Adam Johnston / YourMovieSucks / YourMovieSucksDOTorg / AnUnkindness - It's hip to fuck dogs.

[Wheezy Asthmatic]

Lemme know when someone listens to this shit and gimme a summary. This video should only be a 30 sec long if you're a rational human being.
" Fucking dogs is wrong. Anyone who fucks dogs is sick. Don't fuck dogs. "
Jesus how hard is it to say that.

 

[Gravityqueen4life]

do you really need an hour too explain why its ok for you too suck your dogs dick Adam?

gave it 10 minutes and so far its just him bitching that people who call him a zoophile dont do it beacuse they care about the animals, but do it beacuse they either hate him personally or want to virtual signal.

 

[Cosmos]

I've actually really been enjoying the Adam and Pals commentaries for 13 Reasons Why. That show is such a fucking trainwreck.

I agree with most people in this thread when they're complaining about his content slowing to a trickle. He hasn't done an actual YMS review in over a year now. It's all just below-10 minute videos on his opinion on recent movies. He's great at tearing into schlock, I want to hear more of it but it's been so long since he's done it.

I enjoy the Adam and Pals commentaries so that's helped but I really wish he would go back to his roots and be more productive.

Also, I'm not listening to an hour long video on his views on bestiality because nobody has time for that.

 

[Meowthkip]

do you really need an hour too explain why its ok for you too suck your dogs dick Adam?

I don't think Adum even has a dog. Or any pets.

 

[Polexia Aphrodisia]

I don't think Adum even has a dog. Or any pets.

Hard to take care of a dog when you're plastered or high off your face a lot of the time, I'd imagine.
Or at least, hard to take good enough care of a dog that it won't try to attack you when you molest it.

 

[SwanDive]

Given that people in here don't care or are too busy to watch the full video (really not trying to come off as condescending when I say that), I might as well summarize the points he makes in the video and try to represent him to the best of my ability:

• Bestiality is generally wrong. This overall seems to be the gist of his point, and what people tend to take issue with is that he argues that it is hypocritical for people to say that people involved in animal husbandry who perform demonstrably worse acts to animals, sexual and non sexual, should not be criminalized but people who engage in less harmful sexual acts with animals should be criminally punished.
• He cites Jackass and Kenny Vs. Spenny as examples where acts of bestiality were performed for the sake of comedy and people otherwise seem fine with it. This leads him to believe that people only see bestiality as wrong when it is performed for the sexual gratification of the person involved, regardless of whatever sort of harm or distress is inflicted upon the animal. People care more about the mindset of the person than the well being of the animal involved.
• A large portion of the video is dedicated to him elaborating on why people who claim he is a zoophile are idiots. I do feel that it is important to point out that he does not refer to such comments as harassment, but rather people just memeing and trolling. He states that in the initial comments he made during a Twitch stream while drunk that he did not feel the need to be so thorough in his arguments because he did not believe his opinion to be controversial to the point where people would largely misrepresent him.
• He states that his takes on bestiality are only brought up in order to discredit him in unrelated arguments, whether that be the idubbbz simping drama, or him not liking a popular movie. He believes that if he were not a furry, this would not be as much of a talking point and cites Destiny and The Amazing Atheist points of comparison.
  • As someone who frequents the Destiny thread, it is worth pointing out that Destiny's takes on bestiality are similar to Adam's, if not more extreme, however this rarely comes up in discussion, with his incest takes being a more popular point of criticism. I don't know much about the Amazing Atheist however, so I can't comment on that front.
• On the topic of eating meat, while he himself generally refrains from eating meat products as part of a broader concern for the environment, he doesn't see much of an argument against eating meat from the perspective of preventing animal abuse. He states that it would be really weird to take that sort of position given that it is so ingrained in our culture as being morally permissible, while also acknowledging that cultural perspectives on harm towards other living beings is prone to change over time. Circumcision comes up as another example in which, under a similar moral framework to why people think bestiality is wrong, should technically be immoral, but the broader cultural perspective on the matter has deemed it fine nonetheless.
  • He makes the argument that a lot of the people who want to criminalize people performing sexual acts on animals for their own sexual gratification would be the type of people to oppose gay rights in the 1950s. He does acknowledge, however, that these two things are not equatable and that he is just simply drawing a comparison in the mindset and people's abilities to be critical and think beyond something just being socially acceptable or not.
  • He claims that the argument "It's wrong because it is degenerate" has its roots in people advocating against sodomy however long ago (sodomy referring to any sort of non-vaginal penetration, oral or anal) and that such people who make such arguments now would be against sodomy just as well if the broader cultural context deemed it to be immoral as well.
• Just because someone is a furry doesn't mean that they are interested in having sex with animals, and that the appeal of anthropomorphic animals are the sort of "meta-human" qualities they possess. He cites some alien from Mass Effect as a non-furry example of this to support his argument.

