Well this thread has lasted for 6 pages and does deal with a subject that is considered sexual in nature but it is only
discussion and has nothing pornographic or sexually leading. On that note, I would assume the post is ok since I don't say anything in it that can be misconstrued to be directed to anyone in particular. Also, the main part of the discussion is for education and does neither condone nor condemn.
So as a safeguard:
DISCLAIMER:
This post is in no way meant to encourage the act of bestiality/zoophilia and is meant strictly as a form of educational material which is in reply to an already existing discussion and references psychological, religious, social, philosophical, and moral ideas, thoughts, and opinions.
====================================================
Call it fascination, general interest, or just plain curiosity, the subject of Zoophilia has held my attention for decades and with good reason. I have undertaken the task of authoring a book on the subject from the perspective of an “insider”. The reasons for the book are many but the main reasons are because what the world knows and believes about Zoophilia is based merely on centuries of religious conviction, the bad publicity it receives from those who are ignorant of its realities, and the media portrayals showing only what they want the world to see and believe.
I tend to seek out information on the subject as well as those involved and with the advent of the internet, it is easier to do so. One reason being: before the internet, the world was a little more obscure and many cultures were concealed from the eyes and ears of others elsewhere around the globe.
:
|
“Society in general at present is considerably misinformed about zoophilia, its stereotypes, and its meaning.” (Masters, Miletski, Weinberg, Beetz)
|
From the dawn of the time of human-kind (both pre-historic and modern), bestiality has been a part of society and culture as can be seen in such things as pre-historic cave drawings (Northern Italian Val Camonica, in the lower Alpine regions of Lombardy, Italy), carved stone monuments and temples (Temple Art held by the Government Museum, Goa, India), In Greek, Roman, and Native American pottery, paintings, and even in jewelry.
Kings and Emperors have used bestiality as a means of punishment (in Sravanabelagola, a Jain place of pilgrimage in Karnataka, an inscription warns vandals of punishment by mating with a donkey and thieves who rob the temple will be offered to a sex starved bull) as well as for entertainment in the Circus of Rome:
:
|
"Beasts were specially trained to copulate with women: if the girls or women were unwilling then the animal would attempt rape. A surprising range of creatures was used for such purposes - bulls, giraffes, leopards, cheetahs, wild boar, zebras, stallions, jackasses, huge dogs, apes, etc. The beasts were taught how to copulate with a human being [whether male or female] either via the vagina or via the anus." - R.E.L. Masters Ph.D.: Forbidden Sexual Behaviour and Morality, an objective examination of perverse sex practices in different cultures (1962), ISBN 0856290416 LIC #62-12196).
|
In some cultures, bestiality is revered as sacred. In fact, the rendition of Leda and the Swan is known by connoisseurs as “An event of unequalled beauty”. In ancient Egypt, the animal aspects of the gods ensured that bestiality would be practiced both for religious and magical purposes, and in Greece, to punish Minos, Poseidon caused Pasiphaë, Minos' wife, to fall madly in love with a bull from the sea, the Cretan Bull. Pasiphaë had Daedalus, a famous architect, make a wooden cow for her. She then climbed into the decoy to seduce the white bull. The offspring of their union was a monster called the Minotaur.
Certain religious sects have documented bestiality in their teachings and the Christian Bible points to several passages in which the act is a crime and that the punishment for such a crime is stoning of both the human and the animal. I will not go into a debate on religion as I have my ideas, theories, and understanding of the reasons why such things are documented but I will say this:
It is believed by many that the main reason for the biblical laws were perhaps due to the ignorance and beliefs of the time, that in order for man to become closer God, he must first “rise above his basic bestial instincts”. Another reason for such laws was also due to the belief that such a union could produce offspring and that the offspring would be neither man nor beast but some form of monster, in equality to demons which are often portrayed as a cross between humans and animals.
