Jump to content
Zoo Community Forum & Zoo Writers’ Guild
Sign in to follow this  
caikgoch

Does anyone remember "asshairs"?

Recommended Posts

caikgoch    34

It was recently stated that our legal "issues" and the many changes in law recently were inspired by fencehoppers and other clumsy individuals caught in the act of bestiality starting with the infamous Enumclaw incident.         It has shocked me to discover that none of the current generation have ever heard of Zoobuster.        So I have decided to remedy that deficiency.    

Once upon a time (say around the mid 1990s) there was feud among some Zoos.        Some of them might have been a bit psychotic and one or two of them was very sociopathic.         All of them had a bad case of "Zooier than Thou".       It got intense enough that one of them enlisted the aid of the SPCA and other animal welfare organizations to attack his opponents.        He set up a site called ASAIRS (Animal Sexual Abuse Information and ResourceS  if I remember correctly) for veterinarians, law enforcement, and animal rescues to use as an aid to prosecution.         He called himself "Zoobuster" and advertised himself as a reformed Zoo out to correct the wrongs of his former compatriots.

He used the name Randy Pepe and later Mike Roland.      The other side of the conflict egged him on and portrayed himself as a savior rescuing the young community from the evil "outer".        Between them they taught a lot of people in authority how crazy and cruel Zoophiles could be.       I trace the start of our problems with animal welfare organizations to this event.        As the organizations learned how lucrative persecuting Zoophiles could be our fate was set.

Almost nothing remains on the net.     http://21stcenturycares.org/zooph.htm    is all a quick search could find.       My memory is far from perfect or complete so I would ask those that remember to add to this thread and build a complete picture for the youngsters.        History forgotten is history soon to be repeated.     

 

Share this post


Link to post
30-30    21

What exactly are your intentions to bring up this episode from the "zoo neolithicum"? To abbreviate a long story, this guy probably was on an ego trip ...and found opponents on a similar ego trip, as it seems. If it is, as I assume,  you bring this up to underline your dogma of zoophilia as a completely uncontrolled and unrestricted field to play in, I have to ask you whether the deeds of Joe Arpaio, one single man constantly stepping over the legal line, are a reason to abolish all police.

I already talked with you about the ASSHAIRS stuff on BF about 3 years ago and since you couldn´t provide me with enough hard facts, I started searching for them on my own. I discovered some chat protocols from the ASAIRS guy and what he had to say didn´t sound like total bullshit to me. I also ran across some chat protocols from his opponents...and they also didn´t sound like bullshit. Yes, all this got out of hands quickly and neither side acted gloriously. But what relevance does this have today, in this massively different time and age?

By the way, ASAIRS wasn´t the only "initiative" that aimed for the bad people among us. Even ZETA did something comparable when they purposedly befriended with a guy named Janis Benda in chatrooms. Benda is that guy whose pictures of the tortured, taped and tied to a table German Sheperd are flowing around the net as proof of the bad nature of zoophilia. You surely have seen them.

Anyway: It is a undeniable fact that "zoophilia" as it presents itself today through forums and online videos has one essential flaw: it is uncontrolled , unrestrained. Excessive persons are generally tolerated, no questions asked ...well, except the usual ones of "Can I meet you and fuck your animal?". Zoophilia is the proverbial "Wild West", literally no rules apply and you can do anything without being challenged by others. Many even applaud and praise the worst kind of folks out there.

You cannot call this current state anarchistic, it´s just complete chaos, with all negative effects chaos has. To bring some sort of order into this may not be the worst idea although I absolutely agree that "Mike" went too far...just like Arpaio went too far and made his office into his private torture/degradation club. The idea behind ASAIRS wasn´t bad per se, but as usual, the execution was on a subterranean level. 