That's a bit of a brick of text there, but I wanted to be as comprehensive as possible. I've also included screencaps of the two reddit posts provided in the description of the video. There are some things I didn't include and he repeats himself at several points because, being a live stream, the video is very conversational (which would also explain the video length). That being said, I hope this was informative and helpful to the people who are unable or unwilling to sit through the entire video themselves.

I don't think Adum even has a dog. Or any pets.

In the video he states he does not own any pets.

 

[Rice Is Ready]

Given that people in here don't care or are too busy to watch the full video (really not trying to come off as condescending when I say that), I might as well summarize the points he makes in the video and try to represent him to the best of my ability:

• Bestiality is generally wrong. This overall seems to be the gist of his point, and what people tend to take issue with is that he argues that it is hypocritical for people to say that people involved in animal husbandry who perform demonstrably worse acts to animals, sexual and non sexual, should not be criminalized but people who engage in less harmful sexual acts with animals should be criminally punished.
• He cites Jackass and Kenny Vs. Spenny as examples where acts of bestiality were performed for the sake of comedy and people otherwise seem fine with it. This leads him to believe that people only see bestiality as wrong when it is performed for the sexual gratification of the person involved, regardless of whatever sort of harm or distress is inflicted upon the animal. People care more about the mindset of the person than the well being of the animal involved.
• A large portion of the video is dedicated to him elaborating on why people who claim he is a zoophile are idiots. I do feel that it is important to point out that he does not refer to such comments as harassment, but rather people just memeing and trolling. He states that in the initial comments he made during a Twitch stream while drunk that he did not feel the need to be so thorough in his arguments because he did not believe his opinion to be controversial to the point where people would largely misrepresent him.
• He states that his takes on bestiality are only brought up in order to discredit him in unrelated arguments, whether that be the idubbbz simping drama, or him not liking a popular movie. He believes that if he were not a furry, this would not be as much of a talking point and cites Destiny and The Amazing Atheist points of comparison.
  • As someone who frequents the Destiny thread, it is worth pointing out that Destiny's takes on bestiality are similar to Adam's, if not more extreme, however this rarely comes up in discussion, with his incest takes being a more popular point of criticism. I don't know much about the Amazing Atheist however, so I can't comment on that front.
• On the topic of eating meat, while he himself generally refrains from eating meat products as part of a broader concern for the environment, he doesn't see much of an argument against eating meat from the perspective of preventing animal abuse. He states that it would be really weird to take that sort of position given that it is so ingrained in our culture as being morally permissible, while also acknowledging that cultural perspectives on harm towards other living beings is prone to change over time. Circumcision comes up as another example in which, under a similar moral framework to why people think bestiality is wrong, should technically be immoral, but the broader cultural perspective on the matter has deemed it fine nonetheless.
  • He makes the argument that a lot of the people who want to criminalize people performing sexual acts on animals for their own sexual gratification would be the type of people to oppose gay rights in the 1950s. He does acknowledge, however, that these two things are not equatable and that he is just simply drawing a comparison in the mindset and people's abilities to be critical and think beyond something just being socially acceptable or not.
  • He claims that the argument "It's wrong because it is degenerate" has its roots in people advocating against sodomy however long ago (sodomy referring to any sort of non-vaginal penetration, oral or anal) and that such people who make such arguments now would be against sodomy just as well if the broader cultural context deemed it to be immoral as well.
• Just because someone is a furry doesn't mean that they are interested in having sex with animals, and that the appeal of anthropomorphic animals are the sort of "meta-human" qualities they possess. He cites some alien from Mass Effect as a non-furry example of this to support his argument.

That's a bit of a brick of text there, but I wanted to be as comprehensive as possible. I've also included screencaps of the two reddit posts provided in the description of the video. There are some things I didn't include and he repeats himself at several points because, being a live stream, the video is very conversational (which would also explain the video length). That being said, I hope this was informative and helpful to the people who are unable or unwilling to sit through the entire video themselves.


In the video he states he does not own any pets.

It doesn't matter what he says he will always be known as "dogfucker" online and no hour long rambling video will ever change that.

 

[Kuchipatchi]

How are his subscribers taking this? I wanna see a chart of his numbers.

Edit: Because it ain't the main channel, he's hiding it from the normies that would bomb the video with angry comments and dislikes. His fans are sucking him off harder now. I can imagine that they're his furry demographic otherwise people would have a problem.

 

[Polexia Aphrodisia]

He cites Jackass and Kenny Vs. Spenny as examples where acts of bestiality were performed for the sake of comedy and people otherwise seem fine with it. This leads him to believe that people only see bestiality as wrong when it is performed for the sexual gratification of the person involved, regardless of whatever sort of harm or distress is inflicted upon the animal. People care more about the mindset of the person than the well being of the animal involved.

