OKLAHOMA CITY, July 22, 2008
Dogs Trained For Bestiality Get Reprieve
Animal Sanctuary To Accept 2 Canines Allegedly Taped Having Sex With Female Owner
-
(CBS/iStockphoto)
-
Section Strange News Weird events, odd people and more peculiar happenings.
A mixed breed and a Labrador, formerly owned by Diane Sue Whalen of Tulsa County, have been accepted by the Best Friends Animal Society in Kanab, Utah, said Barbara Williamson, spokeswoman for the animal sanctuary.
The dogs - named Lucky and Buddy - will be taken to the no-kill sanctuary next month.
Whalen, 54, and Donald Roy Seigfried, 55, were charged with felony crimes against nature after Whalen's adult son found more than 150 tapes of his mother performing sex acts with her dogs and a blue heeler owned by Seigfried. Seigfried was accused of filming the acts.
The dogs were placed in the Tulsa Animal Shelter following the arrests. While Whalen relinquished custody of her dogs, Seigfried is fighting for ownership of the blue heeler, named Merlin.
Earlier this month, a judge ordered that the dogs be examined by a veterinarian and found suitable for adoption before being placed in homes. Both of Whalen's dogs have been deemed adoptable.
The dogs were neutered at a Tulsa veterinary clinic. Jamee Suarez, president and founder of the Oklahoma Alliance for Animals, said the dogs are healthy and are recovering from their surgeries.
The Oklahoma Alliance for Animals is a nonprofit organization that works with the Tulsa County sheriff's office on cases involving animal cruelty.
Volunteers for the organization will drive the dogs more than 1,000 miles to the animal sanctuary in Utah. Once there, the dogs will become candidates for adoption.
"Each dog (at the sanctuary) is treated as an individual," said Williamson, the sanctuary spokeswoman. "We felt we could help these dogs."
A deputy who investigated the case had recommended that the dogs be euthanized and wrote in court affidavits that they had been trained to rape.
Williamson said euthanizing the dogs would have been "the easy thing to do."
"These dogs are totally victims," she said.
The sanctuary has room for 2,000 animals, mostly dogs and cats. Williamson said there are that many "urgent pleas" every month asking the shelter to take in animals.
Animals that are not adopted live permanently at the sanctuary.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From U.S.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 52 CommentsAbout time media and law got the terminology right, this, for certain, was zoophilia or bestiality.
But you don't say?
Is this an official report by CBSNEWS or a copy from another news network?
Here's the terms...
#Zoophile: - Someone with a strong, loving, affectional, bonding relationship with a non-human/non-same-species, species.
*Affectional Zoophile - Someone with zoophilia, with near enough like any human-human romantic (as in sweethearts, not golddiggers (unlike the world today)) relationship.
*Fantasy Zoophile - Someone with Affectional Zoophilia, but who also fantasises/dreams about having sex with their partner, but dares not resort to such a deep affection because of worries that they'd lose their beloved, and/or get a criminal charge for having sex with them, and being called a perverted 'bestialist' (even though they aren't).
*Erotic Zoophilia - Someone who used to have Fantastical Zoophilia, but now actually shares their carnal passions, in hope that their non-human animal sex partner will have pleasure, and sex is used for showing how much the two different species love each other.
#Bestialist: - Someone who is a desperate/coercive/fantastical zoosexual.
*Mild Bestialist: - Someone who has sex with an animals, ISN'T coercive, but ('may') have/has a remote relationship with someone else's animals.
**Fence Hopper - A Mild Bestialist who has a sexual and/or remote romantic relationship with someone else's animal(s), or a one/few-times fling; trespassing sometimes happens, and having no relationship affects the animal, and hence, the fence-hopper may have coerced the animals into have sex with the fence hopper, and could potentially psychologically/physically harm the animal.
**Polygamous Mild Bestialist - A Mild Bestialist who has sex with more than one animals, perhaps originating from a fantasy (hence may be due to a mental health problem), even if the animals experience pleasure, and aren't harmed, it is wrong to have favourtism, and it can affect the animals psychologically/physically.
*True Bestialist - Someone who has sex with an animals, IS coercive, but ('may') have/has a remote relationship with someone else's animals; it feature all the subcategories of Mild Bestiality, but coercion takes place, and romance is less likely, and desperation is more.
#Zoosadist: - Someone who has sex with, and harms animals, via the use of brutal coercion and/or submissive, or non-sexual sadism.
*Non-Zoosexual Zoosadist - Someone who hurts animals for self-gratification, sexual or not, and is hence a sadist; and likes to dominate, but does not have sexual intercourse with his/her victims.
