As long as the subject of zoophilia is currently in the spotlight here, let me bring up something that I’ve been pondering for several weeks. In France there is an AIDS awareness campaign out that plays on our societal aversion to the “Ickyness” (to borrow a phrase from Skatje) of sexual contact with animals to make the point that sex can be dangerous.
Obviously the ads would never fly here. The modern fundamentalist religion movement has forcibly dragged the societal acceptance of rational discourse about sex and sexuality far enough into the closet to prevent the ads from ever seeing the light of day on billboards and bus stops. Visual depictions of sexuality on this level are verboten in public due to the appeasement by both our society in general and our government in particular of the medieval false-prudery of a group of people with no connection to reality.
Discussion continues, below the fold.
Setting that aside for the moment however, I’m not sure what to think about this tactic. Though visually graceful and appealing on artistic merit alone, the images are effectively scary. The question becomes “Is that a desirable reaction?” We could also ask, “Is that a goal for which we should be striving in this campaign?”
For starters, I think the images used in this tactic cast the net a bit wide, and don’t specify that the targeted behavior is unprotected sex. They could easily give the impression that they are putting out a message about sex generally. In fact when I first saw the images, my initial thoughts were along the lines of “Holy crap. Could the abstinence-only-sex-is-sinful sycophants sink any lower?” (I admit, my thoughts are often less genteel and generous than my keyboard, as hard as that might be to believe.)
After reading a bit more and looking a little deeper, I realized that this is not at all what it at first appeared to me to be, but rather a campaign that was only colored that way in my mind because of the time and the place wherein I reside. Were there less hysteria over sex here (brought to you by your friendly neighborhood fundy), there would probably not be the knee-jerk reaction that this was yet another crusade against biological reality.
Another thought that comes to mind is that were it not for such hysteria, an intelligent and informed conversation on the merits of this campaign and its reinforcement of zoological “stereotyping” (if I can be allowed a bit of literary license) regarding certain animals might be more towards the top of conversational priorities. What is it that causes the “scariness” of spiders and scorpions (not to mention sharks or octopi)?
What is it about zoophilia that bothers so many of us? Rather than the ridiculous rantings and rhetorical masturbation of the likes of Slimy Sal, it would be interesting to discuss the original issues brought up by Skatje in an intellectual manner, as she had intended.
There are many issues that could and should be discussed about these images, and perhaps we might be able to address some of them here, without the fanatical screeching of the likes of Slimy Salvador Cordova, Asshole of the Year.
From whence came the art: