Thursday, 3 November 2011

Killhorse ->gut it -> take nude photos

quote [ After Elizabeth Herrick and her boyfriend "euthanized" their 32-year-old horse with a rifle, they gutted it and Herrick climbed inside its carcass for a nude photo session. Then they posted the photos online resulting in some, er, "extreme emotional reactions ]

Links to pics in extended. Main article has no pictures.

http://www.jurnalul.ro/stiri/externe/infiorator-o-femeie-s-a-fotografiat-in-interiorul-unui-cal-mort-video-595467.html
http://www.sharknews.fr/societe/international/2613
[by germanjulian@7:11amGMT] [+10 WTF]

Comments

willrogers said @ 7:21am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2 Good]
FIRST!
feeling constipated said @ 7:28am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2]
rndmnmbr said @ 8:02am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 Insightful]


(yeah yeah, it gets overused, but sometimes it's the only appropriate thing)
DarkShadowRavenDragonGrrl69 said @ 1:33pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 Underrated]
Voting to make this the official SE mascot.
assbastard said @ 5:08pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 Underrated]
"I can picture stumbling into a dimly-lit room with a drain in the center, with crowds of hooded, pale figures hunched around a flickering computer screen displaying gay otter hermaphrodites with giant veiny dicks wildly fucking oddly boyish hentai twins, giving the Goatse Guy a run for his money in terms of stretch factor and shitting all over a pile of maimed and bloody kittens who had their tiny penii split open when they shot out football-sized sperm into the 80-year old peg-legged Italian stripper's prolapsed anus in the first 2 minutes of the video, and one of them turns around and growls:
'If the rest of us can fap to this, so can you.'"
~Chop-Logik
Gn0me said @ 8:18am GMT on 3rd Nov
You still have to _____ off a horse.
ComposerNate said @ 8:34am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:3]
mrcucumber said @ 4:08am GMT on 4th Nov
Very Nice Nate. Thanks.
htabdoolb said @ 8:25am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:4 Funny]
I find this hilarious. And hot.

Well, why the hell not? The horse is dead, so it doesn't care. They ate the meat, so it isn't like it went to waste after she was finished playing in it. As far as anyone knows, they didn't kill the horse just to fuck around with it's corpse, but because it was an aging, fading animal. The fucking around was probably just a lark. It's not something most people would consider, let alone actually do, but so what? No one was harmed because of it.

I'm a bit disappointed about the lack of frontal nudity in the pictures, though. Also, I would love to see someone in PETA react to this. It would probably make my week.
assbastard said @ 10:19am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 Insightful]
Shit, if this is gonna be that kind of party, I'm gonna stick my dick in the mashed potatoes.
eraser said @ 12:39pm GMT on 3rd Nov
"It just goes to show you. Never stick your dick in a pudding. Sure it might be good pudding and you can spend the rest of the day convincing everyone else of this, but no one's going to eat it because YOU STUCK YOUR DICK IN IT!" -- Benjamin 'Yahzee' Crenshaw.
mrcucumber said @ 3:16pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2]
Guy goes to a costume party.. Arrives at the door naked with his dick in pudding. Host asks what is costume is, he replies : I'm fuckin' dis custard.
KropperPrime said @ 5:03pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1]
So once you are old and dying, can I have your corpse to fuck with and maybe have a photoshoot with your decaying remains?

I mean, why would you care, you'll be dead.

I swear I'm gonna eat you once I'm done.
psychotim said @ 5:06pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Glad to know you're vegetarian.
KropperPrime said @ 5:08pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Missing the point like a pro.
psychotim said @ 5:14pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Good]
The horse didn't have wishes for its corpse to be respected.Its family doesn't care how it's disposed of. It likely had no concept of death at all. It no longer cares what happened to it after death because it's dead. There was no cruelty, you're just reacting emotionally.
KropperPrime said @ 5:23pm GMT on 3rd Nov
I come from a family of hunters and I'm used to see moose carcass being chopped into bits and I personally enjoy eating the liver that I have to slice myself.

But you won't catch me frolicking naked in said moose, take pictures of it and then share it with the world to prove how special and freaky I am to the world.