He's generalizing here. I'm sure there are plenty of people who think that bestiality for comedy is gross - myself included.

He makes the argument that a lot of the people who want to criminalize people performing sexual acts on animals for their own sexual gratification would be the type of people to oppose gay rights in the 1950s. He does acknowledge, however, that these two things are not equatable and that he is just simply drawing a comparison in the mindset and people's abilities to be critical and think beyond something just being socially acceptable or not.

If they're not equatable, why bring it up? Pedophiles also loooove the gay marriage argument. Not a good look.

He states that his takes on bestiality are only brought up in order to discredit him in unrelated arguments, whether that be the idubbbz simping drama, or him not liking a popular movie. He believes that if he were not a furry, this would not be as much of a talking point and cites Destiny and The Amazing Atheist points of comparison.

Yeah, sorry, but if someone holds re/tarded opinions, I'm less inclined to take them seriously. See: antivaxxers, flat earthers, essential oil people.

 

[Meowthkip]

In the video he states he does not own any pets.

You know, yeah, the way he talks about animals has always given me the impression that he's never had a pet or any kind of close emotional bond with an animal, since he takes this kind of clinical view on the subject of bestiality that seems to lean in favor of rationality rather than the emotions of "taking advantage of an animal's trust in you for your own sexual gratification is wrong." Weirdly, if he actually had a pet, he might actually better understand why people have such a visceral reaction to it.

I think as long as the pet isn't a horse, he wouldn't mongle it. I want to believe that he wouldn't try anything with a horse, but I don't think I could trust him not to get curious.

Dude likes horses.

 

[Cactus Wings]

You know, yeah, the way he talks about animals has always given me the impression that he's never had a pet or any kind of close emotional bond with an animal, since he takes this kind of clinical view on the subject of bestiality that seems to lean in favor of rationality rather than the emotions of "taking advantage of an animal's trust in you for your own sexual gratification is wrong." Weirdly, if he actually had a pet, he might actually better understand why people have such a visceral reaction to it.

I think as long as the pet isn't a horse, he wouldn't mongle it. I want to believe that he wouldn't try anything with a horse, but I don't think I could trust him not to get curious.

Dude likes horses.

I've been trying to figure out what differences there are on rodent pets like hamsters and more personality-driven ones like dogs or cats, and that's exactly it. They have either the capacity or the physicality to express some kind of personality. Horses do not. They can stand around and react in varying ways to different things. You get either "don't do that" or "whatever" when you shove a dick in a horse. Dogs on the other hand, have a subjective reaction to it, I'd assume, which is either why people defend them so drastically, or worse, why people like sticking their dick in one. He literally just wants to jerk off to horse fursonas with big dicks, is probably all he's getting at.

I knew a person ages ago with the exact same kind of personality and even looks to Adam, and lo behold, he was reasonably normal, but also would get completely nonsensical and aroused at the mere thought of horses. Take into consideration that horses can't really show much personality beyond instinctual reaction, and the fact they have big dicks; something of critical importance to basic bitch furfags like Adam, and I can easily see why he'd end up discussing with the zoo crowd over something as basic as "horse dicks are kinda hot, since I see them in furry art, and horses, unable to really come across as individuals the same way more expressive pets can, are therefor also okay to shove a stick in".

Everything aside, he's just such a fucking waste of space. He's a below C-tier youtuber, hasn't fully committed to being a furfag, has a terrible "it's not my OC, it's me"-approach to the art he does get, and yet he keeps popping up in collaborations with all kinds of otherwise respectable YouTubers, the same way Game Grumps do. Like, at the fucking least just go full-on furry and buy horse porn left and right. I've seen entirely respectable artists clearly have a huge fascination with horses and taurs, and almost exactly because they just react upon it through the furry medium, nobody gives a shit. It's once he tries to address normal people about normal horses and dogs it goes wrong.

 

[Meowthkip]

I've been trying to figure out what differences there are on rodent pets like hamsters and more personality-driven ones like dogs or cats, and that's exactly it. They have either the capacity or the physicality to express some kind of personality. Horses do not.

Take into consideration that horses can't really show much personality beyond instinctual reaction,

I'm not a horse person, so I really can't say anything to refute this anecdotally, but this feels wrong. Dogs have several thousand years as a head start in terms of being bred and raised to be sensitive to human emotions and desires and they're also way easier for humans to read than a horse. Horses can't see things directly in front of them due to the placement of their eyes and most people in modern day don't have frequent exposure to horses, so they won't know how to interpret their body language. My experience with horses is pretty limited, but they're do have personalities, and they definitely get curious about things. In comparison to dogs they can be kind of dumb, though.