And in case this post above is somehow directed at me, mind you , I never said that all the true zoos should turn in all the "untrue" ones to the authorities like ASAIRS did. All I want is the reseparation of our scene. I want my word back. If someone´s a beasty, I would be the very last one to pull an ASAIResque stunt on him ...if he´s treating his animal good. And until we actually DO this reseparation, no one should complain about being thrown into the same drawer as those who are acting irresponsible and with no respect for animals. One word = one ilk of people, that´s how Average Joe´s mind is working. Learning about "zoo history" is a good thing, but it´s not a good thing to view history separated from recent developments and the current desastrous state our scene is in. Self reflection is desperately needed, moderation is needed and common sense is needed. What´s not needed is blind recitation of "historic events" that only increase the density of the "zoo" filter bubble. What led us all to this point in history isn´t ASAIRS, it´s all the non ASAIRS "zoos" who vehemently deny the introduction of rules and criteria that help to identify people´s position on the "zoo scale".

I also have to contradict you when you say that our problems with animal welfare organisations started with Enumclaw. That´s just too simple. No, the problems with animal welfare organisations were always there, none of these has ever considered sex with animals as justifiable. Even Enumclaw, a single, isolated incident, couldn´t have done that...no, it was what happened AFTER Enumclaw, when people started to investigate the "zoo scene" on the internet. Beastforum played a vital role with all the pure perversion, the unhinged abuse, the largely populated hookup section. More than once I ran across excerpts directly taken from there. What also contributed a lot was the overall appearance of our entire scene online. I repeat myself, but let me once again quote what Silke Lautenschläger, the Hessian politician who´s the originator and responsible for the German "anti zoo" laws, has said about the "zoophiles". "What once was a relatively harmless, tolerable (!) and weird sexual practice of a few individuals has now , with the help of the internet, become an organised online sex cult with connections to the illegal porn mafia and is possibly disorienting juvenile users in their most vulnerable developmental phase as well as encouraging a vast load of sexually adventurous folks with the typical ´anything goes!´ attitude."

Not Enumclaw made animal welfare organisations into enemies, no, what was BEHIND Enumclaw, the horrible display of openly abusive mindsets and actions was what broke our necks here. Without the unfavourable picture given, Enumclaw would have been a rather strange singularity without all of the backlash that ensued, without the hysteria and new laws introduced in every nation of the world. 

 

 

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
silverwolf1    192

I remember, quite well actually, as I was in the thick of that fight as it neared it's climax. I also remember the oldest members of the 'community', veering away from entangling themselves in either side. A lot of us, myself included, did as much damage as Pepe' did. A lot of us, again including myself, won the battle only to lose the war. Fact is, this subject is why I and several others went silent in the early 2000s.

I don't see ASAIRS as the one reason we are further regulated now, nor do I see foolish or abusive people going public as such. Nor folks I wouldn't call 'zoo' on their best day getting caught or even misguided folks demanding public 'acceptance'. See, they ALL have contributed in my opinion, and I'm probably right.

What I'd like to see here is an unbiased history of ASAIRS, so folks would know what it was, and one of many other infamous "anti-zoos" in their own topics. There've been plenty. I'd also like to see essays and debate on why you think they existed and what they did to 'zoophiles'. This topic is a good starting point for debate on the damage ASAIRS did or didn't do. I might contribute further, but I'd like to see other folks opinions who remember those days better, especially the beginnings that I wasn't there for.

sw 

Share this post


Link to post
egoldstein    37

Ah the good old days and all the fun that entailed, that was such a shitstorm. Anytime someone suggests I'm just a bit too paranoid (I probably am), I think about those events.

 

18 hours ago, 30-30 said:

Anyway: It is a undeniable fact that "zoophilia" as it presents itself today through forums and online videos has one essential flaw: it is uncontrolled , unrestrained. Excessive persons are generally tolerated, no questions asked ...well, except the usual ones of "Can I meet you and fuck your animal?"

Are you promoting that ridicuouls zoophile registration idea again? How many times must it be pointed out to you that your idea is so fatally flawed as to be absurd?

I do hope you are as I do enjoy dismantling the poor logic and resoning inherent in it.

Quote

Zoophilia is the proverbial "Wild West", literally no rules apply and you can do anything without being challenged by others. Many even applaud and praise the worst kind of folks out there.