In my time of study and research, I have found that much of what is believed is what has been spread trough propaganda by such groups as PETA, HSUS, ASAIRS (which was officially disbanned in 2003), and other such and so called “Animal Rights Activists” as well as government officials not to mention religious activists and fanatics. Also, the publicity that the media tends to show our society (which as we all know is driven by the need for “Airing Dirty Laundry”) is what people thrive on and want to see, yet what they believe is only what the media wants them to.
Older psychology placed bestiality and zoophilia into a categories of psychoses and it was deemed that anyone who had acted in this fashion was either a youth simply experimenting or a deranged psychopath capable of nothing but harm and suffering. Also, due to those who are publically ostracized by the media (who are usually done so because they were caught in the act and some form of harm had come to the animal) zoophiles have had to live in fear, ridicule, and in hiding. This same form of societal discrimination and ridicule also happened when the idea of homosexuality emerged in the USA in the 60’s. Now, modern psychology is slowly coming to the conclusion that zoophilia very well may be a genuine, loving, and caring lifestyle for the most part.
:
|
“Zoophiles' emotions and care to animals can be real, relational, authentic and (within animals' abilities) reciprocal, and not just a substitute or means of expression.” (Masters, Miletski, Weinberg, Beetz)
|
In the mid to late 90’s, a student of psychology named Hani Miletski, took upon herself the task of advertising on a nation wide scale for zoophiles to come forward and be a part of a survey which she would later use to author the book
“Understanding Bestiality and Zoophilia”
I have had the privilege of being able to speak with Dr. Miletski and through our dialogs, we have become fairly close friends. I have also had the privilege of speaking with such noted people as Peter Singer, Dr. Martin Weinberg, and a few who have been involved in such documentaries as “Animal Passions”. I have personally had the opportunity to have a voice in the July 2006 Bizarre Magazine UK article “Chasing Tail” as well as several offers from psychologists to speak at seminars and from producers to appear and speak in future documentaries.
Past documentaries (which I have not appeared or spoken in) have included “Hidden Love: Animal Passions” and the sequel “Animal Passions 2004”, and in 1998, Jerry Springer hosted one particular show called “I Married a Horse” which featured the late Mark Matthews (author of “The Horseman: Obsessions of a Zoophile”) and his wife, Pixel, a strawberry roan pony mare which Mark married in an unofficial ceremony. At the last minute, the show was pulled from airing, deemed too controversial even for the Jerry Springer Show. More recently, in 2007, the documentary film “ZOO” by Robinson Devor, made its debut at the Sundance Film Festival where it was acclaimed by “a poetic film about a forbidden subject, a perfect marriage between a cool and contemplative director and potentially incendiary subject matter: sex between men and animals”. It was a film which entailed a story that broke in 2005 about a local man, Kenneth Pinyan, who died after having sex with an Arabian stallion.
In my reply to many of the aspects of this thread, please understand that I am in no way denying anyone’s opinions and I am in no way making any statements against anyone here nor am I trying to gain condoning or convey correctness. My reply is simply in an effort to answer some of the questions, shed some light, and dispel some of the myths on the subject.
Havoc, I would like to thank you for reviving this thread but please allow me to say that although the definitions may be as they are, Zoophilia is not “AKA Bestiality AKA... f**cking sheep” … ( lol )
Although the terms are as they are, there is concern among zoophiles as well as among psychologists as to whether the terms are actually correct or not due to there being a great difference between their actual meanings.
In most cases, Zoophilia (taken from the greek words ζῶον (zṓon, "animal") and φιλία (philia, "friendship" or "love") simply means “Love of/for Animals”. It is often a very deep love and regard for non-human animals that is misunderstood by a vast number of people. Admitted, zoophilia can and often does involve a sexual attraction, but it is not the sexuality that is the attraction… sexuality as in any relationship is often a byproduct, a “perk” (if you will), and is not the sole reason for a person being a zoophile. When referring to sexuality, “Bestiality” is the term used for the act of sex between a human being and a non-human animal. There is also some debate among zoophiles as to their usages and from this, other terms have been born.
