Professor faces backlash after he termed article about sex with animals ‘thought-provoking’ – Times of India
In a startling controversy, Princeton’s Professor Peter Singer has triggered a wave of criticism by deeming an article on interspecies relations as ‘thought-provoking.’ The 77-year-old bioethics teacher faces scrutiny for his unconventional stance. Encouraging his audience on X to delve into the “thought-provoking” piece titled “Zoophilia is Morally Permissible,” Singer, known for his work at the Center for Human Values, has ignited a heated debate.
The immediate backlash ensued upon his post, where he recommended the article authored under the pseudonym Fira Bensto. Singer contends that the article challenges society’s staunch taboos, advocating for the moral permissibility of certain human-animal interactions. This controversial perspective prompts a call for a profound and open discourse on both animal and sex ethics.
Sharing the link, Singer prompts users to “read and ponder,” endorsing the author’s claim that the case for zoophilia’s permissibility is robust, with common objections falling short. The author argues that critics require more than mere outrage, asserting that the burden of proof should now rest on those opposing the permissibility of zoophilia.
In response to Singer’s post, a critic dismisses the platform choice, stating, “Twitter isn’t suitable for this discourse. Earth may not be an ideal venue either, but certainly not Twitter.” Another critic vehemently opposes Singer’s perspective, asserting, “There’s nothing to ponder. Individuals, predominantly men, engaging in non-consensual acts with animals should face legal consequences. Any form of intimacy with non-consenting beings amounts to an egregious violation. Period.”
#ZoophiliaDebate #EthicalDilemmas #PeterSingerControversy #AnimalEthicsDiscussion #SexualBoundaries