Correction, that's a flaw inherent in keeping domesticated animals. It's not an inherently sexual thing, unless you're actually suggesting that all sexual contact with non-human animals is the primary source for the vast majority of harm to non-humans. As with any group of people grouped purely by who they have sex with, there's *always* going to be some real unpleasant people in the overlap. Some people, surprise, suprise, get off on harm, be it to another human or a non-human, I don't think anyone is surprised by that, but I can't think of a single community I've been part of where that kind of thing would even be tolerated, much less accepted. Do places that tolerate that exist? Probably, but that's as relevant to zoophilia as rape, pedo, or snuff sites are to the average heterosexual male. Most rapes are comitted by heterosexual males, should we form a registry for heterosexual males? One is as absurd as the other, for exactly the same reason.

 

Quote

You cannot call this current state anarchistic, it´s just complete chaos, with all negative effects chaos has. To bring some sort of order into this may not be the worst idea although I absolutely agree that "Mike" went too far...just like Arpaio went too far and made his office into his private torture/degradation club. The idea behind ASAIRS wasn´t bad per se, but as usual, the execution was on a subterranean level.

Well that idea has been repeatedly shown to be a terrible idea, probably not the worst, but certainly nothing I would expect from anyone who'd given any thought to it would consider. It's nothing more than an attempt to harass people based on sexuality and nothing more. If it were about protecting non-human animals, you'd be pushing for better animal protection laws, perhaps pushing for routine chcks by vets for health and welfare issues so that abuse from whatever source could perhaps be addressed instead of dragging government into the lives and bedrooms of people. An invasion based, not on past abuse, not on the likelihood of future abuse, but purely on sexuality, because you apparently believe that all sexual contact with non-humans is inherrently harmful. I could respect that position, except that you don't seem to care about abuse from any other source, which unfortunately accounts to the vast majority of harm, because you want to focus on a teeny-tiny percent of the population who are very likely providing a much greater level of care to their wards than the general population does. Your usual description of what is tolerated or what you routinely suggest is normal is very far from what I've seen in the communities I have participated in, perhaps you assosciate with some less desireable people or maybe you are projecting your own thoughts, I do not know.

Who, in their right mind would identify themselves to such a registry?

What color should the patch be? I think Yellow and Pink are already taken.

 

Quote

All I want is the reseparation of our scene. I want my word back.

Really? I seem to recall you just posting that you want a registry of zoophiles. How exactly are we to separate ourselves from these abusive people? I've asked you this at least a dozen times, but you've never explained it. If a group of us decided that you were one of "them", how are we to exclude you? Who decides what's tolerated? How does one enforce this? Perhaps most importantly is explaining how a registry is going to validate it for the general population, they already think it's gross and abusive no matter the details, what makes you think they're going to see your group as A-OK good guys?

 

Quote

What led us all to this point in history isn´t ASAIRS, it´s all the non ASAIRS "zoos" who vehemently deny the introduction of rules and criteria that help to identify people´s position on the "zoo scale".

No, what led to ASAIRS was Randy being an asshat and deciding to go on a rampage trying to out any zoo he could, regardless of his knowing anything about them other than that they identify as zoo. From what I observed of the events, he wasn't motivated by anything more than spite to get back at the entire community for being rejected. He tried to get the HSUS involved, but I think their interest only went so far as trying to use it to get donation money. I don't know how truthful his autobiography was, but it didn't paint a very pretty picture of the man. I sincerely hope he's overcome whatever issues he had, I hope him health and happiness, far, far away.

 

12 hours ago, silverwolf1 said:

Fact is, this subject is why I and several others went silent in the early 2000s.

It had a lot of influence on my extended hiatus.

 

 

Edited by egoldstein

Share this post


Link to post
30-30    21

 "Are you promoting your ridiculous idea again..." Well, I am definitely not promoting something that has been debunked by reality for several decades now and basically led to the gigantic hostility and total lack of trust in so called "zoophiles". Zoophilia will never, NEVER be "legalised" without a corrective, without a voice for the animals. While I "promote" my idea of regulated zoophilia according to the Dutch approach towards cannabis cunsumption ("Wiet pass") that has worked out pretty well since the Dutch parliament installed their trademark "geduuit" politics, you are promoting basically nothing else than making the fox into the hen house keeper. If it were about human-human relationships, I´d agree to the currently dominant dogma of "laissez faire", but animals CAN´T just walk into the next local police station and demand protection from their abusers. That´s the difference between me and you & all the others falling for the retarded dogma. What is fine with humans isn´t fine with animals. But "let´s make the possible abusers the ones who decide whether it is abuse or not" ...*gosh*

 

Nothing else left to answer you, egoldstein. Your obvious denial of the harsh realities out there is just fantastic to watch, yet your idea of "free zoophilia" has led us to the current state, the general hostility and the new "zoo" landscape with all these laws. If we, the zoos, can´t moderate and self correct our community, then authorities will...and have done in the last couple of years. Your approach has failed and the longer you deny this simple fact, the longer it will take us to develop different approaches.

