From the Archives: Her Fiancé Is Into Dog-on-Girl Porn—Should She Marry Him Anyway?

Comments

1

Fuck no.

Actually, I take that back, if you need to even ask, you deserve him.

2

I suggest getting Dr. Laura's take on the matter.

3

I wonder if DDS wants to have puppies one day?

4

Eww

5

I wish these re-posts came with updates on what ended up happening.

6

DTDFA

7

🤮

8

Oh man do I want an update on this one!

9

I like big mutts and I cannot lie...

10

@4: Autocorrect keeps trying to make that "ewe"

11

The writer seems ultra GGG when things are extreme it's not a good thing.

12

Who let the dogs out? Bark like a dog. Doing it doggie style. Givin’ the dog a bone. Who’s a good boy?

Before the ick’kicked in , i’d pee myself laughing. How can you keep a straight face while the guy is telling you this?

Tell him you’re into rottweilers sucking his dick and want to see that. See how game he is.

13

No LW, don’t marry him, he sounds gross.

14

LW, It all depends. Is his dog hot?

Sorry. I suspect that this guy has learned to live with the fact that (except for that one girlfriend) this is going to remain a fantasy. If so, I really see not much harm in playing along with his fantasy and then the two of them having vanilla (human on human) sex.

Assuming, of course, that the porn involves willing dogs taking the initiative and I suspect the guest expert is right that it almost always does, at least with male dogs.

15

LW: Just six words: Call off the wedding and RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

16

"hounding you about it endlessly" - so funny. Archives Dan was not so serious as today and it was often great entertainment reading the advice. Not like nowadays when people send in questions like "is my husband who looks and acts like a man, has a cock and balls, enjoys fucking me (a woman) actually now in fact a lesbian" This kind of thing cannot be seen as funny in any way but answered with the utmost of seriousness.

17

Tell him you would like to see him get railed by a dog and that you scheduled him a rabies shot for next Tuesday at the dog pound. In the mean time read him Clifford Goes to Hollywood.

18

Anyone got any armchair theories on why virtually all of us find this so gross? Dan and many others put it in the same category as incest and scat. It's not too hard to believe that humans have a deeply-wired aversions to poop and inbreeding. But, one could easily imagine a world where sex with animals wasn't a universal taboo - plenty of people do plenty of things to animals that are arguably way worse than the type of porn in this letter. So what is it? The risk of animal-born disease? The fact that we think of animals (especially domesticated ones) as "people" whose consent cannot be meaningfully obtained? Mission creep from all that making fun of (insert name of people from a nearby, sheep-herding, country)?

19

Are you Australian, afreschetta@18, cause I think that’s a joke about NZ, and their many sheep. Or is that a joke about Australia and our many sheep. Maybe it’s a mutual slag off.
No, no theories, and you’re right we do do much worse to animals. We kill and eat them.

20

2CV @12: raw dog.
I would like an update too. I think if she didn't dump him immediately, the relationship stood a good chance of survival so long as he was willing to leave any dog talk as fantasy only. "I've told him that as long as this remains a fantasy, I won't make an issue of it." So did it remain a fantasy or did he push his good fortune and scare her off? Inquiring minds want to know.

21

Afreschetta @18, evopsych logic would dictate that we have a natural aversion to sex with other species because our chromosomes would combine in weird ways.

22

@21 BiDanFan interesting!

@19 LavaGirl I have noticed that people all over the commonwealth love those jokes :D I was thinking you could insert at least Scottish, Welsh, Australian, or New Zealander, and probably more.

23

Afreschetta @22, yes, "Welsh" was the first punchline that popped into my mind!

24

Yes I think I'd like an update on this one too. But I wouldn't want to be the staff member who had to write to DDS and ask if dogs fuck her now. And if they do I don't really want to know, and she probably wouldn't want to say.

We had another letter on this theme a couple years ago IIRC. Along with everything else, I think having a dog fuck it's owner might introduce some general challenges in training the dog. Hell it's difficult enough to train a dog to sit that isn't fucking you.

25

Humans cannot sexual shame animals. It's unlikely without a society around them that even a human could feel shame. So I guess if you're the type that likes to stand still with an orifice available, it's not abuse if your dog starts pumping it's penis in there.

