Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible - Revision history

Bloit: Undo revision 135680 by CTCA (talk)

2026-04-01T08:13:16Z

Undo revision 135680 by CTCA (talk)

Show changes

CTCA at 20:23, 31 March 2026

2026-03-31T20:23:13Z

Show changes

Bloit: Undo revision 135260 by Swedishwin.com (talk)

2026-03-31T07:55:10Z

Undo revision 135260 by Swedishwin.com (talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:55, 31 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	#~~REDIRECT~~ [[~~i mog you all~~]]		[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]
			As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|doi-access=free\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

			The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.

			== Introduction ==
			Sex with animals is a powerful social taboo that exposes its practitioners to utmost indignation and stigma. Zoophilia is one of the few sexual orientations (along with, for example, necrophilia or pedophilia) that remain off-limits and have been left aside from the sexual liberation movement in the past fifty years. I would like to argue that this is a mistake. There is in fact nothing wrong with having sex with animals: it is not an inherently problematic sexual practice. Given the sheer outrage that the mere mention of zoophilia triggers in many people, we might expect the case for its permissibility to be a hard sell and my claims to be modest and tentative. This is not so: not only do I think that zoophilia is morally permissible, but I also think that the case in its favor is rather straightforward, so that it should be the default position within many philosophical quarters. This makes it all the more surprising that no ambitious and explicit defense of it has been published so far.

			I start in Section 1 by clarifying what is meant by zoophilia. In Section 2, I introduce the debate over the permissibility of zoophilia. In Sections 3 and 4, I address the questions of whether zoophilia is harmful and whether animals can consent to sex with humans. In Section 5, I tease out some important implications.

			== Metadata ==
			* Submitted: {{#formatdate:2023-03-23\|mdy}}
			* Accepted: {{#formatdate:2023-09-24\|mdy}}
			* Published: {{#formatdate:2023-10-31\|mdy}}

			== References ==
			<references />

			{{Home}}


			[[Category:Research]]
			[[Category:Resources]]

Swedishwin.com: Redirected page to I mog you all

2026-03-30T15:15:25Z

Redirected page to I mog you all

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:15, 30 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[~~File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]~~		#REDIRECT [[i mog you all]]
	As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|doi-access=free\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

	~~The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.~~

	~~== Introduction ==~~
	Sex with animals is a powerful social taboo that exposes its practitioners to utmost indignation and stigma. Zoophilia is one of the few sexual orientations (along with, for example, necrophilia or pedophilia) that remain off-limits and have been left aside from the sexual liberation movement in the past fifty years. I would like to argue that this is a mistake. There is in fact nothing wrong with having sex with animals: it is not an inherently problematic sexual practice. Given the sheer outrage that the mere mention of zoophilia triggers in many people, we might expect the case for its permissibility to be a hard sell and my claims to be modest and tentative. This is not so: not only do I think that zoophilia is morally permissible, but I also think that the case in its favor is rather straightforward, so that it should be the default position within many philosophical quarters. This makes it all ~~the more surprising that no ambitious and explicit defense of it has been published so far.~~

	I start in Section 1 by clarifying what is meant by zoophilia. In Section 2, I introduce the debate over the permissibility of zoophilia. In Sections 3 and 4, I address the questions of whether zoophilia is harmful and whether animals can consent to sex with humans. In Section 5, I tease out some important implications.

	~~== Metadata ==~~
	* Submitted: {{#formatdate:2023-03-23\|mdy}}
	* Accepted: {{#formatdate:2023-09-24\|mdy}}
	* Published: {{#formatdate:2023-10-31\|mdy}}

	~~== References ==~~
	~~<references />~~

	~~{{Home}}~~


	~~[[Category:Research]]~~
	~~[[Category:Resources~~]]

Bloit at 23:31, 29 March 2026

2026-03-29T23:31:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:31, 29 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~Template~~:~~Col~~-~~break~~}}NIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGER		[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]
	*		As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|doi-access=free\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

			The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.

			== Introduction ==
			Sex with animals is a powerful social taboo that exposes its practitioners to utmost indignation and stigma. Zoophilia is one of the few sexual orientations (along with, for example, necrophilia or pedophilia) that remain off-limits and have been left aside from the sexual liberation movement in the past fifty years. I would like to argue that this is a mistake. There is in fact nothing wrong with having sex with animals: it is not an inherently problematic sexual practice. Given the sheer outrage that the mere mention of zoophilia triggers in many people, we might expect the case for its permissibility to be a hard sell and my claims to be modest and tentative. This is not so: not only do I think that zoophilia is morally permissible, but I also think that the case in its favor is rather straightforward, so that it should be the default position within many philosophical quarters. This makes it all the more surprising that no ambitious and explicit defense of it has been published so far.

			I start in Section 1 by clarifying what is meant by zoophilia. In Section 2, I introduce the debate over the permissibility of zoophilia. In Sections 3 and 4, I address the questions of whether zoophilia is harmful and whether animals can consent to sex with humans. In Section 5, I tease out some important implications.

