A new documentary film about efforts by animal rights activists to ban beastiality (zoophilia) in Denmark shines a spotlight on the one “zoophile,” Oliver Burdinski, who was willing to speak on camera. In an in depth interview, Mr. Burdinski argues that animals can consent through physical cues and that he, not his dog, is the passive partner. The opposite, he says, would be cruel.

Mr. Burdinski speaks very candidly about his experience: “When I was 14 or 15, I wasn’t sure if it was right, so I tried to get human partners. But I was not happy with them. I tried to be normal. In 1994, I got internet and realized that I’m not alone.”

The video below is the in-depth interview. To see the new documentary, which is very interesting, click the link at the top of the story.

Mr. Burdinski says he did not choose to be a zoophile; he insists that it’s his sexual orientation. He reminds me of a childhood neighbor who is now in prison for pedophilia. His parents told me his addiction to “touching boys” was kept in check by high doses of an antidepressant, but, when he reduced his dose due to side effects, the urges came back. I don’t know if he has OCD or if his sexual orientation is pedophilia. Either way, he is a very nice guy born with a very big problem. Sad for him. Sad for his victims.

Unlike my childhood neighbor, who has not spoken publicly about his struggles, Mr. Burdinski is very brave to be the public face of zoophilia and to educate the public about the issue. Even though a ban on zoophilia cannot be enforced in peoples’ homes, I do think it should be outlawed in order to end animal sex tourism in Denmark. I can’t believe that even exists! Then again, Denmark is home to one of the cruelest events on earth – “The Grind” – during which 800 pilot whales are rounded up and brutally slaughtered each year in the Faroe Islands.

On August 25th, we reported that police and bullfight fans attacked protesters in Southwestern France after they entered the arena in an attempt to stop or delay the bullfight. Here is raw footage of the brave activists occupying the arena and then being dragged, attacked and pepper-sprayed by the police.

One day, this footage will be in a Museum of Animal rights. In the meantime, we must continue to make history by participating in or supporting non-violent direct action, as shown in this video.

After using a horse to crash into a protester (saboteur) at an illegal fox hunt in the U.K., hunters blocked the road with their vehicles to prevent the ambulance from attending to the victim, who broke five ribs. The attack was caught on camera, and the footage will be turned over to the authorities.

People who hunt and kill for sport are, by definition, violent. It should therefore come as no surprise that some hunters also attack people who get in their way. In this video, hunters punch protesters who are  blocking an illegal dig-out of a fox who is hiding in a hole.

Hunting with hounds was outlawed in the U.K. in 2005, but it continues due to lack of enforcement. As a result, the 51 year old Hunt Saboteurs Association continues to operate, “protecting our wildlife from the ‘sportsmen’ who get their kicks from killing.”

The police are so accustomed to protecting the hunters that the saboteurs must continue to wear masks to protect their identities. Unsurprisingly, the activists, who engage in non-violent tactics to save lives, continue to be vilified as “terrorists” by lawmakers and the media while the illegal hunters are portrayed as the victims. One way to thank and help the hunt saboteurs who put their safety on the line for the animals is to support their life-saving work.

Cheese! We’ve all heard it before, and many of us have said it ourselves: “I could never give up cheese!” Why the hell are we so addicted to cheese?

You’d think it was the fat and salt that trigger the cravings, and maybe they play a role. But the real culprit is a secret ingredient unknown to most: morphine. Researchers say that a protein in milk called casein creates pleasurable “opiate effects” when it breaks down into “casomorphins” during digestion. It’s the morphine that draws babies to boobies and grown ups to cheese.

Ethical vegans don’t eat cheese from the milk of dairy cows for humane reasons, but that doesn’t mean we don’t like the taste. In fact, plant-based cheeses that melt, stretch and mimic conventional cheese have become cash cows for the companies that recently launched them. But one group of vegans, engineers and computer scientists is taking cruelty-free cheese to the next level — creating dairy cheese that’s vegan. Isn’t that an oxymoron? How is that possible? Here’s the explanation:

“Through synthetic biology, we engineer our yeast to become milk-protein factories, churning out real milk proteins (known as caseins). These milk proteins are then combined with water, vegan sugar and oil to make a kind of milk which is ultimately converted into Real Vegan Cheese using the age-old cheese-making process.”

If vegan dairy cheese replicates conventional cheese with the same precision that Just Mayo and Beyond Meat have replicated mayonnaise and chicken, then we will be able to say with even more conviction, “You don’t have to give up cheese.” In the meantime, health food stores already have cruelty-free, plant-based cheeses, such as Daiya and Treeline, that would satisfy almost everyone who eats cheese, if they’d only give them a try. There’s even a non-dairy cookbook!

The best part about vegan dairy cheese? Tens of millions of cows could be unhooked from painful milking machines and reunited with their babies who were kidnapped at birth.

If you want to learn more about and/or support this endeavor, please visit their Indiegogo page.

When Congress passed the industry-backed Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) in 2006, the use of “terrorist” to describe animal rights activists became socially acceptable. Peculiar, no? Terrorists use suicide bombs and planes as weapons; activists use cameras and leaflets. Terrorists torture and kill indiscriminately; activists work to reduce suffering and harm. Do ISIS and Hamas look to the animal rights movement for guidance? Are they emulating our tactics? Probably not.

Don’t get me wrong. There are terrorists in the equation — they are the people who terrorize animals in factory farms, in laboratories, on fur farms and in many other windowless buildings that keep the public in the dark. These terrorists attempt to use the AETA to shift attention away from their own atrocities: “Hey – let’s pay members of Congress to pass a law that equates animal activism to terrorism so that the activists become the enemy and we become the victim.”

The animal industries’ use of the word “terrorist” to demonize activists was an exploitation of the public’s fear and vulnerability in a post 9/11 era, and animal abusers in other countries picked up on this approach. In 2013, leaders of the bullfighting business in France described the country’s anti-bullfight association a “terrorist organization” when calling on the government to dissolve it.

Kevin Oliff and Tyler Lang. Photo by Dom Greco

In July, two activists in California, Kevin Olliff and Tyler Lang, were arrested and charged under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act for allegedly releasing 2,000 mink and foxes from fur farms. Will Potter, author of Green Is the New Red: An Insider’s Account of a Social Movement Under Siege, tells their story.

How do the victims of actual terrorism and their families feel about the use of “terrorist” to describe animal rights activists? And why do people accept this bastardization of the word? Is it simply because they haven’t given it any thought? Or, is it because categorizing activists as terrorists helps people rationalize their own behavior. After all, eating and wearing animals is less egregious than being a terrorist.

Under AETA, anyone who causes the loss of property or profits to institutions that use or sell animals can be prosecuted. The law is vague, and it is unconstitutional because it violates free speech. Eventually, it will be overturned. Learn more about AETA and where it stands now.