Surprisingly you won't catch me frolicking naked in any food I intend to eat.
psychotim said @ 5:26pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Good]
That's fine, it still doesn't make a wit of difference as to whether or not what they did was right or wrong or harmed anything or anyone at all. You admit to enjoying killing, dismembering, and personally eating chunks of a once living creature. Would you be okay with someone doing that to you when they're dead? They swear to god they'll only do it because they like to.
KropperPrime said @ 5:34pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1 Overrated]
Man, how do you keep ignoring the 'take pictures naked and posting them online' part.

May I point out my other comment where I clearly state that it is the part I have a problem with.

You do whatever the fuck you want as long you aren't harming someone else.

Posting your freaky goreporn online is harmful.

Also, if it would be safe for the health of everyone involved, I would have no problem being recycled as food once I'm dead. (or anything else useful for that matter)

I'm not even trying to go philosophical about how wrong it is to disrespect a dead animal or if it is even possible to do so.
psychotim said @ 5:39pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Good]
Man, how do you keep ignoring the 'take pictures naked and posting them online' part.

So it magically becomes wrong if you take pictures? Explain why. You do understand hunting pictures are a ridiculously common thing, correct?

Posting your freaky goreporn online is harmful.

Posting gore porn online is harmful because unbalanced people or something something copycat? And posting porn is harmful because unbalanced people something something rape, obviously. And posting violent movies/video games is harmful because something something school shooting.

Or does it only apply to things you, personally, find distasteful?
KropperPrime said @ 5:44pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1 Overrated]
It becomes magically wrong when you create something that offends common decency and post it online for all to see.

For the record, I'm against gory horror movies like SAW and shit like that.

I'm also against ultra violent video games like Manhunter.

Art is one thing, being a sick fuck is an other.

If you paint a war scene, the violence is realism. If you paint a clown dismembering a child, you are being a psycho.
psychotim said @ 5:49pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2 Underrated]
Good to know you support censorship and obscenity laws.

Just pray you aren't caught if your government decides sites like SE violate "common decency" and you deserve to be punished or forced into treatment for it.

God help you if they find porn on your computer after a religious right group manage to elect a government to carry out their wishes that be declared obscene across the board as well.

Personally, thought crimes are a little disgusting to me.

In fact, I think advocating for something so harmful is a violation of common decency. Please stand by while I ready your place in the asylum for the grave crime of offending me.
KropperPrime said @ 5:52pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1 Overrated]
Privacy works both way.

I don't want people prying into my life, but I don't want to pry into other people lives, especially if they are offending me.

Japan is a good example of how some decency laws are necessary.

I wouldn't want to walk my kids (that I don't have) in front of some juvenile tentacle porn because some sick artist want freedom of expression.
psychotim said @ 5:57pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Good]
You post it online for other to see, you are a fucking sicko and should be strapped to the wall in an asylum somewhere.

That sounds awfully like prying into someone else's life. As a matter of fact, that's despriving someone of the liberty to live their life freely at all.

Let's get this straight: They didn't e-mail you these pictures with the title "ADORABLE KITTENS FOR ALL". There's no accusations that they forced these images on anyone. YOU chose to look at them. And I'll wager you've committed the grave crime of "prying into other people's lives" with something offensive to them if all that's required to do so is make the content available.
KropperPrime said @ 6:03pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1 Overrated]
I didn't look at them.

But obviously some people had to.

They posted them PUBLICLY.

Posting on a public forum is tantamount to plastering it on a wall somewhere.
psychotim said @ 6:06pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Good]
So your stance is, offend anyone at all (or maybe just you, since obviously things you don't like are offensive, things other people don't like is them being unreasonable) by making something available to the public, you deserve your life being ruined. Brilliant. You're a disgusting human being.
KropperPrime said @ 6:12pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1 Overrated]
As mentioned in a comment below, maybe not ruined, but at least put on check.

There is obviously something wrong with someone if they have that behavior, we wouldn't want that behavior to degenerate further into something that could be very harmful.