And btw, where exactly has my idea of regulated, registered zoophilia been proven wrong by actually experimenting with it? All I can see is a community shitting their pants because my idea would make it possible to be held accountable and responsible for all the fucked up things that are done in the name of zoophilia.

"There will be so much winning, you all will be tired of winning..." Where exactly have we won anything following your idea, egoldstein? Just tell me one "zoo" victory in the last 30 years of "zoo rights activism" and I´ll shut up....

Share this post


Link to post
30-30    21
16 hours ago, silverwolf1 said:

I remember, quite well actually, as I was in the thick of that fight as it neared it's climax. I also remember the oldest members of the 'community', veering away from entangling themselves in either side. A lot of us, myself included, did as much damage as Pepe' did. A lot of us, again including myself, won the battle only to lose the war. Fact is, this subject is why I and several others went silent in the early 2000s.

I don't see ASAIRS as the one reason we are further regulated now, nor do I see foolish or abusive people going public as such. Nor folks I wouldn't call 'zoo' on their best day getting caught or even misguided folks demanding public 'acceptance'. See, they ALL have contributed in my opinion, and I'm probably right.

What I'd like to see here is an unbiased history of ASAIRS, so folks would know what it was, and one of many other infamous "anti-zoos" in their own topics. There've been plenty. I'd also like to see essays and debate on why you think they existed and what they did to 'zoophiles'. This topic is a good starting point for debate on the damage ASAIRS did or didn't do. I might contribute further, but I'd like to see other folks opinions who remember those days better, especially the beginnings that I wasn't there for.

sw 

Due to the fact that I went offline for a couple of years when I bought my Hannover mare in ´94, I can´t contribute much to a debate about ASAIRS. But I absolutely subscribe to your post here, we don´t need the continuation of the blame game. ASAIRS was badly executed and "Pepe/Mike" definitely had some issues..but I always wonder what made "Pepe" pull off this. You simply don´t wake up one morning and decide "Well, today I´ll start destroying the zoo community"...especially not if you count yourselves in to it. 

In retrospective and with several other zoos having withdrawn from our community, giving no other reason but "I realised that the zoophile community wasn´t about animals at all and almost completely about the ones eager to fuck animals", I guess that "Pepe" went through the same kind of epiphany. He probably was pissed off by all the tightly upheld ideals zoophiles really like to instrumentalise when they´re under attack from the outside, but tend to forget quickly and completely when they´re with their own kind of folks. The silence from the community when another animal has been treated badly, the convenience of selective perception like it is displayed even in this very thread by Egoldstein´s post. I think "Pepe" just snapped and went off on his own, personal crusade. Incidents like ASAIRS aren´t isolated in themselves, there is always a reason why people go on tilt mode.

Silverwolf, you see how little the zoos are willing to give in to society and its absolutely justified demand to regulate/correct/prohibit violations against animal welfare. The total stubbornness just baffles me, the denial of actual issues zoophilia has in the real world, the absolute lack of will to compromise. This "either all or nothing" approach...but changes usually come in small steps. The encrustation of our community and its "ideals"...

Nonetheless, I too would appreciate an UNBIASED documentation of ASAIRS. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
silverwolf1    192
6 hours ago, 30-30 said:

Due to the fact that I went offline for a couple of years when I bought my Hannover mare in ´94, I can´t contribute much to a debate about ASAIRS. But I absolutely subscribe to your post here, we don´t need the continuation of the blame game. ASAIRS was badly executed and "Pepe/Mike" definitely had some issues..but I always wonder what made "Pepe" pull off this. You simply don´t wake up one morning and decide "Well, today I´ll start destroying the zoo community"...especially not if you count yourselves in to it. 