*Brutal Biastophilic Bestialist - Someone who hurts animals so they submiss to forced sexual activity, so they can 'have their way with it'; perhaps because they are very desperate because of the inavailablity of the 'preferred sexual object', 'zoosexual', 'human' or 'anything', or just likes to have power over potentially 'lesser beings'.
#Zoosexual: - A zoophile, bestialist, or zoosadist.
Note: Bestialists sometimes sedate their animals, in order to avoid the need of committing zoosadism; some zoosadist use sedation to calm the animals down, before beating them and sexually interfering.
Bestiality and zoosadism are both evil; zoophilia is genuine, and brought down by these horrible counterparts, because they have sex with animals, too.
People often say 'zoophiles' are 'mentally ill'; and they come into conversation and make expletive and insulting remarks; what happens if they are 'mentally ill' (which has been proven wrong in most, if not all cases), surely those 'anti-zoos' are just bullying them, and making them feel worse, no?
Anti-zoosexuals do seem to judge to conclusions that all zoosexuals are the same people, even when one rapes/harms, and the other doesn't.
That's like calling all non-rapist people in a sexuality, that isn't your own, 'rapists', even though they aren't all.
And I can reassure you, there's a lot more zoophiles out there (not all true zoophiles, but are there sweethearted humans, in this money-based world, anymore? At least they don't hurt/coerce their animals!), than there are bestialists and zoosadists.
And there are a lot more non-zoosexual zoosadists, than zoosexual, the simple reason being, most zoosadists genuinely hate animals so much, they'd rather beat them, than give them any form of pleasure.
Thanks for reading my comments.
I have much, much more to say!
Your sick! Sounds like you like to **** aminals too. Wish I could turn you in!
What is the world coming to? Humans are the deadliest of animals..
Before you say anything, this is my line of research. And you can check my social network profile to see I'm more than a sexologist exploring zoophilia, I'm also a technologist and philosopher, and I most certainly am non-zoosexual.
...At least someone got the wording right for a change.
Even realist, Wikipedia and Wiktionary have got their facts right; and official documents have, as the references, obviously.
Posted by tmittelstaed at 9:39 PM : Jun 3, 2009
You did. Does that make you a fool too? LOL
How do they think dogs exist right now; by being trained to have sex?
They'd have sex with anything that moves and 'fits', let alone 'humans'.
Coercion is natural in all animals, anyway.
At least zoosexuals can decide to stop coercing/harming their non-human mates.
Yes, other animals can decide, too.
True zoophiles are losing out, thanks to its desperate, evil, and self-gratifying counterparts, bestiality and zoosadist.
Thanks for reading my comments.
the difference here is LIBERAL MEDIA PROMOTES these kind of sick and twisted behaviour...
Go back to letting talk radio do your thinking for you sir...it''s probably better off that way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ulfvitr at 05:54 PM : Jul 23, 2008
+ report abuse
and may i remind you that se x with children and same se x IS NOTHING NEW WITH LIBERALS..as a matter of fact that is such a norm ITS ALREADY ACCEPTED..
the difference here is LIBERAL MEDIA PROMOTES these kind of sick and twisted behaviour...
In every state in the USA, and smaller country, there is at least one case of bestiality/zoophilia/zoosadism 'criminal charges'; but there are millions of zoosexuals out there, that is what I call a norm.
I mean 1,000,000/6,740,000,000 humans? That's an awful a lot of zoosexuals; and that's just the active members of the online zoosexual communities.
It's rare in the news, because they like to keep their heads down in fear they'll lose their non-human animal partner, be called perverts, or face a criminal charge - lover, rapist, or sadist, it doesn't matter.
But still, the true loving zoophiles are not bad.
Posted by libsluv2spit at 06:07 PM : Jul 22, 2008
Because we all know that perversion is limited to liberals. I mean the Priest *** scandals, the recent congressional same *** / airport scandals, Haggard and such are all examples of liberal perversion..... oh wait...
May I ask, how does one train dogs to do something already natural to them?
Not all zoosexuals can afford to train dogs in such away, so it is a load of rubbish.
Dogs are hedonistic species and would love to have sex with anything that moves, if it is bent over, and waiting to be 'penetrated'; humans make the perfect level and posture when bent over, as does a female dog; that's why they are successful at breeding, - because the females are at the right height position for males (just so are humans); its nothing to do with any 'nature'. Everything you see is successful, only because 'it comes together'; I'm sure if sex didn't exist, you'd soon find something else to moan about, right?
But how does one castrate a pre-pubescent?
The great country you people have turned America into. You must be so proud, you bootlickers probably can''t wait for the, soon to be, mandatory anal probe(in the name of fighting terrorism, of course).