Spoiler: RE: Sticking your dick in a horse, you sick fuck

I also imagine most horses don't really react much to a person sticking their dick in because, well, obvious size differences. And now thinking to the horse people I do know joking about horses liking to snack on fingers if anybody's ever gotten their dick bitten off by a horse, well, it would serve them right.

 

[Arm_of_the_Lord]

I watched a couple of his videos while bored(without prior knowledge of this thread's existence) and they were awful.
I seriously don't understand what the fuck do you people find interesting about them; he does provide legitimate and interesting criticism once a blue moon, but most of the time he's just making incredibly minor nitpicking and poopoo peepee jokes. He also constantly engages in painfully autistic theorycrafting about the movies that don't merit that kind of analysis, often because he simply glossed over some plot point.
Oh and he inserted a clip of himself vomiting into one of the videos for no good reason. What the fuck.

 

[Nauseated Courgi]

Oh and he inserted a clip of himself vomiting into one of the videos for no good reason. What the fuck.

Two of them actually.

 

[GhostButt]

Bestiality for the sake of comedy or husbandry are not as frowned upon because the INTENT isn't disgusting.

Comedy is to remind you that it's gross and it wouldn't be funny if it wasn't so.

Husbandry is for the sake of agriculture.

Fucking animals because you are a creep that can't get off any other way because animals are your obsession = mentally ill, and we are right to distance ourselves from such an individual.

Fucking animals because you are a creep and thus can't find a willing partner = you are gross and probibly mentally ill in a different manner and we are right to have already distanced ourselves from such a person.

The natural human instinct of revulsion isn't evidence of hypocrisy, it just is.

 

[SwanDive]

Bestiality for the sake of comedy or husbandry are not as frowned upon because the INTENT isn't disgusting.

Comedy is to remind you that it's gross and it wouldn't be funny if it wasn't so.

Husbandry is for the sake of agriculture.

Fucking animals because you are a creep that can't get off any other way because animals are your obsession = mentally ill, and we are right to distance ourselves from such an individual.

Fucking animals because you are a creep and thus can't find a willing partner = you are gross and probibly mentally ill in a different manner and we are right to have already distanced ourselves from such a person.

The natural human instinct of revulsion isn't evidence of hypocrisy, it just is.

I believe Adam's argument at that point would be that you don't actually care about the health and well-being of the animal. It's not the fact that an animal being harmed is immoral, but rather the mindset of the person inflicting the harm that is immoral.

 

[who dare wins?]

I legitimately wonder what went through his head to make such a long video where he is pulling off insane mental gymnastics to say "fucking dogs is ok".

 

[Man vs persistent rat]

Being the big dick in a community of other spergs tends to give content creators an inflated view of their own opinions. Most hide these flaws better than YMS, I think he's outright incapable of self-reflection.

 

[Ricket]

I legitimately wonder what went through his head to make such a long video where he is pulling off insane mental gymnastics to say "fucking dogs is ok".

It's just "I'm right; I'm always right!" blasted on repeat 24/7 all the while getting more and more louder the more he doesn't sperg about it.

 

[Burning Fanatic]

I've actually really been enjoying the Adam and Pals commentaries for 13 Reasons Why. That show is such a fucking trainwreck.

I agree with most people in this thread when they're complaining about his content slowing to a trickle. He hasn't done an actual YMS review in over a year now. It's all just below-10 minute videos on his opinion on recent movies. He's great at tearing into schlock, I want to hear more of it but it's been so long since he's done it.

I enjoy the Adam and Pals commentaries so that's helped but I really wish he would go back to his roots and be more productive.

Also, I'm not listening to an hour long video on his views on bestiality because nobody has time for that.

Back in late December, I brought up how Adam was working on a new YMS video about the Lion King remake. Unless I misunderstood it at the time, it seems like he's now doing two separate YMS videos: One about the whole "Kimba the White Lion" controversy, where Disney supposedly copied parts from the 1966 anime to incorporate into their 1994 film, and the other about the Lion King 2019 remake in general.

While he is correct about many of the inaccuracies and false information being spread by people, dude's becoming a bit too obsessive with it. Like in the first highlights video (around 8:20), one guy's video pointed to a similarity involving characters trying to avoid getting trampled by a stampede. Because the guy said "branch", despite the character in Kimba clearly clinging to the side of a tree and not a tree branch itself, Adam quickly jumps to assume that the guy didn't watch Kimba's anime at all. He then reels his assumption back after realizing just how silly that is to say.

TL;DR: Adam's been going to extreme lengths to try and disprove everyone (from random tabloid writers to YouTubers to even a college law professor) who believes or claims that Disney's the Lion King (1994) directly stole from the 1960's Kimba the White Lion anime. Hence why this shit's been taking forever to come out.