You find people disgusting because they do not agree with you. Brilliant you are human being.
psychotim said @ 6:16pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2 Insightful]
You said above that decency laws are necessary. If you think people should just be put "on check" in case something related (and illegal) happens later that's not really a law against it at all, it's common sense policing and changes the implications of what you're saying vastly.

And yeah, I find people who want to legislate morality disgusting. It flies in the face of a free and just society. I make no apologies.
KropperPrime said @ 6:17pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:3]
Freedom is overrated.

People are not smart enough to handle total freedom, they need some restrictions.

Without them the whole world would be like 4chan's /b/ board.
Bob Denver said @ 7:14pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2 Underrated]
Freedom is not overrated.
That said, the difference is between the freedom of children and the freedom of adults. I'll agree that many people are not mature enough to handle complete freedom.

The horse was dispatched quickly and was in the company of people it trusted; it was old and presumably infirm; they ate the meat...all high-minded and beyond reproach.

I take issue with the pictures because it shows a fundamental lack of respect for a creature that lived its life in the service of those people; in short, a companion. I know that my body will be nothing but meat when I die and that I will not know what is being done to it. But should someone choose to desecrate it, the shame will be their's to bear and if they feel none...we should be sad for them and worried for ourselves that such people exist. Should they choose to flaunt that desecration publicly and with pride, we should be afraid.
mrcucumber said @ 10:06pm GMT on 3rd Nov
What a great thread.
spazm said @ 2:29am GMT on 4th Nov
Amen.

Pass me another beer will ya.
mrcucumber said @ 3:53am GMT on 4th Nov
:-)
happiest_sadist said @ 4:32am GMT on 4th Nov
I would like to state for the record that, if a hot chick wants to roll around in or on my body after I have died, I do not object.

I do, however, object to being killed. If you kill me then I won't give you permission to interact with my dead body.
Because I'll be dead.
theRed said @ 4:56am GMT on 4th Nov
Okay but what defines desecration?

Maybe they were celebrating the horse's life in some bizarre ritual you don't know about that was nevertheless respectful and done with reverence.

Or maybe they were just curious and on drugs.

Either way, where does the verdict of desecration come from? General consensus or some transcendental principal?
Bob Denver said @ 8:11am GMT on 4th Nov
Well....yeah, you could be right. I strongly doubt it but you could be. That there were pictures posted on the Internet nudges it in the direction of attention-whoredom.
Ultimately one can always take the "How do you know they didn't...?" tack.
For example only, take the number of US Christians who support the wars in the Middle East because of 9/11. All the people who died were either going to heaven or hell according to Christian beliefs so was it not a good thing by that belief? How do we know that the hijackers weren't acting as god's agents?

Some tribes in Papua New Guinea would kill and eat people captured from neighbouring tribes. In some cases this was a respectful act. How do we know that Jeffrey Dahmer wasn't doing the same thing?

Yeah...the argument that maybe they were doing 'x' doesn't fly with me.
SleepFrog said @ 3:25pm GMT on 4th Nov [Score:2 Informative]
Oooh, see, this is how you draw out the lurkers. "What defines desecration" is an extremely interesting discussion, and upon reading this post/this line of comments, I was immediately reminded of Haidt's Moral Foundations theory. Here's a link, to Haidt's website about it. If you want a small amount more info I recommend the linked NYTimes article which doesn't seem to be behind a paywall, rather than the yourmorals site, which requires a registration, although that can be fun too. It kind of goes downhill when Haidt tries to apply it to politics, but it's interesting before that.
Essentially, by Haidt's system, moral feelings/judgements are a wide net typically including 5 distinct systems (empathy with pain, like of fairness, loyalty to ingroup, respect for authority, and disgust with impurity). However, not everyone feels these as moral feelings or equally strongly. It is fairly common for the degree to which a particular person feels the authority impulse, or feels it as a moral feeling specifically, to vary quite a bit, for instance.
But the horse/pics example is almost identical to one of the standard questions given to judge moral feelings based on purity, which I paraphrase "A family has had a dog its entire natural life, and upon its peaceful and painless death, decides that the best way to show their respect for its years of devoted companionship is to eat it. Everyone in the family feels that every element of this brings closure to their experience and honors the beloved dog. Is this wrong?"
Personally, I always answered no, I can't find anything wrong with that, even though eating a dog sounds kind of gross. But it's apparently a common moral feeling, and perhaps the long-lasting debate is attributable to the difference in composition of moral feelings between the one side and the other.
cb361 said @ 6:37pm GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Underrated]
Hello SleepFrog.
willrogers said @ 7:10am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Funny]
theolypse said @ 9:49pm GMT on 3rd Nov
You're absolutely right here, but you're still overapplying those restrictions in the instigating case.
nfsd said @ 11:00pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
I find your opinion and views about decency and obscenity to be offensive and obscene. Furthermore, they're posted in a public forum, which is akin to plastering them on a public wall.

