@DrasticDreamer Funny, your moral outrage at this question got me thinking about our whole position on informed consent. Now I know it won’t make any difference to some, but I am not arguing for any change in existing law regarding human/animal relations. I haven’t the slightest interest in getting it on with any animal. But in truth, animals are just as capable of giving their own brand of informed consent with their own species as are humans. And what we call rape, forced sex without the consent of one partner, happens among animals just as it does among humans.
Certain animals that have been trained for sexual performances do appear to enjoy their work. It sure looks like consent. Of course, we outlaw sex with young children and humans of diminished mental capacity because even through they may enjoy the act and willingly participate, they can’t grasp all the implications such as pregnancy, moral opprobrium of their society and the risk of STDs.
But in the case of a man and a sheep, or a woman and a dog, are those risks in operation for the animal? There is zero risk of pregnancy. Society may disapprove, but the animal won’t know or care, so it won’t be hurt by such moral outrage. And there are scant few diseases that affect both species—so even the STD risk is quite small.
I am guessing our knee-jerk reaction to human inter-species sex comes from our tendency to anthropomorphize the animal involved and not from our having weighed the moral damage the act causes.