Re: zoosexual cave art?

Gil Hardwick (
Tue, 02 May 1995 02:17:29 GMT

In article <>, Stephen Wray ( writes:
>I'm primarily interested in philosophy of mind -- cognitive science etc.
>The way that people in society view their relationship with animals is
>relevent to my research interests.

Well, now that you explain what it is you want to know more fully,
perhaps we can help after all.

Why did you limit your enquiry to sexual relationships only? Surely
that is the very least interest humans have in animals.

If you want to expand your enquiry to *social* relationships, on the
other hand, why, the field is just enormous. I think we had a thread
here long ago on pets, is that right Cameron?

Have a good look into the provision of food for others, including the
exchange of body fluids (breast milk in particular, but also do not
neglect to take semen into your account) as representing transfer of
part of a person's spirit into the recipient, to become one with them.

Follow that enquiry along a bit further to include pups and piglets
being suckled by human mothers, for example.

>I do not want articles from Australians about New Zealanders and sheep -- I
>am not a New Zealander, I just live here. My interest in this is neither
>fetishistic nor humerous.

Ah, we all take time out for a bit of fun here, else it just gets far
too boring. And far too heavy . . .

He who refuses to qualify data is doomed to rant.
+61 97 53 3270