Just when you think it can't get any worse; a documentary on bestiality

[shnarkle]

Flipper meets his match in a tank out in California.

Sorry, I don't remember the title to this film, and it wasn't released for over four or five decades after it was produced. The movie documents a woman living with a dolphin in a tank somewhere in southern California. She engages in consensual sexual relations which is probably going to be the next barrier to be knocked over in the near future. Everything from the majestic oak to the whales of the briny deep will be fair game.

 

[Whateverman]

What exactly are you objecting to?

The existence of bestiality? The existence of this documentary? The moral collapse of western civilization?

If you want to actually discuss what was going through your head when you posted this, we need specifics.

 

[Whateverman]

This appears to be what you were referring to:

How A Science Experiment Led to Sexual Encounters Between a Woman and a Dolphin

A new documentary tells the story of Margaret Howe Lovatt, who in the 1960s took part in a NASA-funded research project, in which she developed an unusual relationship with a dolphin named Peter.

www.theatlantic.com

The article contains adult subject matter, though it's clinical rather than lewd. And TIL a new word: delphinophilia.

Thanks for that

 

[Challenger007]

What exactly are you objecting to?

The existence of bestiality? The existence of this documentary? The moral collapse of western civilization?

If you want to actually discuss what was going through your head when you posted this, we need specifics.

This is a really strange movie, judging by the description. This is either a mental pathology in a person, or is it just some kind of abnormal story. I understand homosexuality, transgender transition. But I don't understand pathological addictions to animals and children.

 

[shnarkle]

This is a really strange movie, judging by the description. This is either a mental pathology in a person, or is it just some kind of abnormal story. I understand homosexuality, transgender transition. But I don't understand pathological addictions to animals and children.

The same rationality that applies to one applies just as equally to the other. it wasn't a docudrama. It was a documentary.

 

[Whateverman]

This is either a mental pathology in a person, or is it just some kind of abnormal story. I understand homosexuality, transgender transition. But I don't understand pathological addictions to animals and children.

The same rationality that applies to one applies just as equally to the other.

It look like you've just said the same rationality in a homosexual person is also found in a person sexually attracted to animals or children.

Please clarify.

 

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Flipper meets his match in a tank out in California.

Sorry, I don't remember the title to this film, and it wasn't released for over four or five decades after it was produced. The movie documents a woman living with a dolphin in a tank somewhere in southern California. She engages in consensual sexual relations which is probably going to be the next barrier to be knocked over in the near future. Everything from the majestic oak to the whales of the briny deep will be fair game.

If this is what I think you are referring to, this was a NASA funded project aimed at teaching dolphins to understand human speech. The volunteer was Margaret Howe Lovatt and she developed a very unusual and close relationship with a male dolphin who was named Peter.

The ethical issues of Dr John Lilly's "research" remain [this included giving these animals LSD] and the close confinement of this one male dolphin who was kept in a confined space with no natural light and fresh air, and no access to other dolphins [these are social animals] led to him effectively committing what we would call "suicide" after he was also removed from Howe Lovatt.

There is a 2014 article on this from The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...-encounters-for-a-woman-and-a-dolphin/372606/ and also from the Guardian in the same year https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/08/the-dolphin-who-loved-me

We have to remember that like humans these cetaceans are highly intelligent, social animals, at the top of their food chain.

 

[shnarkle]

If this is what I think you are referring to, this was a NASA funded project aimed at teaching dolphins to understand human speech. The volunteer was Margaret Howe Lovatt and she developed a very unusual and close relationship with a male dolphin who was named Peter.

The ethical issues of Dr John Lilly's "research" remain [this included giving these animals LSD] and the close confinement of this one male dolphin who was kept in a confined space with no natural light and fresh air, and no access to other dolphins [these are social animals] led to him effectively committing what we would call "suicide" after he was also removed from Howe Lovatt.

There is a 2014 article on this from The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...-encounters-for-a-woman-and-a-dolphin/372606/ and also from the Guardian in the same year https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/08/the-dolphin-who-loved-me

We have to remember that like humans these cetaceans are highly intelligent, social animals, at the top of their food chain.

