not have to own it and act on it.

No-One said: "I do not think anyone can say performing these acts are harmless to both humans and the animal..."

Yes. Extremely destructive for the humans. But then a lot of things are, and doesn't there just seem to be a whole lot of people all over that stuff? This at least doesn't get paid for with my tax dollars. Yet. I'm sure somebody is trying to find a way.

As for the animal, who cares? Its an animal,its not a child. Frankly, I care about -my- dog. Other people's dogs/horses/sheep/whatever are their problem.

I wouldn't let any animal of mine be used like that, but then I don't give money to drunks or sell crack to junkies either. Same reason. Why help people kill/maim/mangle themselves when they are perfectly capable of getting the job done without your input?

aww crap, is that where my booky went. I bin lookin fer my bookywooky. he's constantly playin possum

"The term 'Zoophilia' is putting lipstick on a pig; a lame, yet obvious attempt to associate our warm fuzzy childhood memories of visiting the zoo with the act (of) bestiality. Dogs, horses, and sheep are not zoo animals..."

Bingo, you gave it the right name-O. We must draw a line somewhere. The term Zoophilia is, as you point out, highly misleading because it doesn't properly differentiate between legitimate and non-legitimate interspecies activity. A zoo animal is, as you note, quite different than a family pet, and those who wish to avoid crossing the hard moral line need to understand just how misleading the term "zoophilia" really is.

"Just because someone has an urge - and I would add proclivity or desire - one does not have to act on it. How many times a week do people have thoughts or urges...and simply do not act on these thoughts or urges?"

Three or four, I'm guessing. The exact figure would obviously depend, to the largest extent, on the number and duration of zoo visits.

"I was also disturbed - I did not expect a link like that posted on a lighthearted thread, and did not read the entire article as soon as it became clear where the article was going..."

You really should have read the whole thing - nudge-nudge, wink-wink, know what I mean, know what I mean?