Obama says, 'no torture'.
Cowpoke ('kaw` powk): A hired hand who tends cattle and performs other duties on horseback
*************************************************
That has got to be the most ignorant statement I have ever hear issued from a human mouth. This guy shouldn''t be anywhere near law enforcement, let alone wearing a badge. What an idiot.
I'm sure everyone would enjoy to be euthanized, right?
The dogs were the victims, if zoosexual rape did take place.
Why don't we castrate/euthanize all 'victims', instead of the criminals?
How does a dog get trained to do natural things, anyway?
I bet they meant puppy training, right?
Because, we actually DO train humans as well.
You do realise most zoosexuals can't afford training dogs?
Hey, what about those who hurt/abuse animals and don't even think about giving them pleasure (because they like to give them pain)?
What about the meat industry?
Would an animal be better exploring sexual pleasures, or being hurt and cut into little pieces, so humans can enjoy the meaty taste?
Where in an animal's genes does it say 'you must have sex with animals the same species'? Surely, when one gets an erection (because of testosterone), there's not many other places you can put that 'lunging prod' into, but any species' orifice; and a bent over human/dog, seems to be the perfect solution for fulfilling such a desire, right?
I thought humans liked to be 'seperate' from 'the animals' and 'nature'; and yet it is a 'crime against nature'!
Why is there so many contradiction in the anti-zoo's words?
'Evolution', 'next generation', who gives a damn about 'the next generation', ok, you can procreate and concept the latest member of your species, but if you fall in love with any species, human or not, you want to spend the rest of your life with them; and to give 'pleasure' to each other, to show how much you love each other, you resort to affection, and the most consensual, sensual affection, is sex.
Sex is pleasure, not harm.
There are those who are so desperate, they coerce / abduct (/fence-hop) / explore, whoever they can find, that's called 'bestiality', and it often feature 'rape'; and even its brutal counterpart, 'zoosadism'.
But there are also those who love the animal, the 'zoophile'.
You may not realise, but if you find a book about a '(wo)man and his/her dog', in the 'romance' section of a library, you're most likely going to read a book about a zoophile, even if sexuality is not experienced.
A 'zoophile' is someone who has strong, emotional bonds with an animal, and hence is in a relationship.
There are three levels of zoophilia, they are the following...
1. Affectional Zoophilia (deep love, loving affection).
2. Fantasy Zoophilia (deep love, loving affection, sexual attraction, sexual fantasy).
3. Erotic Zoophilia (deep love, loving affection, sexual attraction, sexual fantasy, sexual fondness, sexual intercourse).
Zoophiles experience such a strong bond, they resort to affection, they thrive on giving pleasure to their beloved partner, whom happens to be non-human, and the ultimate way of giving their mate affection, is pleasure, and pleasure shows show much the zoophile loves their animal mate, and the ultimate form of giving someone affectional pleasure, is sex.
Zoophiles don't coerce their animals, they love them so much they wouldn't even dare thinking of forcing or harming them; would you do it to your spouse, if you love them? No, you wouldn't. And zoophiles feel the same.
The trouble is, there a lot of desperate people out there, who coerce and hurt animals for sexual self-gratification, and perhaps even children or mentally ill (because they are perhaps so ugly or unliked, no normal, adult human would have sex with them); so they resort to an 'available' sex partner, and that is normally 'non-human animals', who are easy to rape, if not aggressive, however, I have a reason to believe a lot of vicious animals are caused by sadistic abuse, sadistic or not. We name those who rape, 'bestialists', and those who brutally rape, 'zoosadist'; they aren't nice people, may be that's why such rapists are attracted to animals and children, because they are easier to force by harm, than a adult human is; I think the phrase 'pick on someone your own size', comes to mind.
These 'true zoophiles', out there, with romantic, relationships with their animals, are perfectly innocent; just because they like to give the animal a little bit more extra pleasure than the average belly-rub, puts them on the same level as rapists.
Well, there are non-zoosexual zoosadists; and there are rapists who rape humans.
Rape and harm should be banned, not sexuality; because sexuality is more likely to stem from love, not sexual coercion.
Whatever you want to choose or think, it's up to you.
But it's about time you anti-zoos kept your opinions to yourselves, and drop the books of fiction, who solely follow as historical religion.
And finally realise you a succumbing to the terrorists, and disabling the freedoms of those who truly only have sex with animals to give pleasure to their beloved non-human mates, not harm.
Thank you for reading my comments.
none.
where did I say that I had some long line of women wanting me?
and I''m "one sad dude" because why? I find humor in the ridiculous things other people do?
what''s the matter? you can''t handle it when others don''t agree with your hatred?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 52 Comments