But the real question is, does it really matter if it's abusive?

26

afreschetta @18: I'm not sure why so many in the commentariat find animal love gross, but that's certainly not a universal truth amongst those with access to livestock. Sheep shagging is a thing, and not just in Commonwealth humour!

We commenters are predominantly urban types, I guess. So ewww! But I wonder how much of the squick is because it's dog on girl, rather than boy on sheep/cow/wildebeeste?

27

@25 Sportlandia - Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but isn't it obvious that it matters that something is animal abuse? I'll assert that most people care, to some degree or another, about not abusing animals, even if they might differ greatly on what constitutes abuse.

28

@26 fubar What sort of prevalence are we talking here? I assume there's not a lot of good data, but if I were to go out into the ovine hinterlands, is it like everyone knows the story of the one guy with a taste for wool, or is it like "well, it's pretty convenient so .."?

29

@27 my point is: The question should be, "should you fuck your dog?". I personally think the answer is no regardless of it abuses the dog or not. Imagine fucking a human with the command of the english language (or whatever languages one speaks) of a dog. When the lady decides it's not getting her off, what's she gonna do, ask the dog to hop off? Tell him to slow down the pace? Sorry, he can't hear that. Real life humans have been #metoo'd for less.

30

I didn't see a reminder anywhere, so I hope everyone remembers to "Fuck First"(TM).

31

Oh this guy is definitely going to push for some dog play once the wedding's over.

32

@22, that joke seems to show up about anywhere rural: "_, where the men are men and the sheep are nervous," right?

@31, yeah... either they broke up or she's done a dog by now I think. He was not going to (forgive me) let it lie.

33

fubar @26, as one of the more rural of the assembled, I can add that I assume a large reason for the sheep-fucking jokes (and, probably, whatever sheep-fucking actually happens) is due to...well...how much like human vulvas sheep vulvas look. The resemblance can be slightly unnerving, when you first notice it (and you do, during breeding season, for example; also sheep lift/wiggle their tails when they are happy). I suppose to the right eye, it would be slightly...something else.

34

@33: Also, a sheep would be about the right height off the ground to make it more comfortable/feasible (for the man), and the size of the sheep vagina should be roughly similar enough to accommodate a human penis and feel good to the man.

I cannot believe I'm seriously considering the reasons that men fuck sheep . . . I clearly have had too much coffee today!

35

@33 and you don't need stilts like you do for a cow.

36

Oops, didn't refresh to get @34 on that point.

37

I admit to being entertained back in 2005 when militant anti-abortion extremist and Christian Reconstructionist Neal Horsley told Alan Colmes he had sex with animals including a mule. He had a busy 2010, losing a run for Georgia Governor and getting arrested for a terrorist threat against Elton John.

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=315948
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Horsley
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2005/5/10/113166/-

38

Mtn. Beaver @35, FIFY:

and you don't need stilts like you do for a cow, or so I've heard.

You're welcome.

39

Did anyone see that episode of The Grand Tour? Yes, Colombian donkey sex on a car show on your streaming Service... it was weirdly open and everyday in a way
https://www.reddit.com/r/thegrandtour/comments/an5w0i/clarksons_column_let_me_put_my_ass_on_the_line/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

40

@21 for actual different species chromosomes wouldn't combine at all. things need to be pretty close for mixing, if one could find a neanderthal one might have some success.. Of course horses with donkeys (but not humans) works to a limited degree, sometimes lions and tigers (but NOT bears oh! my!).

It is interesting that this letter if from the archives, if it were from today we could look to the Bible for guidance, e.g. Romans 1:25:
"25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things [Donald Trump] rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. "

Well, if one is going to invoke the bible (even facetiously) , I suppose one cant ignore Leviticus.
While I realize the order of things may have changed during translation, and numerical order may not be too important, still I think it is interesting that Leviticus 20:10 comes before 20:13 then there is 20:14 (just kidding) finally followed by 20:15.