Yes, that sounds like the same actors. I don't think the documentary was funded by NASA though. I could be wrong, but the impression I got was that it was supposed to be released 50 years ago, but they canned it because it was too controversial. Then about 6 or 7 years ago it popped up again somewhere, I forget the story behind why it was released.

 

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Yes, that sounds like the same actors. I don't think the documentary was funded by NASA though. I could be wrong, but the impression I got was that it was supposed to be released 50 years ago, but they canned it because it was too controversial. Then about 6 or 7 years ago it popped up again somewhere, I forget the story behind why it was released.

The ethical behaviour of Lilly and even Howe Lovatt remains controversial.

 

[shnarkle]

The ethical behaviour of Lilly and even Howe Lovatt remains controversial.

Not for those who are eating up the Hollywood propaganda. There have been a number of movies out that are breaking down that barrier, e.g. Avatar, and I can't remember the name of the one about the woman who falls in love with the aquatic fish/man. She takes him home, and keeps him in her bathtub. I think she even floods her basement apartment etc. See any similarities?

Avatar seems to show some similarities to demon possession as well. Then there are movies that suggest incest, pedophilia, and necrophilia as well, e.g. Big; Rumor Has It, August; Osage County, and the movie about the undertaker's son who revives the dead girl by kissing her corpse.

 

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Not for those who are eating up the Hollywood propaganda.

Is it "propaganda"?

There have been a number of movies out that are breaking down that barrier, e.g. Avatar, and I can't remember the name of the one about the woman who falls in love with the aquatic fish/man. She takes him home, and keeps him in her bathtub. I think she even floods her basement apartment etc. See any similarities?

I have never seen Avatar but The Shape of Water like other films by Guillermo del Toro deals with magic realism. and the blurring of reality and fantasy. If you have seen his films The Devil's Backbone or Pan's Labyrinth you will know to what I am referring

Avatar seems to show some similarities to demon possession as well.

LOL! I doubt it.

I suspect that is a subjective inference which perhaps says more about the mind-set of the person making such an inference than the ideas of James Cameron who wrote and directed.

Then there are movies that suggest incest, pedophilia, and necrophilia as well, e.g. Big; Rumor Has It, August; Osage County, and the movie about the undertaker's son who revives the dead girl by kissing her corpse.

Big is a very amusing film utilising a long-established theme of wishing to be grown up and the problems that the granting of such a wish brings.

This same theme has also been dealt with by various authors. F Anstey's novel from the 1880s, Vice Versa: A Lesson to Fathers deals with the scenario where the son and father are physically swapped but retain their respective attitudes and behaviours. E Nesbit also touches on the same theme in a chapter of her children's book Five Children and It.

I have not seen Rumor Has It but August: Osage County is a film I found grimly dark with, at times, a gallows humour about a dysfunctional family.

Again I suspect that what you have cited as nefarious plot lines is very much "in the eye of the beholder".

 

[The Pixie]

Not for those who are eating up the Hollywood propaganda. There have been a number of movies out that are breaking down that barrier, e.g. Avatar, and I can't remember the name of the one about the woman who falls in love with the aquatic fish/man. She takes him home, and keeps him in her bathtub. I think she even floods her basement apartment etc. See any similarities?

Do you think Lilly and the dolphin were in love?

Surely the moral issue with bestiality is that the animal is not capable of making an informed choice. If the fish-man and his partner were in love and consent adults, where is the moral problem?

Are you familiar with star Trek? Mr Spock has a Vulcan father and human mother, and there are other cross-species relationship across the numerous series. Was that bestiality? Was it morally wrong?

 

[shnarkle]

Is it "propaganda"?

Most definitely.

I have never seen Avatar but The Shape of Water like other films by Guillermo del Toro deals with magic realism. and the blurring of reality and fantasy.

In this case a humanoid fish which is technically a completely different species.

