Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Horse sex blogging

Not that I've been having sex with horses (or humans, for that matter). But in the course of berating a crazy right-wing horsefucker, dadahead approvingly cites Kant's injunctions against bestiality. If the disease and animal-welfare considerations can be handled, bestiality is far more comical than morally outrageous. I've linked to Bentham's writings on sexual morality before, and I reproduce them here:


An abomination which meets with as little quarter as any of the preceding is that where a human creature makes use in this way of a beast or other sensitive creature of a different species. A legislator who should take Sanchez for his guide might / here repeat the same string of distinctions about the vas proprium and improprium, the imaginations and the simultaneity and so forth. Accidents of this sort will sometimes happen; for distress will force a man upon strange expedients. But one might venture to affirm that if all the sovereigns in Europe were to join in issuing proclamations inviting their subjects to this exercise in the warmest terms, it would never get to such a heighth as to be productive of the smallest degree of political mischief. The more of these sorts of prosecutions are permitted the more scope there is given for malice or extortion to make use of them to effect its purpose upon the innocent, and the more public they are the more of that mischief is incurred which consists in shocking the imaginations of persons of delicacy with a very painful sentiment.

Burning the animal

Some persons have been for burning the poor animal with great ceremony under the notion of burning the remembrance of the affair. (See Puffendorf, Bks. 2, Ch. 3, 5. 3. Bacon's Abridg. Title Sodomy. J.B.) A more simple and as it should seem a more effectual course to take would be not to meddle or make smoke about the matter.

It's good sensible utilitarianism, and I love it.


Neil Sinhababu said...

I accept each of the propositions you state above. However, I do not believe that the first two bear any logical relation to the third.

Neil Sinhababu said...

Indeed! Do you then agree with my claim that sex with animals is "far more comical than morally outrageous?"

Anonymous said...

This reminds me of a discussion about five months ago at Foreign Dispatches.

Chalk this as another point for the theory that right-wing types are perverts who embrace sexual puritanism out of misguided guilt and feeling the need to control themselves. See also radical Christian child correction for some disturbing perversion in parent-child relations.

Anonymous said...

Oh, I just read a bit more of the Bentham thing. I was surprised -- and amused -- that he vociferously condemned masturbation. I guess he couldn't have known better, at the time.