A Zoophile can be one of two types: sexual or non-sexual, therefore, the term “Zoosexual” has come about. A good example of these two variations would be:
1) the Zoosexual is the person who is deeply in love with
and has sex with their dog/horse/sheep/etc., where
2) a typical example of a non-sexual zoophile would be how someone refers to their dog as a family member, a child, etc. Although no one would admit it, the non-sexual zoophile can be seen in everyday life walking their dog in the park, visiting their beloved passed in the “Pet Cemetery”, etc. This is the same way a Zoosexual acts yet no one would really know if their best friend was Zoosexual unless they divulged it.
It takes great courage to openly admit something that is considered so taboo. Many won’t admit it and with good reason: our society feels compelled to “Crush” anything it cannot understand, to dissect it, categorize it, and often lock it away in a closet so it can’t be seen by the so called “normal ones”. For many, “coming out” could mean certain doom. Some zoophiles have animals that they are obligated to and must protect while others may have families or good jobs which they must protect. The reasons are many but none the less, all too real. Society sees this subject as what some might consider, the last taboo, and it is treated with greater disdain and loathing than any other.
There is a large difference between zoophilia and bestiality, that I will agree with. I wouldn’t worry too much about no one being totally against it in this thread… those who are just haven’t found it yet or aren’t wanting to answer out of fear of being associated with its subject matter. ( lol ) Give it time.
To comment on the ideas and feelings of disgust: one of the main reasons for this, I believe, is due to humans believing that they are above all else in this world without having realized that they too (humans) are a species of animal, a mammal, a primate creature which only has two things differentiating them from all others:
1) the imposable thumb, and
2) a higher intelligence (which is often questionable and under scrutiny). Humans see other life as “lower” and treat it as though it cannot be remotely equal. We can see it in our language: a non-human animals is almost always referred to as
“It”, a thing to be locked in a cage or kept outside no matter the climate. The manner in which animals are generally treated possibly would be considered abusive if the non-human animal was given the same rights that humans have.
One example of the ways many humans abuse animals was given above yet there are many and most don’t realize it as abuse because even in the eyes of the law, an animal is “chattel”, personal property that has no decision on its own life’s matters and may be used at the owners discretion.
Other ways in which animals are abused include specific methods of “training” used for certain show animals such as horses; using animals to lift and pull obviously overbearing loads such as barges on a river bank; carrying great weight over long distances; herding into small cramped spaces and overfed then killed, often inhumanely such as with a pneumatic bolt to the head or electrocution, in mass amounts for food and clothing. Even in the types of foods that are bought and sold for pets is questionable. Have you ever actually tasted some of that stuff? I have and I cannot imagine it is “Loved by pets” as much as most ads claim. They eat it because there is no other choice and most veterinarians will tell you that feeding them human foods and cooked fats is no good for them. I have often questioned the reasons behind this but have come to the assumption that they tell you this so the circle of funding can keep pouring in from the manufacturers, veterinarians, and vaccine companies. Vaccination is another misleading abusive behavior in the name of pharmaceuticals and veterinarians making money.
Dr. Bob Rogers, DVM, of the Critter Fixer Pet Hospital, in Spring, TX did a study in 2000 and found that when an annual booster vaccination with a modified live virus vaccine (i.e. Distemper , Parvovirus or Fe Distemper) is given to a previously vaccinated adult animal - no added protection is provided. Modified live virus vaccines depend on the replication of the virus for a response. Antibodies from previous vaccines do not allow the new virus to replicate. Antibody titers are not boosted significantly, memory cell populations are not expanded thus, no additional protection is provided. He also found that Vaccine Manufacturers, with the USDA's approval, were relabeling some three-year rabies vaccines and using them as one year products. This senseless annual vaccination was creating two serious adverse reactions; Feline Vaccine Associated Sarcoma (VAS), a cancerous tumor that forms at the injection-site and Canine Auto-Immune Hemolytic Anemia (AIHA). As a result, numerous pets and companion animals died. A petition shortly followed to the United States Government and the AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) which addressed the study and findings and it was also recommended that a "truth in labeling" law for Rabies vaccines be created.