If you have seen his films The Devil's Backbone or Pan's Labyrinth you will know to what I am referring

I'm familiar with them as well. Regardless, the issue of intercourse with the fish man comes up in the movie and is not handled with any tact whatsoever. it's not just bizarre, it's demented.

LOL! I doubt it.

I suspect that is a subjective inference which perhaps says more about the mind-set of the person making such an inference than the ideas of James Cameron who wrote and directed.

The movie deals with people who are literally taking possession of other creatures. Do you think demons find it boring or distasteful to take possession of human beings?

Big is a very amusing film utilising a long-established theme of wishing to be grown up and the problems that the granting of such a wish brings.

Like the advances of adults who have a thing for immature men?

August: Osage County is a film I found grimly dark with, at times, a gallows humour about a dysfunctional family.

I thought it was interesting how the woman in the relationship pointed out that she was sterile which seemed to be the only problem either of them saw as the real issue.

Again I suspect that what you have cited as nefarious plot lines is very much "in the eye of the beholder".

I didn't say they were nefarious. I'm simply pointing out that they are presenting ideas that used to be taboo, but are presented in a way so as to challenge those taboos. Rumor Has it is one in which the audience is tricked into believing that the two characters are in love/lusting for each other because they know they are not engaging in any sexual taboo, only to then discover that they may actually be father and daughter after all. What's so nefarious about the fact that people will do just about anything once arbitrary social barriers are withdrawn or removed? What's so nefarious about entering into another person, and possessing them? What's so nefarious about molesting a corpse? What's so nefarious about having sexual relations with a relative? Absent any moral code, there is nothing nefarious about it. Since when does Hollywood uphold Christian values to begin with? if they can make money at it, then they'll throw their money into the pot, but that alone isn't going to stop them from making movies about incest, pedophilia, etc.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Not for those who are eating up the Hollywood propaganda. There have been a number of movies out that are breaking down that barrier, e.g. Avatar, and I can't remember the name of the one about the woman who falls in love with the aquatic fish/man. She takes him home, and keeps him in her bathtub. I think she even floods her basement apartment etc. See any similarities?

Avatar seems to show some similarities to demon possession as well. Then there are movies that suggest incest, pedophilia, and necrophilia as well, e.g. Big; Rumor Has It, August; Osage County, and the movie about the undertaker's son who revives the dead girl by kissing her corpse.

I've seen "Avatar".
Its a poorly written re-telling of Dances with Wolves, in space.
I suppose that to some, the idea of colonized natives having rights might be "demon possession". Those of us who are not so white, disagree

 

[The Pixie]

I've seen "Avatar".
Its a poorly written re-telling of Dances with Wolves, in space.
I suppose that to some, the idea of colonized natives having rights might be "demon possession". Those of us who are not so white, disagree

I have seen it too, and it was very disappointing given the hype.

When I saw shnarkle's comment, I was dubious, but thinking about, he may have a point. The humans "possess" the avatars.

 

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Most definitely.

On what evidence and reasoning?

In this case a humanoid fish which is technically a completely different species.

It is a fantasy. Folk and fairy tales are populated by humans either being turned into, or falling in love with, other creatures.

Do you consider Hans Christian Anderson's little mermaid to be "a humanoid fish"? What about the folk tales and legends on which ballets like Swan Lake are based?

I'm familiar with them as well.

Then you will understand that your comments concerning The Shape of Water do not accurately represent what is being suggested by the subtext and symbolism of the film. Elisa is found as a child near a river suffering from injuries to her throat. She undertakes her daily routine of sexual pleasure in the bath. She is mute which echoes the little mermaid who sacrifices her voice in order to have feet [become human] so that she may pursue the prince. The same theme appears in the comedy/fantasy movie Splash but Daryl Hannah has to regularly return to water in order to regain her mermaid shape. Elisa is also an outsider who does not fully "belong". Her only friend is a gay man who like herself is something of an outsider and has never come out as gay.

Regardless, the issue of intercourse with the fish man comes up in the movie and is not handled with any tact whatsoever. it's not just bizarre, it's demented.