In retrospective and with several other zoos having withdrawn from our community, giving no other reason but "I realised that the zoophile community wasn´t about animals at all and almost completely about the ones eager to fuck animals", I guess that "Pepe" went through the same kind of epiphany. He probably was pissed off by all the tightly upheld ideals zoophiles really like to instrumentalise when they´re under attack from the outside, but tend to forget quickly and completely when they´re with their own kind of folks. The silence from the community when another animal has been treated badly, the convenience of selective perception like it is displayed even in this very thread by Egoldstein´s post. I think "Pepe" just snapped and went off on his own, personal crusade. Incidents like ASAIRS aren´t isolated in themselves, there is always a reason why people go on tilt mode.

Silverwolf, you see how little the zoos are willing to give in to society and its absolutely justified demand to regulate/correct/prohibit violations against animal welfare. The total stubbornness just baffles me, the denial of actual issues zoophilia has in the real world, the absolute lack of will to compromise. This "either all or nothing" approach...but changes usually come in small steps. The encrustation of our community and its "ideals"...

Nonetheless, I too would appreciate an UNBIASED documentation of ASAIRS. 

 

I do remember exactly what set him off, but I'll let some-one who was there for the whole thing tell it. 

sw

Share this post


Link to post
caikgoch    34

I missed the beginning myself.       I've been on the net since the very beginning but it never occurred to me that anyone would mention anything as taboo as bestiality on what was (in my mind) a purely governmental operation.        Since then I have had a lot of dealings with both of the major parties and have heard both sides of the story.        I have a lot of corroboration and logic to shore up my belief of what happened but like you I would like to hear a first hand account by someone with out an agenda.

This resurrection of "regulated" Zoophilia and the idea that most people practicing bestiality are harming animals tweaked my sense of history.       Anyone with minimal life experience should know that most people are like most people.       They are going to take the same kind of care of animals regardless of why they are keeping them outside of a production environment.

So what started the current trend of viewing the people that care for animals the most as the most likely to harm them?        In the previously cited Enumclaw incident even the cops and prosecutors admitted that no animals were harmed.

Share this post


Link to post
egoldstein    37
18 hours ago, 30-30 said:

 but animals CAN´T just walk into the next local police station and demand protection from their abusers.

And the non-human who are harmed by non-zoos *also CAN'T just walk the next local police station and demand protection from their abuser*

The difference is that I'm not focusing on sex, I'm focusing on harm and abuse; you however, focus your entire idea on sex instead of harm. If you were pushing for actual animal protection I'd be in support, but you don't appear to care about anything except who's fucking who.

 

Quote

That´s the difference between me and you & all the others falling for the retarded dogma. What is fine with humans isn´t fine with animals. But "let´s make the possible abusers the ones who decide whether it is abuse or not" ...*gosh*

And once again, you show an ability to disregard what was said and offer up your usual trawman argument. I'll reitterate it again, the bulk of the abuse to non-humans isn't from zoophiles, it's from the vast majority of non-zoophiles, but you don't seem to care about that abuse and seem to focus purely on zoophiles because you seem to think everyone is a horrible abuser (except of course you).

 

Quote

 

Nothing else left to answer you, egoldstein.

Sure, just pass over all the direct questions and slide by without actually addressing any of the criticism. I'm not in the least surprised though, it's your modus operandi
.

 

Quote

Your obvious denial of the harsh realities out there is just fantastic to watch, yet your idea of "free zoophilia" has led us to the current state, the general hostility and the new "zoo" landscape with all these laws.

Please cite for me where I'm promoting this "free zoophilia". You routinely use this defense even after having me explain to you on numerous occasions that I do not support such.

 

Quote

If we, the zoos, can´t moderate and self correct our community, then authorities will...and have done in the last couple of years. Your approach has failed and the longer you deny this simple fact, the longer it will take us to develop different approaches.

As I asked earlier, exactly how are we to do this moderation? If we decide you are an abuser, how do we exclude you in such a manner that the general public will recognize? They will continue to see every abuse that has a sexual nature as being representitive of zoos as a whole.