			== Metadata ==
			* Submitted: {{#formatdate:2023-03-23\|mdy}}
			* Accepted: {{#formatdate:2023-09-24\|mdy}}
			* Published: {{#formatdate:2023-10-31\|mdy}}

	== References ==		== References ==
Line 8:		Line 20:


	[[~~index.php?title=~~Category:Research]]		[[Category:Research]]
	[[~~index.php?title=~~Category:Resources]]		[[Category:Resources]]

Goonson at 19:21, 26 March 2026

2026-03-26T19:21:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:21, 26 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	NIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGER		{{Template:Col-break}}NIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGER
	*		*

Cobsonniggerpoop: kys

2026-03-26T18:46:57Z

kys

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:46, 26 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]~~		NIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGERNIGGER
	As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|doi-access=free\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>		*

	~~The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.~~

	~~== Introduction ==~~
	Sex with animals is a powerful social taboo that exposes its practitioners to utmost indignation and stigma. Zoophilia is one of the few sexual orientations (along with, for example, necrophilia or pedophilia) that remain off-limits and have been left aside from the sexual liberation movement in the past fifty years. I would like to argue that this is a mistake. There is in fact nothing wrong with having sex with animals: it is not an inherently problematic sexual practice. Given the sheer outrage that the mere mention of zoophilia triggers in many people, we might expect the case for its permissibility to be a hard sell and my claims to be modest and tentative. This is not so: not only do I think that zoophilia is morally permissible, but I also think that the case in its favor is rather straightforward, so that it should be the default position within many philosophical quarters. This makes it all the more surprising that no ambitious and explicit defense of it has been published so far.

	I start in Section 1 by clarifying what is meant by zoophilia. In Section 2, I introduce the debate over the permissibility of zoophilia. In Sections 3 and 4, I address the questions of whether zoophilia is harmful and whether animals can consent to sex with humans. In Section 5, I tease out some important implications.

	~~== Metadata ==~~
	* Submitted: {{#formatdate:2023-03-23\|mdy}}
	* Accepted: {{#formatdate:2023-09-24\|mdy}}
	* ~~Published: {{#formatdate:2023-10-31\|mdy}}~~

	== References ==		== References ==
Line 20:		Line 8:


	[[Category:Research]]		[[index.php?title=Category:Research]]
	[[Category:Resources]]		[[index.php?title=Category:Resources]]

SockyPaws: Tag inline citation as freely available

2024-12-06T18:26:42Z

Tag inline citation as freely available

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:26, 6 December 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]		[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]
	As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>		As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|doi-access=free\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

	The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.		The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.

SockyPaws: Fix inline citation DOI link

2024-12-06T18:22:23Z

Fix inline citation DOI link

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:22, 6 December 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]		[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf\|thumb\|right\|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]
	As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira\|~~year~~=2023\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/~~jci03020006~~}}</ref>		As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal\|last=Bensto\|first=Fira (pseudonym)\|date=2023-10-31\|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible\|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}\|format=PDF\|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas\|volume=3\|issue=2\|doi=10.35995/jci03020005\|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

	The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.		The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.

SockyPaws: Restructure page

2024-12-06T18:14:00Z

Restructure page

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-=== Fira Bensto (pseudonym) ===
+[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf|thumb|right|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]
-Submitted: 23 March 2023, accepted: 24 September 2023, published: 31 October 2023[[File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf|thumb|Bensto, F. Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas (PDF)]]
+As one of our most deeply entrenched social taboos, [[zoophilia]] is widely considered to be wrong and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In this article, I would like to go against this de facto consensus and argue that zoophilia is morally permissible. This would have major implications for how we legally and socially deal with zoophilia.<ref name="zimp">{{Cite journal|last=Bensto|first=Fira|year=2023|title=Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible|url={{fullurl:File:Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible.pdf}}|journal=Journal of Controversial Ideas|volume=3|issue=2|doi=10.35995/jci03020006}}</ref>
-considered to be wrong, and having sex with animals is illegal in many countries. In
+The introduction below is copied from the source article to describe the scope and nature of the research. The full PDF document is available at right.
 == Introduction ==
-Sex with animals is a powerful social taboo that exposes its practitioners to utmost
+Sex with animals is a powerful social taboo that exposes its practitioners to utmost indignation and stigma. Zoophilia is one of the few sexual orientations (along with, for example, necrophilia or pedophilia) that remain off-limits and have been left aside from the sexual liberation movement in the past fifty years. I would like to argue that this is a mistake. There is in fact nothing wrong with having sex with animals: it is not an inherently problematic sexual practice. Given the sheer outrage that the mere mention of zoophilia triggers in many people, we might expect the case for its permissibility to be a hard sell and my claims to be modest and tentative. This is not so: not only do I think that zoophilia is morally permissible, but I also think that the case in its favor is rather straightforward, so that it should be the default position within many philosophical quarters. This makes it all the more surprising that no ambitious and explicit defense of it has been published so far.
-indignation and stigma. Zoophilia is one of the few sexual orientations (along with e.g.
+I start in Section 1 by clarifying what is meant by zoophilia. In Section 2, I introduce the debate over the permissibility of zoophilia. In Sections 3 and 4, I address the questions of whether zoophilia is harmful and whether animals can consent to sex with humans. In Section 5, I tease out some important implications.
-necrophilia or pedophilia) that remain offlimits and have been left aside from the sexual
+== Metadata ==
-liberation movement in the past fifty years.1 I would like to argue that this is a mistake.
+== References ==
-There is in fact nothing wrong with having sex with animals: it is not an inherently
+{{Home}}
-Given the sheer outrage that the mere mention of zoophilia triggers in many people,
+[[Category:Research]]
 [[Category:Resources]]