It is a story in a movie. It is not reality. I would consider it equally "demented" to believe the story that a three day old corpse got up and walked around an area for a while and then went on to cook a barbecue breakfast on the beach for his friends.

The movie deals with people who are literally taking possession of other creatures.

Not dissimilar to Invasion of the Bodysnatchers. However, the subtext of that 1956 movie is Communism.

Do you think demons find it boring or distasteful to take possession of human beings?

I do not believe in demons just as I do not believe in humanoid amphibians or that wicked magicians can turn a princess and her ladies-in-waiting into swans.

However, I do recognise the delights of fantasy and folk tales.

Like the advances of adults who have a thing for immature men?

Define an "adult" and define an "immature man" for the purposes of that remark.

I thought it was interesting how the woman in the relationship pointed out that she was sterile which seemed to be the only problem either of them saw as the real issue.

She does not know her biological relationship to Little Charles at that juncture. I would also remark that it is something of a side plot to the film, and of course echoes the tale of Siegmund and Sieglinde in the Völsunga saga and Poetic Edda [and which is so superbly depicted in Wagner's
Die Walküre].

I didn't say they were nefarious. I'm simply pointing out that they are presenting ideas that used to be taboo, but are presented in a way so as to challenge those taboos.

Exactly as so many films have done.

As a mass medium cinema is an excellent way by which to educate, entertain, and inform.

 

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Do you think Lilly and the dolphin were in love?

Surely the moral issue with bestiality is that the animal is not capable of making an informed choice. If the fish-man and his partner were in love and consent adults, where is the moral problem?

Are you familiar with star Trek? Mr Spock has a Vulcan father and human mother, and there are other cross-species relationship across the numerous series. Was that bestiality? Was it morally wrong?

Given the fixation with zoophilia am I correct in my understanding that this is still legal in some US states?

 

[shnarkle]

On what evidence and reasoning?

I just pointed out a few examples which you basically ignored.

It is a fantasy. Folk and fairy tales are populated by humans either being turned into, or falling in love with, other creatures.

Maybe more examples of bestiality are a good thing then?

Do you consider Hans Christian Anderson's little mermaid to be "a humanoid fish"?

Some sort of hybrid. How do these hybrids come about?

What about the folk tales and legends on which ballets like Swan Lake are based?

what about them?

Then you will understand that your comments concerning The Shape of Water do not accurately represent what is being suggested by the subtext and symbolism of the film.

I'm not denying the subtexts. I'm pointing out that the literal text presents a human being having sexual congress with another species.

Elisa is found as a child near a river suffering from injuries to her throat.

Yet why wait until the end of the film to reveal that she's a fish just like he is? Hmm?

It is a story in a movie.

Thanks for pointing that out. I'm sure there are some who may have needed that pointed out to them.

It is not reality.

Where did I say it was?

I would consider it equally "demented" to believe the story that a three day old corpse got up and walked around an area for a while and then went on to cook a barbecue breakfast on the beach for his friends.

Agreed. So what? You're making my points for me now. Thanks.

Not dissimilar to Invasion of the Bodysnatchers. However, the subtext of that 1956 movie is Communism.

Yep, and back then it was seen as sick as well. It's a horror flick, or didn't you know that?

I do not believe in demons just as I do not believe in humanoid amphibians or that wicked magicians can turn a princess and her ladies-in-waiting into swans.

Yet, you seem to like the idea anyways. To each their own.

Define an "adult" and define an "immature man" for the purposes of that remark.

I am not redefining words. Look them up yourself.

She does not know her biological relationship to Little Charles at that juncture.

I don't know what you're talking about here. That's not the same film I viewed then because he sister asks her if she's aware of the ramifications at which point she reveals that she' s sterile.

I would also remark that it is something of a side plot to the film,

How so? It's right in line with the social taboo, except for the fact that it's discriminatory and prejudicial against those with disabilities.

As a mass medium cinema is an excellent way by which to educate, entertain, and inform.

And yet there isn't much in the way of education at all in these films. Instead they color one's impressions by presenting possible exceptions to the rule.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

I just pointed out a few examples which you basically ignored.