Please deal with yourself accordingly.
cache22 said @ 12:16am GMT on 4th Nov
If none among us are smart enough to handle total freedom, then who among us is smart enough to dictate these restrictions?
kichijoii said @ 1:18am GMT on 4th Nov
Nobody, but we make do with the political system.
KropperPrime said @ 5:54pm GMT on 3rd Nov
SE does violate common decency :)

That's why I don't check it at work.
htabdoolb said @ 1:04am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:2 Underrated]
"Posting your freaky goreporn online is harmful."

To who? Who is harmed? Offended, probably. Repulsed and utterly disgusted, very likely. But harmed? I'm just not seeing it.

A person has to actually seek these images out to see them anyway. If someone sees a link that says "Girl bathes in horse guts(pics!)", they're perfectly free to scroll past the link without clicking it if they don't want to see what is in it.
corwin said @ 4:34am GMT on 4th Nov
"That's fine, it still doesn't make a wit of difference as to whether or not what they did was right or wrong or harmed anything or anyone at all."

Let us return to the important part of this debate: WHIT! NOT WIT!

Seriously, the problem with killing an animal and posing for naked pics inside its eviscerated carcass is not that "horses have feelings, too" or "animals have rights"—it's that it demeans the human beings who did it, and by extension, all human beings. It's much worse to do this to a person, or to an animal with feelings, a sense of self, and a notion of the future (say, a chimpanzee)—but doing it to a horse is wrong for the same reason it would be morally reprehensible to mutilate with a knife and then masturbate on a plastic replica of a baby. Posting pictures of it is indeed worse, but again not because it offends me or my sense of decency: it shows that the people who did these inhuman things are proud of themselves for doing them. I am now further demeaned.
crom said @ 5:49am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Interesting]
I'm sure glad that other people's actions don't demean me! You must have it rough buddy.
granitewitch said @ 5:50pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Underrated]
Surprisingly you won't catch me frolicking naked in any food I intend to eat.

I did, but it was our wedding anniversary and we were in a hotel.
KropperPrime said @ 5:52pm GMT on 3rd Nov
I guess Jello doesn't count.
sacrelicious said @ 6:16pm GMT on 3rd Nov
the fate of any corpse can be spun in such a way as to sound like desecration.

"sorry to hear about your grampa being buried in the ground and eaten by worms and bacteria. he deserved better than that"

"you sick bastard, you removed all of my dead father's blood and replaced it with chemicals? what the fuck is wrong with you?!"

"you BURNED your own wife's CORPSE?!"

conversely,

"taring and feathering aunt Grace's body and flinging it by catapult to get her closer to heaven is just the kind of sendoff I'm sure she would have wanted"
rndmnmbr said @ 7:58pm GMT on 3rd Nov
...Okay. I'm down with this. I'll will you my corpse. I'm sure this can be spun as some form of leaving my body to science.
htabdoolb said @ 8:49pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Sure, do whatever with my corpse. I certainly won't care at that point. That's what being dead means.
madpride said @ 9:30pm GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Interesting]
Give a Fuck Donors... The Fuck you Save could be your Daughter/Sister.

''A corpse for every man to fuck/photo shoot with recently dead, Snow White. I mean, why would you care, you'll be dead.'' - Mad4Prez 2012

If you give a Fuck give a Fuck, save a life, ad to joy, ensure the blind, ugly, fat, sick, pale, jobless, banker, republican has a body to Fuck each Month.

