To answer the question: “Is it necessarily abusive if we have sex with animals?” If yes, why? If not, why not? ", we must first ask ourselves the question: what is considered abusive? Another question to ask is: what is animal abuse? Being violent is either causing physical harm or even being emotionally cruel. That is to say, this definition does not exclude other species. Robert Agnew in The Causes of Animal Abuse states that animal abuse "generally indicates that the harm inflicted on animals must be 1) socially unacceptable, 2) intentional or deliberate, and/or 3) unnecessary." (Agnew, 179) A definition given at a conference on animal abuse was: “Animal abuse is any act that contributes to the pain, suffering, or abnormal death of animals or that threatens or harms another way to their well-being. Animal abuse can be physical, sexual, psychological or emotional. This may involve active abuse, neglect or passive omission. It can be direct or indirect, intentional or unintentional. (Classroom lesson)Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The question here remains whether it is necessarily abusive to have sex with animals. On the one hand, there are those who will say that it is abusive to have sex with animals. Then there are those who say it's actually not abusive to have sex with an animal. In this essay, I will discuss both arguments and their reasoning, as well as my position on this issue. This essay will talk about bestiality and how people view bestiality in terms of normal behavior or deviant behavior. Before I begin with the two arguments as well as my point of view, I want to acknowledge some information that I have obtained. thanks to a web search by Dr. Piers Beirne. On this website he sets out his argument on how bestiality should be viewed and condemned. He states that bestiality should not be condemned based on religious beliefs, but rather based on the how, why and consequences, as it is very similar to the abuse of women by men or even of children by men and women. “The argument I would like to make is that bestiality should not be condemned on religious grounds…Bestiality in this context is considered a violation or breakdown of the natural order and it should not be condemned at all in these terms. believe. I believe, in a word, that bestiality must be condemned, how, why and with what consequences is another story, because it is so similar to the abuse of women by men, and perhaps even more so of young children by men and women. (Piers Beirne; web) I will keep this argument in mind when outlining the arguments between the two sides, although they will include arguments that include things such as whether or not this behavior and action is morally wrong . That being said, I begin with my first argument. Why is it wrong to have sex with animals? Those who oppose these actions question whether the animal can give consent. Consent is an enthusiastic yes, of one's own free will, without any threat. Since animals cannot speak human language, they cannot give consent. We cannot really say that it is not because the animal isexcited about an action, since he wags his tail or does something which may or may not suggest that he enjoys the action the person is doing to him, that he knows perfectly well what the person is doing. we do to them. With each definition, arguments are made about whether or not it is acceptable and whether or not it includes what needs to be included. Another argument in favor of this view is that some people who participate in bestiality might participate solely for their own interests and benefits; that they use this animal as an object to play with and use for their own interests, which is abusive in two ways: abuse of power over them and sexual abuse. Since the animal cannot speak “human” language, it cannot talk about what is happening to it, which also constitutes psychological abuse. Of course, in this way, those who participate use them because for some it can be difficult to find someone who would want to participate in a sexual act with them, that is why they use their animals to satisfy this need that they cannot get from any. another human. Can being loyal to your owner and wanting to make them happy be confused with consent? Those opposed to it agree that it can in fact be confused with that. Just like someone who just wants to make their partner happy might give an enthusiastic yes, the same could be said for animals. Of course, they are still animals in the wild and will attack if they feel like they don't like what is about to happen. Some may still do it because they are dedicated or might be influenced to do so by treats or treats. things like that. The main agreement that many who are against bestiality would bring up is that of those who have morals and religious beliefs. Some people believe that humans are superior to animals and therefore should not interact the way zoophiles do with animals. Based on this view, one could say that humans should only interact with other humans because they can understand each other on a human level and talk about relevant things that are happening. You can't do that with animals because they can do it. don't answer. For those who believe that it is not in fact considered abusive if one has sex with animals, argue the following. As stated in the previous paragraphs, being abusive involves physically or sexually harming the person and/or a non-human partner. They consider their actions to not physically and especially sexually harm their non-human partner, because it appears that their non-human partner does not appear to be in pain and may in fact enjoy the behavior as well as they do. . People who are bestialists, or as some call themselves zoophiles, explain that what they have between themselves and their non-human partners is much more than just physical; that they also “maintain a deep and caring bond with each other.” (Sarah Wheeler; web)An issue that usually always comes up when talking about bestiality is that of consent. Those who support sex with animals argue that animals can in fact give consent, whether through their body language or actions. If an animal feels like it doesn't particularly like a situation and/or an action, it will then make a noise that will be understood when it is time to withdraw and no longer continue. An example of this would be when a dog growls when he is in an uncomfortable situation or doesn't like what is happening. Just as they are able to let us know when to back off, they are also.