41

@40 "...for actual different species chromosomes wouldn't combine at all..." This is referred to in biology as the biological species concept, and it is far from universally accepted. Under this model (in which a species is defined as a metapopulation that is capable of interbreeding), dogs and wolves and coyotes are all the same species, as they can and do all interbreed to produce viable, fertile offspring. Humans and Neanderthals and Denisovans would also be the same species, since they interbred successfully enough that modern humans still carry their DNA in our genomes (depending on where your ancestors originated -- most people with Neanderthal DNA are of European or Middle Eastern ancestry and most people with Denisovan DNA are of East Asian or Polynesian ancestry). It also makes it impossible to define a species among asexually reproducing organisms.

There are many other ways of defining a species -- by karyotyping, morphology (typological species concept), DNA sequencing (genetic species concept), ecological niche (ecological species concept), evolutionary history (phylogenetic species concept), or behavior, to name a few. Some biologists define a species by a combination of some or all of these things. Then there's the issue of species identification in paleontology, which is a whole other can of worms. Paleontologists often don't identify specimens past the level of genera because it's so hard to distinguish a species and draw lines between one species and another from ancient remains.

Then there's the question of hybridization, hybrid species (which do exist! eg. clymene dolphin; they're much, much more common in plants, though), and the concept of hybrid speciation -- at what point does a population of hybrids become its own species? Is this dependent on whether or not it is continually backcrossing with the parent species?

The only thing anyone seems to agree on is that a species is the basic unit in biology for taxonomic classification. Everything else is a continued debate.

42

The biological community seems to be moving toward the genetic species concept in recent years, though. with DNA barcoding and practices like that.

43

crazy cat dude @40, I've always felt one can ignore Leviticus. It's the story of Moses and Aaron going on a camping trip all by themselves and coming back with a clutch of new mandatory rules to help keep the Israelites in line. It's almost as though someone made it up!

44

@26 fubar: You nailed it. LW's dog-on-girl issue is a major ewww factor for me.

45

I would also love a follow-up on this story!

46

@14: First sentence is gold, out of a bunch of funny responses. Well played.

@18: "Anyone got any armchair theories on why virtually all of us find this so gross?"

Culture - across history and cultures, bestiality has been relatively common and even normalized in some cases (not as sure about zoophilia, since we have much more data about practice than preference, and a fair amount of bestiality historically has been situational). So has incest, for that matter, a fact that casts some degree of doubt on the Westermark hypothesis, though there's at least an evolutionary reason to avoid fucking close family members (not so with non-human animals, especially since inter-species disease transmission is far less common than intra-species transmission).

Without a cultural bias, there's no particular reason to find fucking non-human animals weirder than eating their flesh/excretions/eggs or wearing their skins, and the latter are normalized to the extent that a lot of people react with hostility simply being confronted with the existence of vegetarians and vegans. I suppose there could also be an inherent squick factor related to parasite avoidance - except for the billions of bacteria and mitochondria inside of us that we need to live, and pregnancy (and the sex leading to it), having other living creatures inside of our bodies isn't generally desirable. That may account for less squick attached to the use of inanimate objects or (phallic parts of) plants as sex toys than living animals, though I should also note that livestock intestines and bladders have historically been a common condom material and still are used for a couple of products, so there are a not-insubstantial number of people fucking with animal parts touching their genitals in present times (also consider leather sex gear), though the dead versus living factor would be relevant there.

Anyway, my best estimation ia that it's simply a cultural quirk with no genetic/inherent basis, like not eating insects (which many human cultures do, as do our closest ape relatives).

47

@24: As I understand it, dogs getting sexually aggressive with people who aren't into it is far and away the biggest practical problem with actually fucking dogs, and a good reason to oppose actually doing so even if one doesn't think it's wrong/squicky.

@33: Yes, that and the fact that it has been a relativey common practice in reality. It really wasn't always a joke, rather a recognition of an actual practice. In colonial America, for example, plenty of church records of trials for the sin of lust related to bestiality, which was considered wrong in the same way as any extramarital sex (and sodomy, rape, incest, etc.), all as specific manifestations of the general sin of lust or 'unnatural' sexual behavior.

It's really close to impossible to be an essentialist about most of our cultural practices (including sexual norms) with even a passing familiarity with historical (and even present-day) human cultures, though our cultural myths tend to rely on appeals to nature or gods to justify coercing compliance with them, so essentialism persists.

