Thread by @KometSF

1/14 A pattern y'all might start to notice when debating with anti-zoos is their habit often shifting the goalpost almost every time they say something. This common for people who don't argue based on knowledge or evidence but based on their ideology.
A thread:
#zoophilia

Here is an example for this "shifting the goalpost" can look like. Does it make it less of a "no" that the mare give the "no" to a stallion instead of a human? Not at all. In fact it is such an universal "no" that all animals (including humans) can understand it very easily.

So of course I could pick up the stick and go on and show them other videos where horses kick humans (like this one: ). But that would lead to me chasing the goal post. They would say "but that was an accident", "but that was an reaction to violence", etc.

They will keep ignoring the fact, that these are all examples for an animal saying "no" in a very universal, unambigous way and that their first claim was just wrong. They even displayed that they actually don't know jack about animals.

5/15 However, people arguing this way aren't interested in enlightenment or other progressive things. They are invested in defending their ideology and part of that is that humans are not seen as animals but "above" them in some weird way.

And their ideology really is endangered. Accepting animals as equal(!) living beings has fundamental consequences on how your evaluate your current lifestyle. It affects what you eat (no more meat!), what you wear (no more leather!), how you do science (no more experiments!)

It also sheds a new light on sports that involve animals like horse racing, dog racing, dog dancing, etc.. They really need to be reconsidered bc there is a lot of animal suffering in those sports (like the "Rollkur" in dressage riding).

It also sheds a new light on how to you treat the animal(s) living in your house. You can't just "fix" (hate tat word) an equal animal just because their sexuality leads to behaviour that annoys you. You have no moral right to do such a horrible thing.

You may even have to consider to allow the animal some sexual release, when you treat them as equal. And that is definitely not part of why they bought their animal. Many want to use(!) them as a child replacement, so they disrespectfully treat them like children.

10/14 It also sheds a new light on animal breeding. There is so much torture breeding out there, where dogs are selectively bred to fit into the Child scheme visually. Dogs like the french bulldog have a difficult time breathing because of their short nose.

But people like those anti-zoos find them cute, because they fulfill the child scheme, and they don't care that their dogs' rattling is actually them being tortured their whole life. It's the human desire to have a child replacement that leads to this torture.

So you can see that there are high stakes for those anti-zoos. They may see them as "animal rights activists" when in fact they participate in structures that torture animals. They want to see themselves as "the good guys" when in fact they are part of the problem.

Only if they can defend their ideology that allows them to ignore all this suffering, is that they can keep up their self image. Otherwise all this will fall apart. Thus they aren't interested in actually protecting animals. All they protect is their ideology.

14/14 So in a debate they shift the goalpost as soon as they are disproved in order to not acknowledge this and in order to not having to question their ideology and how they see themselves.