 

Quote

And btw, where exactly has my idea of regulated, registered zoophilia been proven wrong by actually experimenting with it? All I can see is a community shitting their pants because my idea would make it possible to be held accountable and responsible for all the fucked up things that are done in the name of zoophilia.

Well your idea was actually experimented with a few times in history, mostly when a socially reviled group gets singled out and abused by the government. I would expect a German to have a better understanding of how such things go wrong, but alas, the old saying about those who cannot remember history likely applies.

 

 

Quote

"There will be so much winning, you all will be tired of winning..." Where exactly have we won anything following your idea, egoldstein? Just tell me one "zoo" victory in the last 30 years of "zoo rights activism" and I´ll shut up....

WTF? Where have I ever said that? I have said many times I'm not interested in "zoo victory", my interest is in working for impartial laws based on limiting actual harm to human or non-human. That a person might have sex with a non-human is unimportant. That they love the non-human or merely lust for it is unimportant. It is harm that is important, whether it comes from sexual assault or non-sexual assault.

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, caikgoch said:

I missed the beginning myself.

 As did I, I found the community just as the mess was starting to unfold. I had little personal dealings with it as I was still quite new then, but I did get hit with some of the fallout.

 

Quote

This resurrection of "regulated" Zoophilia and the idea that most people practicing bestiality are harming animals tweaked my sense of history.       Anyone with minimal life experience should know that most people are like most people.       They are going to take the same kind of care of animals regardless of why they are keeping them outside of a production environment.

Indeed. What's your usual comment about measuring the health and lifespan of the non-humans whom zoos maintain? I'm tempted to paraphrase, but my attempts repeatedly fall short.

 

Edited by egoldstein

Share this post


Link to post
caikgoch    34
41 minutes ago, egoldstein said:

What's your usual comment about measuring the health and lifespan of the non-humans whom zoos maintain?

My favorite is "I rather be screwed than stewed" and I might add "especially if I get an orgasm out of the deal".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Rannoch    26

Having known and conversed with R.P. I do have to say 30-30 you have quite a lot in common with him, right down to the fact you were a zoo all along, despite the destructive path you chose against your own kind, all while believing you are doing the world some kind of favor or saving it from the destruction of the "failed past."

Edited by Rannoch

Share this post


Link to post
caikgoch    34

I do see at least one positive in today's situation.     We are currently lacking the "joyous sociopath" half of the madness.

Share this post


Link to post
30-30    21

So, criticism of our own failed conceptions and expectations is a "destructive path", Rannoch? You know what I am reminded of here? Why don´t you declare me to a suppressive person like your similar minded cultists at Scientology usually do when confronted with criticism of their "superior" fairy tale agenda? 

As I said and always believed, you indeed ARE a cultist and online "zoophilia" IS indeed a sex cult that obviously doesn´t allow any kind of criticism...

Those people like you, Rannoch, those people drooling with their "superior" and "advanced" perspectives and agendas, denying literally ANY alteration of their self perceived superiority...Rannoch, those people are the reason why Trump is your president now. Haven´t you still managed to get the clue? Although I am not anywhere near the republican´s viewpoints, I do see that some of their criticism towards "progressivism" is valid and justified. The smugness with which you are defending your agenda of "free animal sex" is just so dense that I cannot help but to imagine you standing in front of  a mirror while mumbling your slogans while you´re jerking your noodle. ;)

Joke aside: it is exactly this egotistical way of thinking, this "the world should be complying to all MY viewpoints or else, it is unjust"...this has nothing else in mind but absolution of any responsibility. You´re worshipping your ego, despite all of the facts that reality presents you. Or, as Einstein said, The definition of insanity is doing the same experiment over and over, expecting different results." And exactly that you and your comrades of the "sex lib" are doing. Nevermind all the laws against sex with animals installed, nevermind that while your agenda of "free zoo" was commonly propuled by almost any "zoo", anti "zoo" groups formed. And I don´t even mention the fact that most scientists are pretty unanimously declaring "zoophilia" being against animal welfare. But you surely will pull out your usual defensive mechanisms, everyone else is a hater, a "zoophobe", bigoted, uninformed, dumb, retarded or whatever insult you can come up with. Funny though that I am not proposing a war on zoos like Pepe, but actual compromises with society. I still am baffled how anyone with a fuctioning brain could not refer to the last decades as the failing decades"...or can you give me an example, even a single one where zoophiles actually won something? No, we experienced setback over setback...the situation for each and every one of us worsening. Are you really so detached from reality to not realise this?

