Try not to get outraged by your own misquote. I clearly said "one presumes", as in without evidence. If there was a case where a horse was infatuated with the

Try not to get outraged by your own misquote. I clearly said "one presumes", as in without evidence. If there was a case where a horse was infatuated with the person doing the deed and the person was doing it for the sole purpose of the horses enjoyment then that'd be just as weird. Clearly the weirdness is rooted in human morality. I don't think it's unusual to judge the behaviours of humans differently to animals. Otherwise it'd be acceptable to fight to the death over "access" to females; sexual consent would be a very loose concept and defecation on street corners would be acceptable.