I don't remember any of the specific compendia of historical and present cultural studies my human sexuality classes used, but I can recommend John D'Emillo and Estelle Feeedman's book "Intimate Matters" for an overview of sexual practices just in the USA, going back to the beginning of European colonization (including those of various indigenous groups, and the political implications of sexuality differences for contact between colonists and indigenous groups).

48

I gather that there was never a followup message from the LW. I hope that she moved on. This kink is a bridge too far for the vast majority of us, Dan included.

49

Reminds me of the time Dan interviewed a man who had sex with horses. Dan asked the man if he preferred having sex with male horses or female horses, and the man got really angry and offended. "Don't be disgusting. Female, of course. I'm not GAY...."

50

@47
Some of the earliest surviving law codes mention laws against bestiality. (Hammurabi's Code explicitly mentions 4 animals humans are not supposed to have sex with -- not sure what that means about other creatures....) That suggests that it was common enough 4000 years ago to have a law against it. In Puritan towns in New England in the 17th century, there were as many people charged with bestiality as there were charged with witchcraft. Their Native American neighbors were completely appalled -- they were amazed that Europeans needed laws against such behavior.

We would not have many of the super-germs we have today without close animal-to-human contact over long periods of time. That includes way too close contact.

Then again, the cattle industry buys and sells bull semen. It's not harvested surgically, the stuff goes through the usual channels, with some human assistance in the collection on some level. Somehow that's perfectly legal, even perfectly "Christian," but isn't that bestiality?

51

Griz is again digging into the Savage Love Archives back to a letter from the late 1990s. This sounds a lot like the LW's fiance, sent in by a guy signing in as "Horny as Hell". HAH was perplexed as to why he could easily gain access to bestiality porn in Amsterdam, Netherlands, in the infamous Red Light District where women got paid highly for engaging in intercourse with canines--but not in Portland (presumably either in Oregon or Maine. The LW did not specify his home state). The closest HAH could get to watching dog-on-woman porn was at an X-rated video rental store, where he could view his favorite fuck act "for a pocketful of quarters" in a special room. He can "watch it there--but can't rent it because the guy at the counter says it's illegal". HAH's apartment building doesn't allow dogs. What to do? Dan called in a panel of three experts: a sex therapist, a veterinarian, and a spokes rep from PETA. Everyone, Dan included, advised HAH not to pursue his kink of watching women fuck dogs here in the United States. The members of the panel had good reasons for HAH to find a healthier kink: the sex therapist advised HAH to think very carefully before proceeding. Is this harming him, the dog--and certainly the woman must be free to have a choice in the matter. The veterinarian was appalled, specifying all the nasty diseases that humans can get from having intercourse with dogs. She also said that if she knew that a dog in her care was being used for sex with humans she would see to it that the animal was removed from the premises. The PETA rep was totally apoplectic, stating that this was something that PETA would be against. Dan's biggest puzzlement was that HAH seemed to believe that his biggest challenge was finding a willing dog. (!!!)
LW, is this man seeking your hand in marriage really HAH 20 years later? I said it in @15 and I'll reiterate: Call off the wedding and RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

52

Tell the boyfriend that this got her thinking, Tell him she has a friend with a Great Dane that she'd really like to see mount him "doggie style". Tell him if he loves her, he'll let the Great Dane deflower his ass and how hot it makes you. See if he's as willing to be a receiver instead of just an observer.

53

Finally someone says what I've been thinking for years: With all this great concern about the dog's welfare, nobody gives a rat's ass about the woman's welfare? I'm with #52.

54

@52 JonBalz: Thank you. Good idea.
@53: I agree with you, too. See my comment @51 about "Horny as Hell", from the SL Archives. That's why I brought it up.

55

@52 JonBalz
Suggesting that was both funny ("doggie style") and a good idea as an experimental conversation.

@53 Alysounn
Oh for pete's sake, everyone" gives a rat's ass about the woman's welfare". That just so obvious there's been nothing to discuss. Whereas the ethical question WRT animals is interesting since some people get sidetracked (by that some people eat animals [which frequently leads to objectifying them as different from humans in unwarranted ways]) into not being concerned about their state of being.