Fuck the Dead not War, Rape or Reproduce.

You have to be on a voter/driver license Fuck list. A local board decides who gets a fuck body donor that matches with the fucker. The fuckee shall not have died at hands of fucker, no cash or valuables transferred.

''I swear I'm gonna eat you once I'm done. ''

Eating the dead to be avoided due to health concerns and some who get a taste for such, except as Soylent protein powder for soup lines.
madpride said @ 9:39pm GMT on 4th Nov

Naruki said @ 3:30am GMT on 5th Nov
I'm upmodding you because... because... dammit.
madpride said @ 5:17pm GMT on 5th Nov

http://www.whokilledbambi.co.uk/2011/10/exclusive-bambi-get-papd/
madpride said @ 5:27pm GMT on 5th Nov
I'm partial to she-goats who love pussy. Them crazy eyes, those full tits, the less musky and pan smelling. I told her I would honor her, not allow her to be fucked by Paul, Mike and the other hands, but would honor and eat her, so she would be inside my body, delicious, curried, eaten on solstice.
madpride said @ 5:43pm GMT on 5th Nov
Soon genetically engineered sex pets will be available, and next to syneticsexuality that is the merging of interior cortex and brain stimulation multi-orgasmic syn channel and syntube, will alter attraction to oldsex, and reverse rolls with woman who don't plug and play sex themselves. The new sex is so great, like synmilk, syndmt, symlsd, sympot, symecstasy, that any time or semen or strength men have left is highly paid in newest/oldest profession, prostitution and oldfuck.

The new engineered sexpets are mainly pig, but very close to human, and crossed with anteater mouths for deep throat and vaginas and anus with human characteristics. The beauty smooth skin, natural tan skin, slight hair if wished, natural odor, pheromone, good sweet pussy.
madpride said @ 7:05pm GMT on 5th Nov


Just the smell of Bacon makes these pervs hard
madpride said @ 9:25pm GMT on 5th Nov


spite48 said @ 12:25am GMT on 7th Nov [Score:1 Interesting]
Some science fiction authors have toyed with this idea. The question to ask, is if a being is genetically engineered to enjoy it or need it, is there an ethical dilemma? Does the dilemma arise from the genetic engineering or the use?

What about theoretical consensual sex with sapient aliens who happen to look like animals?
crom said @ 6:58am GMT on 7th Nov [Score:1 Interesting]
While we're thinking about these things, assuming it's ethical for me to grow a genetically engineered sex slave in the first place, is it OK if I start from the DNA of a girl who turned me down?

And which is more repugnant: a mature mind in a perpetually infantile body or a fully grown sexually mature adult body with an infant mind?
spite48 said @ 7:44am GMT on 8th Nov [Score:1 Informative]
Yes.
madpride said @ 6:19pm GMT on 5th Nov


madpride said @ 6:40pm GMT on 5th Nov
What the fuck are you?
Pungent odor you hit me.
Eyes closed gentile nature
soft wooly waxed oiled scented
goat geese olive oil orgasm forbidden
secret we keep sweet cud and buttermilk
the new smell of hay, horse waying, rooster calling
just the sight of dew, cut grass, funk, urine, shit excites me.

To know you inside out, now eaten you with love, honor you snow white
madpride said @ 9:29pm GMT on 5th Nov


spite48 said @ 12:29am GMT on 7th Nov
Once I'm dead, I don't care what happens to my body. Thanks for checking first.
assbastard said @ 8:37am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 Funny]
Poor, poor Sarah Jessica Parker. We hardly knew ye.
that1guy said @ 6:26pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Now that....is fucking hilarious.
b said @ 10:01am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Underrated]
I've never seen someone so happy to be snuggled up inside the carcass of a horse.
assbastard said @ 10:20am GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2 Informative]
I've seen happier.
granitewitch said @ 10:19am GMT on 3rd Nov
I've seen a horse euthanized and dissected in a college class. At no time did it ever enter my head that it might be fun to crawl inside its body.

