Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
I would commit necrobestiality for:
$1 4%
$10 0%
$5000 0%
$5000 + legal fees 47%
Fun 47%

Votes: 23


 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
May 26, 2002
Last night, I was pondering something. Something far too deep and meaningful for me to discuss on K5, due to the prudish attitudes there. Every philosophy grapples with the question "What makes a man a man?", but the question "What makes a dead pig a dead pig?" is still unexplored. Hopefully the Adequate will be able to help me gain understanding of this.
We were watching Robert Schimmel on TV last night. He did a quite hilarious routine which included a sketch about a man who had been convicted of "necrobestiality" - in his case, the suspect was discovered attempting sexual intercourse with a dead cat.

So what makes necrobestiality what it is? While gunge involves sex play using food products, it is not considered illegal. It would not be a crime to involve strips of bacon in sex or masturbation, but the intact corpse of a freshly-killed pig would be off-limits. Where is the dividing line?

Suppose you chopped the head off of a dead pig. Would it be legal to involve it in sex play then? Or what if you cleaned and roased a dead cat with Shake N' Bake? Would it become food? I am mystified by this problem. While I considered questioning a local police desk sergeant over the phone (with anonymous precautions taken), it occured to me that perhaps the police are not the correct people to ask. The answer a policeman will give indicates what he will or will not arrest people for - but it is prosecutors and judges who really control the law. However, even legal authorities must turn to philosophy in order to interpret the legal question as to what makes a dead animal a dead animal and not food - and I request your opinion accordingly.


More food for thought (none / 0) (#1)
by First Incision on Sun May 26th, 2002 at 09:11:44 PM PST
What about leather? If Hollywood is being truthful, leather is involved in sex all the time, and no one seems to care.
Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix.

Even more food for thought. (none / 0) (#7)
by hauntedattics on Tue May 28th, 2002 at 02:26:11 PM PST
What about silk? It's a small step from tanned animal skins to insect by-products.

Honey? (none / 0) (#9)
by tkatchev on Tue May 28th, 2002 at 02:44:08 PM PST
Does that mean that "oral sex" is ritualized cannibalism?

Peace and much love...

So you see. (none / 0) (#2)
by tkatchev on Sun May 26th, 2002 at 11:02:37 PM PST
Thus begins the slippery slope down into liberalism.

Peace and much love...

It's a cultural thing. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by SpaceGhoti on Sun May 26th, 2002 at 11:17:08 PM PST
The dividing line between necrobestiality and a food fetish is when an animal is legally considered food. Having sex with a freshly killed pig is necrobestiality, while having sex with kosher bacon is just your personal perversion. Killing a cat or dog for food in the US is considered immoral and cruel, while petting a dog in Cambodia could get you fined for playing with your food.

A troll's true colors.

I knew a guy (none / 0) (#4)
by stud9920 on Mon May 27th, 2002 at 02:15:36 AM PST
... who pretended he was fucking his hamster. He would take the hamster in his hand, and fuck him.

By the way, does anyone remember the gay rabbit rape troll on slashdot ?

No (none / 0) (#5)
by Fon2d2 on Tue May 28th, 2002 at 07:45:42 AM PST
but I did read an incest rabbit troll once.

Hmmm (none / 0) (#6)
by talibanzoo on Tue May 28th, 2002 at 01:57:34 PM PST
Strangely it's just this kind of thought that made me become a vegetarian (I was already a communist atheist, luckily they hadn't invented lunix in those days). It's difficult to draw the line between thick people and some monkeys. Abusive relationships are bad. It's wrong to encourage killing animals just for the sake of cheap thrills. If the creature is alive and well and getting a kick out of it, that's different.

Hold on, did I get this right? (none / 0) (#8)
by tkatchev on Tue May 28th, 2002 at 02:42:51 PM PST
So, if you dope the poor animal up on highly toxic mind-altering drugs, and only then kill it, then the killing is OK?

Peace and much love...


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to