>>3256020>As for what behaviors are associated with others, it absolutely DOES matter.Correlation is not causation.
You are actually so fucking stupid I think you're trolling.
This was, I assume a counter to the following argument I put forward:
>Whether the vast majority of people who fuck their animals also abuses them is irrelevant.>This does not make the act of having sex with an animal abuse.>I'm sure there's someone out there somewhere who was raped by their father and dealt with it, without any help whatsoever, and went on to lead a successful life, suffering no long-term ill effects.You were talking about associated behaviors?
This has nothing to do with associated behaviors you fucking moron.
You're discussing cause and effect.
What the fuck does that have to do with my claim that the "fact" that the vast majority of people who fuck their pets also abuse them is irrelevant?
Sad thing is, you pulled that statistic out of your ass.
There is no reliable way to conduct a study on this subject.
Both animal abuse and animal sex are illegal. Therefore, comprehensive studies are difficult if not impossible.
>As for your pillow argument, if you can't tell the difference between an inanimate object and an living thing, then you're even more fucked up than I thought.In your primitive mind, the most compelling argument you can come up with is "YOU'RE FUCKED UP!!!!!!!!"
Additionally, you misunderstood my point completely.
It was a fucking analogy, moron.
I was showing the futility of applying standards of morality to lesser creatures.
You cannot apply a human standard of morality to animals, just as you can not apply an animal standard of morality to inanimate objects.
The nature of the subjects is far too different to simply slap on reasoning related to human rights on animals