These people are weird.
Kurisu said @ 2:11pm GMT on 3rd Nov
http://youtu.be/XbrqV2httgI
Kurisu said @ 2:13pm GMT on 3rd Nov
(grumble)
sacrelicious said @ 6:02pm GMT on 3rd Nov
yeah, but at no time did it enter your head that crawling inside it's body would be a disgusting thing to do either.

so get out of your high horse and stop judging people already!
cb361 said @ 8:12pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Hold your horses. You're putting the cart before the horse, and looking a gift horse in the mouth. Wild horses couldn't make me do that.
sacrelicious said @ 8:43pm GMT on 3rd Nov
hoof and puff all you like, but if the shoe fits...
happiest_sadist said @ 4:56am GMT on 4th Nov
Wild whore says what now?

Canter own voice speak for her, or does she say neigh? Maybe we should take a Gallop poll.

We left standard deviation behind log ago...
theolypse said @ 11:18am GMT on 3rd Nov
Main "article" is smaller than an enthusiastic comment on a real news article.
Roulette1337 said @ 12:45pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 WTF]
The real sick bastards are the local news show.

Hey lets demonise these people, show their faces publicly, show the pictures to the girl's fucking mother, basically ignore the fact the police officer says this is legal and at the end point out that these people wanted this to go away and have received death threats. Its fine, we didn't use their names, only their faces and given the story more legs.
astropig7 said @ 1:17pm GMT on 3rd Nov
I only gave +1 WTF because we don’t have a +1 Disgusting.
monday said @ 3:02pm GMT on 3rd Nov
"The woman's mother says it was the sweetest meat she ever tasted."

I fucking love this planet.
madpride said @ 9:07pm GMT on 5th Nov


manbaby said @ 4:59pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Yeah, I reacted to that as well.
danshyu said @ 12:58pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Yeah, pretty disgusting. These people are total freaks. But bottom line is they killed an already dying horse in a humane way. So I honsetly don't see the problem here. Overall they're just couple harmless freaks who gets off on weird shits. And since when did America started outlawing freaks?
theolypse said @ 9:51pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Underrated]
Shortly before breaking away from Britain, I think.
DarkShadowRavenDragonGrrl69 said @ 1:32pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Hell, maybe they just REALLY love The Empire Strikes Back.
Don Corleone said @ 1:44pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Funny]
screw it, these motherfuckers are crazy, let em cast whoever they want!
mrcucumber said @ 2:10pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
What I don't understand is that if they didn't want the publicity, why did they post the pics online?
theolypse said @ 9:50pm GMT on 3rd Nov
For the publicity.
todde said @ 2:49pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
Oregon couple does this -> criminal investigation of sick fucks

Lady Gaga does the same thing but doesn't kill the animal herself -> pop art
SiryumYum said @ 2:57pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:4 Insightful]
Anyone else think that


looks kinda like
SiryumYum said @ 2:57pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Underrated]
Maybe she just wants to be a Khaleesi.
Roulette1337 said @ 5:18pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Informative]
I thought that was to promote the strength of her child. She was already Khaleesi by marrying Khal Drogo. It is known.
TM said @ 8:05pm GMT on 3rd Nov
It is known.
43770 said @ 6:03am GMT on 4th Nov
Known.
mrcucumber said @ 9:04pm GMT on 3rd Nov
joe_mannix said @ 9:19pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Dirty pillows!
theolypse said @ 9:46pm GMT on 3rd Nov
They're the best kind.
half said @ 3:06pm GMT on 3rd Nov
what a loss ! they should have eaten it.
profetscott said @ 3:15pm GMT on 3rd Nov
From the article, I think they did.
rjm said @ 4:03am GMT on 4th Nov
Many people do. First time I saw "horseburger patties" in a French supermarket I was "whoa!? what-" but I quickly got over it. Now "basushi" on the other hand ... that's just yucky on principle.
structured_spirits said @ 10:03pm GMT on 4th Nov
It's actually illegal to sell horse meat for human consumption in the United States or to export them to countries that allow the practice. Horses are pets in the US, which does make this rather shocking.
loomspace said @ 3:25pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Somewhere, there are pics of this chick banging this horse.
half said @ 3:45pm GMT on 3rd Nov
there is a rule for that.
blawiz said @ 3:35pm GMT on 3rd Nov
ckfahrenheit said @ 4:18pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Underrated]
ckfahrenheit said @ 4:40pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Rosa
in the book version the girl is sewn inside the horse and fucked through the horse's vagina. Also I don't think the opera did the part about setting the horse on fire afterwards. The couple in the article might have missed a good chance here. *snap*
Dioxin said @ 4:41pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Hahaha the culture industry can subsume just about anything.
KropperPrime said @ 4:57pm GMT on 3rd Nov
My 2 cents :

You want to bathe in the bloody entrails of a freshly killed horse in the privacy of your backyard, fine.