On health matters: Humans have been the cause and carrier of more germs and diseases than any other creature. The sexual diseases that can be passed between humans are many with at least three that are fatal but as with almost all diseases, they are “Species Specific”. Humans and non-human animals can and do carry specific strains of bacteria and disease which can be shared called “Zoonosis” yet there are few major ones that can be passed sexually but over the years, have been all but wiped out due to vaccination. As with any form of such activity, there is always that chance of risk of health and injury though it would appear that humans take more risk upon themselves and within themselves.
Oh, and just to set the record straight, HIV and AIDS (of the human form) are Species Specific and there is no documented record that either have ever been passed between species (outside of primates). To date, there is no conclusive or concrete evidence or record of STD’s being shared between humans and non-humans except a scant few which are generally treated by antibiotics and can also be transmitted in ways other than sexually. Many myths have come out of ignorance: Syphilis was thought to be a sexually transmitted disease that originated from relations within the shepherding community and then from swine. Gonorrhea was also thought to have originated in the same manner. These two are Species Specific and accredited to the human race alone.
:
|
"I've caught more ills from people sneezing over me and giving me virus infections than from kissing Dogs." - Barbara Woodhouse
|
I have always been fond of the idea that “As long as no harm comes to anyone or anything, then it's fine. To each his (or her) own.” Perhaps if the rest of the world had this form of tolerance and thought, maybe prejudice would disappear and true peace and harmony would happen.
As for the comparison of Zoophilia to any other –philia, first, one must look at the reality of the subject without making irrational assumptions, and they must look at the activity by those involved and the outcome. To compare Zoophilia with any other type is an absurd “reaching for straws” by those whose arguments are usually based solely on unfounded theory with no justifiable proof. They then use these arguments in order to prove a something which is pointless. They simply argue that it is wrong without giving a single shred of solid evidence to the fact or to the contrary. But, just as any good lawyer or politician, the battle is generally won because they have the ability to “Sway the popular opinion” by using what society thrives on most - fear.
As the old saying goes:
“What is one man’s meat is another man’s poison”. We are all individuals and as such, we each have our own convictions to what right and wrong are and what may not be right for one or some, does not make it wrong for all.
We all know that murder is wrong because it deprives someone of their life. It is a harmful act with no in between. Those who commit murder and have no remorse are usually quite sociopathic and psychopathic. This cannot be said about zoophilia except in the hands of a (another rarely heard term) “Zoosadist”. The Zoosadist is someone who takes pleasure in harming or killing an animal for personal satisfaction.
As for the way the mind works about certain things, you are correct “snuzi” but again, for the person who is above average IQ, who believes that murder and stealing are wrong, who may even go to church and lives their lives helping others and living a life that can be called caring and loving – then what?
So, they go home and kiss their dog on the lips, or take a bath with them. Maybe they have a beautiful Arabian mare that they treat like a queen… would sexual contact with either one be so wrong?
Some zoophiles are or have been married and have even had children. Then there are those who are “Zooexclusive” and never have been with another human sexually. The very thought is repulsive to them. There are numerous reasons for this but again, it doesn’t make what they do or how they feel wrong and no one else should have the authority to dictate simply because of their own feelings or thoughts. If it isn’t harmful to anyone or anything, then it isn’t wrong in my opinion.
The internet cannot be to blame for zoophilia or homosexuality no more than it can be to blame for how our children grow up or the music we listen to. Zoophilia and bestiality have been with us throughout history. It just wasn’t as openly known until the internet. In fact, many zoophiles have even said that they thought they were alone, that there couldn’t be anyone else that does this. For many, they felt that they truly did have something psychologically wrong with them and they were isolated until the internet came along. That is when many were able to find out that they really weren’t alone and that they didn’t have to think something was wrong with them any longer. Recent research gives us an idea that Zoophilia is much wider spread than originally believed.
Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s studies have since been basically ignored, mainly because they were inconclusive as his study examples were surveys taken from such people as juvenile offenders and people who had already been convicted of sexual crimes. His study didn’t take into account the possibility of a much farther reaching group.
