/jp/ - Otaku Culture

Cute.

I love birds

My bird doesn't do that, what the hell /jp/?

>>11262101
have tried turning it on and off?

Almost enough to make me regret getting a cat instead of a bird. Almost.

>>11262136
It's ok kitty can get one for you!

god i hate birds

i had a conure when i was a kid and all it did was shit everywhere. one day the hot water heater blew up and made the house stink of fumes and killed that fucker though. what a terrible "pet" it was.

Then there is the prohibition of realistically depicting sex with an animal. The law does not care whether the animal wanted sex. I've read that male dolphins try to have sex with humans, and female apes sollicit sex from humans. What is wrong with giving them what they want, if that's what turns you on, or even just to gratify them?

But this law is not concerned with protecting animals, since it does not care whether the animal really had sex, or really existed at all. It only panders to the prejudice of censors.

A parrot once had sex with me. I did not recognize the act as sex until it was explained to me afterward, but being stroked by his soft feathers was so pleasurable that I yearn for another chance. I have a photo of that act; should I go to prison for it?

Perhaps I am spared because this photo isn't "disgusting", but "disgusting" is a subjective matter; we must not imprison people merely because someone feels disgusted. I find the sight of wounds disgusting; fortunately surgeons do not. Maybe there is someone who considers it disgusting for a parrot to have sex with a human. Or for a dolphin or tiger to have sex with a human. So what? Others feel that all sex is disgusting.

Threatening people with death or injury is a very bad thing, but violence is no less bad for being nonsexual. Is it worse to shoot someone while stroking that person's genitals than to shoot someone from a few feet away? If I were going to be the victim, and I were invited to choose one or the other, I would choose whichever one gave me the best chance to escape.

But since the law doesn't care whether a real human was really threatened with harm, it is not really concerned about our safety from violence, any more than it is concerned with avoiding suffering for corpses or animals. It is only prejudice, taking a form that can ruin people's lives.

>>11262162
>Is it worse to shoot someone while stroking that person's genitals than to shoot someone from a few feet away?
You lost me.

>>11262162
Glorious Stallman, why can't he be the president of the world?

>>11262146
Owned that little shit so hard.

RIP my cockatiel.
Parrots are awesome. I'll never understand why people prefer dogs and cats over them.