This is just screaming out for comment. Apart from the draconian moralistic outrage, what's the crime here? Poor horse? Is there evidence the horse has suffered? Given the thousand pound horse could have objected and squashed Mr. Vereen at any time, but didn't, could that be interpreted as consent? Unless Vereen slipped the horse some rohypnol over some nachos at the local pub first, but there's no suggestion of that.
Poor horse? It's okay to slam nails into its hooves, stick chunky heavy metal and leather gadgets into its mouth, strap an uncomfortable, heavy saddle on its back and sit on it, or imprison it in a smelly 6 by 6 cell, but it's not okay to show the horse a little man lovin' from time to time?
Have there been any complaints from the horse? Any evidence of trauma?
As Vereen has previously had sex with the same horse, clearly there is a special relationship here. In the human world they'd be practically married! Is this fatuous criminal charge, then, motivated by jealousy on the part of Ms. Kenley? Just who is she jealous of - the horse or Mr. Vereen? And has she uploaded the video to Youtube?
I thought the world had become more sexually tolerant lately. Of course, it is South Carolina where basically everyone is related, which, on that basis, I'd have thought a little horse play would be right up there in outrage value with finding a Playboy mag in your teenage son's drawer. A bit ho-hum really.
No comments:
Post a Comment