You post it online for other to see, you are a fucking sicko and should be strapped to the wall in an asylum somewhere.

You defend these people, you are a moron.
psychotim said @ 5:11pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Also, anyone who watches Mythbusters is sick because they regularly mutilate dead pigs for entertainment.
KropperPrime said @ 5:25pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Well I'm also against that, because it is a waste of perfectly good pigs.
psychotim said @ 5:29pm GMT on 3rd Nov
But do you condemn the people who enjoy the show as horrible, sick human beings because they find the mutilation of a corpse entertaining? Let's be consistant, here. Whether or not you have blood on your arms doesn't change the scenario much. Dead body-Mutilate Body-Take Pictures-Entertainment!
KropperPrime said @ 5:36pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Well actually yes, if you watch the show hoping to see a carcass being blown into pieces, there is something wrong with you.

It's supposed to be a show about people botching scientific experiments, not gore and blood.
SilverDraghyeon said @ 5:56pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
For better or worse, we're bred for violence as much as we're bred for finding food and having sexy times.

Thousands and thousands of years of violence equals generation after generation of people being born from the ones who survived the violence. The survivors were probably sometimes just lucky, but more often just better mentally suited to handle wading through blood and still killing the next guy still standing behind all the gore.

The result is that almost every one of us understands the phrase "BOOM! HEADSHOT!" and why it makes large segments of us smile. It's also going to lead to the occasional anomaly of people just a little TOO happy to see entrails. It's odd, but really about as odd as pacifists when you look at the human average of "Sort of baseline violent."

They don't need an asylum. They haven't done anything so far out of line that they need their lives destroyed.

Just remind them they can't kill for fun, put them on a list, and anytime someone dies or dissapears near them send a pair of cops over to say "Hey, this wasn't you guys, right? Kay, good, just checking. You know, cause of the horse. You understand." And move on.
KropperPrime said @ 6:01pm GMT on 3rd Nov
I agree with everything you said.

Especially the last part.

But 'strapping them to a wall has more 'hmpf' to it and that's how I roll.
SilverDraghyeon said @ 6:07pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1 Funny]
Someone just agreed with someone else on the internet.

Now THAT is asylum level crazy.
KropperPrime said @ 6:14pm GMT on 3rd Nov
The internet was actually a huge social experiment to check how long it would take to have two anonymous persons agreeing with each other.

The whole thing will now shut down for data analysis.
damnit said @ 10:16pm GMT on 4th Nov
You had me at two anonymous persons... then my mind wandered into 2 girls 1 cup territory.
crom said @ 5:29pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Anyone who wants to strap people to walls in an asylum should probably be strapped to a wall in an asylum.
KropperPrime said @ 5:37pm GMT on 3rd Nov
That's only because it would be wrong to shoot them.
mrcucumber said @ 9:07pm GMT on 3rd Nov
the circus said @ 9:40pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1]
You should never defend people you don't agree with 100%, because there's no way situations can ever become reversed where you could be viewed negatively for your stances and need the acceptance of people who don't agree with you 100%.
nfsd said @ 11:02pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:-1]
I don't agree with you 100%, therefore I won't defend your position.
cb361 said @ 6:35pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2 Funny]
insanemonkey said @ 6:49pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:2]
May as well post the whole thing...
DarkShadowRavenDragonGrrl69 said @ 8:26pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:3 Funny]
Nice, we found KropperPrime's "too far".
swiggy said @ 8:38pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:5 Funny]


