“Sleeping Dogs Lie”
Filed under: Eros - May 7, 2007 @ 6:27 amUsually you see a movie and you either love it or hate it. Like Requiem for a Dream for example. I actually liked that movie. I’m sure many people were disturbed by the “Ass to ass!” scene with Jennifer Connelly, but that’s my idea of a good time. But man that infected brachial artery - that was all kinds of gross! Not sure if I can give blood this month…OK, back on topic.
I saw this movie called Sleeping Dogs Lie and loved it and hated it. But mostly hated it. Here’s why:
I loved it because:
- It broached a taboo topic for a romantic comedy - bestiality. It’s about a woman who blows a dog once, years ago, and this gets leaked to her fiance and family and all hell breaks lose. No one can look at her the same, she’s called a dirty whore, etc.
- It pointed out that we all have at least one deep dark secret we’re ashamed to reveal.
- It had some unexpected twists and turns - these days I definitely admire a movie that isn’t fucking predictable.
I hated it because
- This annoying French music played throughout the movie.
- The acting was lame at times.
- I hate romantic comedies even when they deal with taboo sex.
- A guy felt compelled to throw away all his porn because the woman he wanted to be with thought it was “gross.”
- The moral of the story was that we should keep our sex secrets secret in order to have successful close relationships. UGH!
That goes against my big mission to be open and honest and ‘fess up our fantasies! Cuz if everyone comes clean, then no one should feel ashamed. Though I do understand the stignma of being different…and how stupid people can be.
One time I told a guy friend about another guy friend who had a foot fetish, and the “normal” guy friend had this reaction: “YUCK toe sucking freak!”
So then I responded with, “Well, I love to suck cock, do you have a problem with that?” And of course he said no, I could suck his cock anytime.
But c’mon now, what’s the difference?! One body part even has a pisshole and it’s totally cool to put your mouth on that, but not toes? Regardless, it ain’t gonna happen.
May 7th, 2007 at 7:51 am
The problem with treating everything as ok or nothin is taboo is that then there becomes no standard of decency or civility. Society just becomes one lump of mass excrement where everyones is afraid to stand up for something for fear of offending someone else…oops, I guess we’re already there.
I mean c’mon, blowing a dog is wrong let’s not kid oursleves into thinking we shouldn’t judge someone for beastiality. It’s wrong, plain and simple. Maybe just as wrong as French music…unless it’s the soundtrack from Amelie. (I’ll admit I loved that movie.)
May 7th, 2007 at 8:23 am
Thanks for the good points.
1. I think causing others to suffer is wrong, so I think any sex act that hurts someone else is wrong. I think fantasizing about taboo sex acts (incest, rape, etc.) is OK, and I also think that it’s OK to act them out in a safe context like role playing.
2. I loved Amelie too, and that music made total sense in the context of that movie. But transplant that soundtrack to a film that takes place in California = me suffering, proving that you can cause suffering in a variety of ways, not just sexually.
May 7th, 2007 at 8:23 am
Bet the dog didn’t think it was so wrong.
Animal Abuse? Hardly. Which is the greater sin? Orally pleasuring a horny dog or looking down your nose at other? Judge not.
May 7th, 2007 at 9:02 am
Sorry, I think doing a dog is gross. It feels icky since dogs are not intelligent creatures and can’t really consent.
May 7th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Of course it’s icky and gross to most. The dog demonstrates consensuality by its behavior and assuming it is adult(3 in dog years?),the point is that kinks we can relate to we think of as fetishes but those we ourselves aren’t into we condemn as perversions. Now, HOMOSEXUAL bestiality, that would be just TOO gross and icky. Sardonic emoticon.
May 7th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
for a well-thought out argument, see:
http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/2001—-.htm
think about the fact that the dogs will hump us for sexual gratification, so how is it wrong that we might want to “hump” them? It might feel wrong, but if the animal isn’t being exploited, and seems to be enjoying it, would that not be considered some sort of consent?
NOT that I’m really advocating this. But I think we need to offer arguments that progress beyond it’s wrong because it’s icky.
May 7th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
“I mean c’mon, blowing a dog is wrong let’s not kid oursleves into thinking we shouldn’t judge someone for beastiality. It’s wrong, plain and simple.”
Rtist, I’ve enjoyed some of your comments in the past, but you aren’t saying anything here. By that, I mean that there is no reason given other than the circular, “It’s wrong because it’s wrong.” Here are some of my personal non-circular comments:
Blowing a dog is peculiar because I don’t see it very often.
Blowing a dog is something I don’t care to do because I generally prefer my mouth to be cock-free (dog or otherwise).
For someone else [male or female...sorry Dr. Bob--insert equally sardonic emoticon] to blow a dog doesn’t bother me at all because it doesn’t affect me. I’m not going to, for instance, be nervous that it might turn me on so much that I’ll start dreaming about Rover’s glistening, erect phallus.
By the way, BK, great topic!
May 8th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Everyone loves a B.O.B. Bitches On Bitches Babe On Babe
Our culture is more comfortable with girl on girl action. Male on Male homosexuality, interspecies or not, is disturbing at the same time every media outlet loves a girl on girl scene.
The reason is simple physics. Think of the symbols for male and female. The female circle has an upside down cross at the bottom. The female yin is grounded into the earth. The male yang circle has a pointed spear. It is easier for the grounded positive energy of yin to comingle with both charges while the negatively charged electrons of the yang naturally repel each other. The disassociation of the unitary and the functional antithesis and reunification of the disassociated is the fundamental law of the Universe.
May 9th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
I am not sure I could handle knowing my partner had participated in bestiality either. All the same, honesty should always be a priority in a relationship. Did the guy ever forgive her for her tryst?
May 9th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Ass to ass was my favorite scene in Requiem, but I think it was a body double and not Jennifer Connelly, which ruined my fantasy… temporarily.
The question that I can’t believe hasn’t been asked… Did the girl spit or swallow? Do I have to watch the movie to find out?
Speaking of beastiality… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf3p1mXHfqY
May 10th, 2007 at 10:58 am
the http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/2001—-.htm link was 404. You must be referring to David Singer a sophist professor that has perverted Darwin and logic into arguments that favor animal rights and disdain human rights, particularly disabled rights. Much of his precepts were first formulated in Germany in the ’30’s. He once answered a question,”If a baby and a dog were drowning and you could save just one, which should be saved.” The professor quickly said that if the baby were defective, as in Down’s Sydrome,and the dog of superior stock he would save the dog. I sited Coach Gene Stallings book,ANOTHER SEASON: A COACH’S STORY OF RAISING AN EXCEPTIONAL SON. Mr. Stalling’s son had Down’s. At first he was tempted to end his suffering soon after birth. But, the child grew up to be an inspiration and beloved by all. So I restated the proposition, “If the drowning victims were a baby with Down’s and a college professor, which should be save?” It the child brought love and respect and improved the life of those around it, and the professor taught a vile, dehumanizing philosophy that once before begat man’s darkest hour… I would definitely save the baby.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
I apologize about that faulty link, Dr. S.O.B.- you can look at http://www.utilitarian.net/singer and scroll down to the article on “heavy petting” if you are interested in an rational,open-minded debate about bestiality. Judging from your disjointed and jumbled remarks, I suspect you have already made up your mind about a lot of things, and have no desire to read anything that might persuade you against your rigid, antiquated, and provincial beliefs.
May 12th, 2007 at 5:05 am
This is turning into a dog fucking orgy. Such passion, such controversy! It’s kindof turning me on.