To give you an idea of just who can be zoophile and even zoosexual, I have spoken to zoophiles who are doctors, lawyers, police officers, dentists, nuclear technologists, psychologists, computer technicians, teachers, veterinarians, steal workers, carpenters, farmers, laborers, ages ranging teen to elderly adult and both male and female. Their numbers are mind staggering though no one really knows just how many zoophiles are really out there.
Many zoophiles have told me that they have been the way they are since the time they were very young. Some in fact believe that they were zoophile from birth but didn’t know what to call it, that they simply just can’t describe why, but they have little or no attraction to other humans in a sexual way.
It can be safely said that “Most” zoophiles do make love with their partners out of a genuine love for them and you can immediately tell who is a fetishist/bestialist and who is a true zoophile. I have found that there is a great distinction between the two. You generally will not know a zoophile unless they tell you they are and they generally act like anyone else. They are not awe-struck when the subject comes up and they are generally very attuned to animals and their feelings. On the other hand, the fetishist/bestialist only seems interested in sexual discussion or perverseness. I have had emails and numerous chat room discussions with such people and the first thing out of their mouths is usually derogatory, sexual, and disturbing.
It is not always true that a person who is attracted to animals sexually has to have a certain amount of feeling or love for the animal. If that were so then anyone seeking a casual sexual encounter or affair with another human would likewise have to have some amount of feeling for them. Although the zoophile generally does love animals and finds certain ones particularly attractive, there are those who seek out simple affairs or sexual outlet yet does not “Love” the partner other than maybe as a casual relation. The one who feels nothing for the other to me is a bestialist, and can be seen in the pornographic industry very well. This is also something many zoophiles are against… the professional porn industry using animals in this way. This sort of thing is all over the internet and is another thing which gives true zoophilia a very bad reputation. It is another reason why so many zoophiles feel the need to be reclusive. Unlike that which is simply a pair of lovers having mutually consenting fun, the professional porn is in it for the gain, the money, and often is quite abusive to not only the animals but the actors as well. Then there are the forums and groups which promote such graphic disregard for animals. Some such forums will have this material available for all to see yet in their rules, specifically state no child porn. Oddly enough, they don’t consider a calf or young animal akin to a young human. In my honest opinion, if the animal is not of mature age to understand sex, if they are not of proper age to breed, then it is the same thing as child pornography and molestation.
For those who believe that this only happens between humans and non-human animals, you may find this interesting –
National Geographic’s “Interspecies Sex: Evolution's Hidden Secret?”
I have worked on numerous farms and have been the stable master of at least three stables: I have seen dogs and pigs, cows and horses, sheep and goats, and dogs and goats having sexual intercourse not to mention the ones who seems to be into “sex toys”. I once witnessed a stallion trying to have sex with an 800 pound round bale of hay and how many can honestly say that a dog doesn’t know the difference between another dog and someone’s pant leg?
In reply to the first post by “Mojo”: your question about what the next topic should be about is totally and absolutely uncalled for !!! This is the sort of thing that zoophiles all too often have to put up with because of the way it is treated and viewed by an ignorant society and has been unjustly publicized by the media. Again, to attempt to compare zoophilia to other paraphilias is an absurd and irrational assumption.
On the matter of choice: Basically, any form of activity is a choice if you look at it correctly. We can choose to be hetero, homo, bi, or even zoophilic. Sometimes, the feeling for a certain thing can also dictate that choice. There has been placed upon society, many boundaries and barriers which are seen as taboo. To traverse the barrier between species not only takes great courage, but takes a very open mind as well as having a deep regard and feeling for animals. No one ever wakes up one morning and thinks “Hey, I think I will go have sex with a horse today”, sometimes, it just happens. Sometimes, a person can get close to someone or something and a feeling overwhelms them. For them, it is the same as if a man walks into a store all alone and sees a beautiful blonde at the checkout counter. Immediately his heart begins to pound harder and he feels like his knees will give way. They meet, share a moment, find out a little about the other, maybe have dinner or go on a trip together. The next thing you know, they have fallen in love and into bed. For the Zoosexual Zoophile, it is the same.