The only reaction I can muster.
TM said @ 9:10pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Flehmen.
Misanthrope said @ 8:51pm GMT on 3rd Nov
Well that's different.
graham said @ 10:02pm GMT on 3rd Nov [Score:1]
kichijoii said @ 1:42am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:4 Insightful]
You can argue freedom of speech vs. offensiveness endlessly. What concerns me more is that these persons bathed themselves in blood and guts and thoroughly enjoyed it. That is very disturbing, not just because it is unusual and abhorrent to most people, but also because there's no obvious, rational cause to want to do that. The comment in the article suggested some spiritual aspect of "wanting to feel closer" to the horse, but this is still NOT a normal way of doing that. Also of note is that they apparently didn't think there would be any drawbacks to posting these images publicly. They REALLY didn't think other people would be offended by this? I think the public reaction to the couple's behavior is rooted in rational induction: if they did this and felt that way about it, what else are they capable of? From there, imagination goes wild.
ckfahrenheit said @ 7:42am GMT on 4th Nov
that bit about wanting to identify with the horse sounds like bullshit. I call fetish, pure & simple. I don't know if fetishes have to make sense ~ mine don't. I'm fine with this incident. However I'm assuming they still did have legit reasons to kill the horse; it's pretty uncool to kill animals just to fap around

rational induction ... what else are they capable of ~ I can relate to this. I feel exactly this way about politicians.
eIfish said @ 9:25pm GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
The thing that bugs me most about the whole affair is how squeamish it shows Western Society to have become.

If you saw all this in the context of an African or south American tribe in a nature documentary, I bet you'd be absolutely fine with it, and you wouldn't think of it as abhorrent and abnormal, and you wouldn't start wondering if they also eat babies or something.

But because it's a couple of white guys, they're clearly unhinged and dangerous.
mwoody said @ 3:54pm GMT on 5th Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
Well, yeah. The point is that they're acting in a way totally divergent from - and, for the most part, tremendously abhorrent to - their surrounding culture. When people can and will totally ignore cultural norms in such a brutal fashion, we have absolutely zero guarantee or indication about how they will act in any given situation.

I mean, when you get right down to, "don't eat babies," "don't stab your neighbor in the eye with a fork," and "don't drive a car through a school" are all cultural norms. Near universal norms, perhaps, but norms nonetheless. And when someone breaks one rule, it's natural to assume they'll be perfectly willing to break another. Hence, our ingrained - and tremendously logical - fear of the unknown and response of revulsion to acts like this one.

Now, when you see someone on the other side of the world in what is obviously a completely different cultural context doing a similar action, there's a much lessened response. A mild disgust, surely, but as others have rightly pointed out, this level of slaughter isn't particularly unusual in and of itself; I've seen things I would empirically consider far more gruesome during the setup for a Luau.

But the point here is that it's not the gore that disgusts. Seeing this same act performed by a group of people about whom we know virtually nothing renders it impossible to determine if the act is within or without their expected behavior. Without a sense of the ordinary, it's more difficult to react to the extraordinary.
mechanical contrivance said @ 3:14am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
We need more pics of the chick. The horse is optional.
Mozart said @ 4:51am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Good]
fz75 said @ 6:14am GMT on 4th Nov [Score:1 Insightful]
I don't see what the big deal is.
Persephone13 said @ 3:24pm GMT on 4th Nov
man, the PETA people here in Oregon are batshit crazy. They're gonna lynch her in a town square somewhere. The scene will be complete with pitchforks and torches.
Naruki said @ 3:31am GMT on 5th Nov
PETA people here in Oregon are batshit crazy.

FTFY
structured_spirits said @ 6:06pm GMT on 4th Nov [Score:-1 Flamebait]
kdog2112 said @ 12:03am GMT on 5th Nov
Get in my horse, my horse is amazing, give it a lick, it taste just like raisens.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.
home | home2 | Sensible Election | about | conduct | galleries not logged in | log in



Members

Registered: 24545
Classifieds

Heaven666
What has been seen cannot be un-seen

BOOBLE
Search sites, pics, movies, personals.

Best Porn
Reviews of the best porn sites with pics, vids, scene desription and member area preview

LONELY GUYS
Meet Women Near You