At least I am searching for ways that would allow finding compromises with society. All you have to offer is your cloud castles of "free sex with animals". If you are indeed as convinced of the inherent harmlessness of zoophilia, then why don´t you go public? To my knowledge, you´re the one with the least to lose in here...so, what exactly keeps you from actually filling your words with life? Oh, I see:  it´s so easy to demand when you´re sitting behind a keyboard, in the cosyness of your home.A keyboard warrior. All you can do is complain, whine...and everyone is responsible, everyone but you. Sorry, but your dream world in which fucking animals is "normal" won´t happen...and as long as you are denying this simple fact, voluntarily rejecting every justified criticism of zoophilia, you will be sitting on the loser branch. Freedom is not won by stubbornly hitting one´s head against an impenetrable wall, it is won by negotiation with society (that WILL demand some sacrifices from OUR side) and supporting the ones who are using their intelligence to try and find holes in that impenetrable wall. What has your stubborn , incorrigible weltbild brought us so far? Let´s see: laws, anti groups, hysteria and negative attention....."Well, dammit, I´ve cut this rope three times now ...and it still is too short!" *gosh*

"Who wants change?!?" 

"WE do!"

"Who wants TO change?!?"

*sounds of bushweed tumbling through the screen*

You are part of the problem, Rannoch...not part of the solution.

Edited by 30-30

Share this post


Link to post
30-30    21
8 hours ago, caikgoch said:

I do see at least one positive in today's situation.     We are currently lacking the "joyous sociopath" half of the madness.

*cough cough* Aluzky *cough cough* ;)

Share this post


Link to post
caikgoch    34
1 hour ago, 30-30 said:

*cough cough* Aluzky *cough cough* ;)

And that just shows how little you actually understand.

Some day I hope you grow up and come to understand that the world is full of people with more experience and education than you.        No matter how wonderful any given individual is there are just too many subjects for them to expert in everything.

I am curious though, just where did you get this fascination with "free sex with animals"?        You seem to be the only one talking about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Rannoch    26
8 hours ago, 30-30 said:

So, criticism of our own failed conceptions and expectations is a "destructive path", Rannoch?

 

No, but paths are linear, and following your path to it's logical conclusion would be highly destructive.

 

Quote

Why don´t you declare me to a suppressive person like your similar minded cultists at Scientology usually do when confronted with criticism of their "superior" fairy tale agenda? 

 

Uh, how about no and never?

Anyways, cults are usually exclusive.  I'm inclusive.

Quote

Rannoch, those people are the reason why Trump is your president now.

Quit pretending you know why Trump is our president.  You're in Germany, for pete sake.  You have very little experience with the issue.

 

Quote

it is exactly this egotistical way of thinking, this "the world should be complying to all MY viewpoints or else, it is unjust"...this has nothing else in mind but absolution of any responsibility.

Hate to break it to you dude, but this is exactly how you come across.

Quote

You are part of the problem, Rannoch...not part of the solution.

 

That's gold, considering who we are talking about in this thread, and how he said almost the exact same thing to me before he went apeshit and caused 90% of our present issues trying to "improve our online image" via selective culling.

You know, I still have Randy's email and am probably one of the few who still maintains a (very cautious and mostly not used) open line with him, and for whatever it's worth (not much I imagine) he deeply regrets what he did.  Maybe you should take a lesson from that before you get to the end of your path, too.

Edited by Rannoch

Share this post


Link to post
farellfoxx    5
On 11/29/2017 at 1:50 AM, 30-30 said:

- I have to ask you whether the deeds of Joe Arpaio, one single man constantly stepping over the legal line, are a reason to abolish all police.-

I don't know, Joe Arpaio makes my life really hard; even after he left his position. I've never hated a Policeman more in my life. He screwed AZ over bad.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×