Of all the true zoophiles I have met, their feelings for their mate is no different than that of a married couple of ten, twenty, or even fifty years. They love and adore their partner, they would do anything to see to their happiness, their safety, and they would gladly lay down their life for their mate. That is no less genuine than the same felt in a human/human relationship.
Having worked at stables, I can also say that non-humans will take the initiative. I have witnessed a stallion trying to basically rape a human female simply because he could smell her hormonal scent. She was at her time and the stallion, with a keener sense of smell and senses than we humans have, could tell that this was the same scent that signals a mares receptiveness. This same scent is also what makes a female more attractive to the human male. It is called a pheromone and is a physiological chemical present in all mammals including humans.
You cannot always believe everything you read, especially when remarks are simply based on personal opinion with no solid facts to back it. I too have seen such things as claims that bestiality is the same as forcing or rape but those are the claims of ignorant opinionated people. It has no bearing, it has no fidelity, it has no foundation, it is not fact.
Non-human Animals have the very same Fight or Flight responses humans do.
Let us take for example what Mark Matthews had to say:
:
|
"Take Pixel for example, she's not tied up, she can walk away, she can run away, she could kick the living bejeezus out of me, she could bite, horses are not defenseless. Friends of mine with dogs, (chuckles) well now dogs... you ever try to do something to a dog that the dog really didn't like? At least a dog that has all his teeth?"
|
There are any number of ways in which non-human animals can say “No”. I read a research article once that stated:
:
|
"In most [popular] references to bestiality, violence towards the animal is automatically implied. That sexual approaches to animals may not need force or violence but rather, sensitivity, or knowledge of animal behavior, is rarely taken into consideration." - Andrea M. Beetz, PhD. (Love, Violence, and Sexuality in Relationships between Humans and Animals (2002)
|
In this respect, what is being said is that it often takes knowledge of animal body language and behavior and not abuse or forcefulness to reach the end result. All too often, people immediately assume it takes force or rape to have sex with an animal. This is preposterous.
Consent is a slippery slope argument. It seems that consent is only required if it involves any discussion of sexuality, otherwise: Humans never require consent from an animal to kill him/her for food or clothing, they never require consent when they force a dog or horse to be castrated or spayed, they never require consent from a horse/ox to pull a ton of apples or haul a locomotive over mountains (such as they did during the building of the railroads in the 1800’s). Humans have a double standard and will use it to their advantage, even if what they are arguing is illogical, irrational, and moot.
Animals have a choice as can be seen in tests done in which animals are given choices between specifics. Also, claims that it is against an animal’s instinct is a myth, again caused by the belief that animals cannot think for themselves. Instincts are the basic traits that all animals (including humans) use to survive and sex is part of it. Veterinarians have even stated that most animals are sexual opportunists and will seek it out. Also, to claim that an animal cannot choose to have sex with a human is irrational as many zoophiles I have talked to would readily disagree due to their first experience being accidental and initiated by the family dog. If an animal cannot choose, then the animal would not take the initiative of their own accord. To say that it is something that a non-human wouldn’t normally do… there are interspecies relationships in many species. Not to mention, as seen in veterinary study:
:
|
“Hand raised animals will grow to know their nurturer as pack leader and will often look to them for not only protection and food but for sex as well.” (Merk Veterinary Manual 7th edition, Animal Behavior)
|
The majority of Zoophiles take great care in how they treat animals and they try to learn as much as they can in order to do so in a loving and caring manner. Zoophiles are generally against any form of animal abuse so is it any wonder why they get so upset when they are called animal abusers or compared to other sexually implied abuse?
I believe I will conclude this reply as it is quite long enough and should have answered much of the replies as are here. If there are any further questions, feel free to add to the thread or to message me here and I will try to be as honest and as professional as possible although, I will not privately discuss anything involving sexuality with anyone under 18 years of age except as it may apply to this thread and in a scientific manner.
.
"Facsimile" ... doesn't make sense to me either ( lol ) but the internet
.
. I agree with you though, it's more of a porn haven then anything else. And you can just post wherever you will mate, no problem. Just keep it civilized.