Maybe more examples of bestiality are a good thing then?

Some sort of hybrid. How do these hybrids come about?

what about them?

I'm not denying the subtexts. I'm pointing out that the literal text presents a human being having sexual congress with another species.

Yet why wait until the end of the film to reveal that she's a fish just like he is? Hmm?

Thanks for pointing that out. I'm sure there are some who may have needed that pointed out to them.

Where did I say it was?

Agreed. So what? You're making my points for me now. Thanks.

Yep, and back then it was seen as sick as well. It's a horror flick, or didn't you know that?

Yet, you seem to like the idea anyways. To each their own.

I am not redefining words. Look them up yourself.

I don't know what you're talking about here. That's not the same film I viewed then because he sister asks her if she's aware of the ramifications at which point she reveals that she' s sterile.

How so? It's right in line with the social taboo, except for the fact that it's discriminatory and prejudicial against those with disabilities.

And yet there isn't much in the way of education at all in these films. Instead they color one's impressions by presenting possible exceptions to the rule.

And every movie featuring a murder presents "possible exceptions to the rule". But you don't have a problem with those, do you? Yet - amazingly - people haven't become inured to murder. Sorry, but this is a storm in a teacup. Nobody's going go out and give bestiality a try because of any of these movies, nor are they going to think that story about a man marrying a sheep makes perfect sense.

 

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I just pointed out a few examples which you basically ignored.

You mentioned some film titles and scenarios. I offered my opinion that you were ignoring subtexts and cultural references.

Maybe more examples of bestiality are a good thing then?

Do you know anything about folklore and cultural anthropology?

Some sort of hybrid. How do these hybrids come about?

It is folklore. The belief in "mermaids" has a long human history. Where do werewolves and vampires come from? They never really existed.

what about them?

The ballet is an example of folklore where humans are turned into other animals, often by an evil genius.

I'm not denying the subtexts.

Based on your comments, you do not appear to have any comprehension of subtexts.

I'm pointing out that the literal text presents a human being having sexual congress with another species.

And I repeat that Del Toro uses magic realism in his films.

You appear to display a somewhat literalist [and censorious] reaction when you watch films that you find controversial.

Yet why wait until the end of the film to reveal that she's a fish just like he is? Hmm?

It's a fantasy and a love story. Do you not understand that? In the same way that [in one ending of the ballet] Swan Lake Odette is united in death with Siegfried. Or Tristan und Isolde are united in death.

Thanks for pointing that out. I'm sure there are some who may have needed that pointed out to them.

You gave the impression you thought it was possible.

Where did I say it was?

Why are you so censorious then? Do you object to other fantastical characters and/or storylines? Is Mickey Mouse a humanoid hybrid? Are the Moomins alien demons? Is Pippa Longstocking a human freak?

Agreed. So what? You're making my points for me now. Thanks.

Yet many Christians believe the gospel of John to be a factually based account.

Yep, and back then it was seen as sick as well. It's a horror flick, or didn't you know that?

It was propaganda in the guise of a horror film.

Yet, you seem to like the idea anyways. To each their own.

Folklore and its origins, its archetypes, its psychological and cultural references is a complex and fascinating discipline.

I am not redefining words. Look them up yourself.

Does a mentally handicapped 60 year old man with the mental age of an 8 year old fit your definition of "an immature man"?

I don't know what you're talking about here. That's not the same film I viewed then because he sister asks her if she's aware of the ramifications at which point she reveals that she' s sterile.

What has sterility to do with potential incest?

How so? It's right in line with the social taboo,

Once again, I refer you to some well-known folklore.

except for the fact that it's discriminatory and prejudicial against those with disabilities.

How so and in what manner is it "discriminatory and prejudicial against those with disabilities"?

And yet there isn't much in the way of education at all in these films.

Educate as in raising awareness of topics or subjects that might not necessarily be commonly acknowledged and understood.

Instead they color one's impressions by presenting possible exceptions to the rule.

Perhaps you should stop watching films.