Zoophilia?

[iridescentblack]

Here's my logic: "He who goes around calling everyone a pedophile... is a pedophile."

 

[Flehmen]

In the philosophy of harm reduction I thought I would visit this thread which popped up on my google alert on the topic of zoophilia.

A little about myself. I'm in my 40s, a professional instructor of adults, married for two decades, contributor to and volunteer for the local community, had a perfectly normal childhood with no skeletons in the closet, etc. I've also been attracted to horses since a little before puberty.

I am posting this partly to set some of the record straight, partly because the social stigma of alternate sexuality needs to be eliminated, and partly because I know that being "alone" with this can be a very hard thing.

Consent:
I firmly believe adult animals can consent and even enthusiastically enjoy sex. I can anecdotally give you a lot of examples but I give you your own experiences. Lets look at dogs, almost all dogs hate having their nails clipped in my experience, and it is quite obvious that they do. The may tolerate it but it is abundantly obvious they are not willing participants. How about a game of fetch, it is also pretty obvious that they want to play. My dogs do something I find exceptionally cute where they will literally nose my hand up onto their head to receive a good petting. Yes, dogs cannot verbalize, but they do have ways of making their preferences known. One last thought before I get on to the problem I have with people suddenly being concerned about animal consent, I have never, ever, been afraid of a six year old child but I have been afraid of an adult dog. Dogs and other animals can and will say no vigorously as much as they will say yes to things that are pleasurable.

So my issue with the consent argument is this, if sex with animals(SWA) is truly rape because we cannot get consent, then what the hell is that juicy steak on your plate? Murder? You see my biggest problem with this argument isn't that people believe it, protecting animals is a good thing, but that they literally turn around and are happy to ignore consent when it comes to their own pleasure in gobbling down meat. Is petting a strange dog now assault? No one cares until it is about sex which to me suggests that it is far more about the sex than the ethics around it.

In the end, what is the ethics of the relationship between man and beast?
http://www.thelocal.dk/20141013/bestiality-ban-not-needed-ethics-council-says
Analyzing Bestiality by Sarah Wheeler

Another thought for you, if you eat cheese, drink milk, eat pork and so forth almost ALL these animals in an industrial setting are artificially inseminated. For cows and pigs this is a particularly painful process and to me would fit ANY definition of rape you would care to throw at me as it is plainly obvious it is not consensual and involves the sex organs. If you were never upset with that, then why are you upset with this, be honest?

Animal pleasure and intelligence:
The literature speaks for itself here that when given the opportunity animals can seek pleasure and can and do make their choices known.
http://www.thehorse.com/articles/34718/study-horses-can-communicate-blanketing-preferences
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_vices#cite_note-equinestudfarmmed-6
Teamwork, pleasure and bargaining in animal social behaviour J. ROUGHGARDEN Journal of Evolutionary Biology.
Secton 2.4.3 of Animal pleasure and its moral significance in the journal of Applied Animal and Behaviour Science Vol 118(2009) is of particular significance to the understand of why we think animals feel "no pleasure" during sex and the entire aritcle throws into stark contrast the idea of animals as unsuffering unthinking unintelligent individuals.

Unfortunately this topic is so wildly open ended and subject to so many assumptions that I can only go on what I've personally experiece in that animals will sex pleasure when other needs are met and sexual pleasure is a primary motivator when animals are allowed to express it.

I'd like you to think about why we neuter our pets in North America. The number one reason I hear is "it fixes behaviour problems" but what behaviour problems does it fix exactly? Sexual behaviours. In this way it is interesting to note that the attitude towards neutering is very different in Europe.

The "Link" between animal abuse and violence(and the assumption that sex is automatically abuse):

I can't help but notice that most of the links to the "research" are invalid, however from the context I was able to guess which studies they were since I've read everything I've been able to get my hands on. Characteristics of Juvenile Offenders Admitting to Sexual Activity with Nonhuman Animals by Fleming et al. is where a lot of these claims come from and is an absolutely atrocious piece of research. First, it only talked to "criminals" to begin with, while on the order of 94% of the sex offenders didn't have sex with animals it tried hard to make a link between sex with animals and such offences, and if you read the discussion it even states how flawed the research is before going on to generalize. Of course that's not what gets reported by humane societies. Also, if you read the biblography all his references are from an abuse perspective, they are pretty cherry picked to be honest.

Here is what real research reads like, while it is a specific case study it is an exceptionally informative read:

In a previous article, we presented phallometric data to illustrate a case of preferential bestiality or zoophilia (Earls & Lalumière, Sex Abuse: J Res Treat, 14:83-88, 2002). Based on the available literature, we argued that a marked preference for having sex with animals over sex with humans is extremely rare. In the present article, we describe a second case of zoophilia that challenges the widely held assumptions that men who have sex with animals are generally of below average intelligence and come from rural areas. In addition, we provide a brief review of a burgeoning quantitative literature using large groups of zoophiles recruited from internet sources. Although estimates of the prevalence of zoophilia are not possible at this time, it appears that zoophilia is not as rare as once thought and shares many features with other atypical sexual interests.(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18157625)​

Others to examine are researchers who talk to people who are not sex offenders already, they have much more valid comments on the topic and are much less inflammatory in their rhetoric. Remember when all gays were pedophiles, that gays were more likely to be sex offenders, that gays were going to destroy the moral fabric of the universe? This is the same ocean, just a different boat. Those things are much more likely the result of how people are treated than the sexual attraction itself.

History:
Porky Pig: In early America, farm animals took the blame for zoophilic sex. by Jesse Bering
Dearest Pet: On Bestiality by Midas Deckkers is an excellent documentation of bestiality in art and throughout history.
A Historical Overview of Sex with Animals by R. E. L. Masters

Conclusion:
Back to the harm reduction, to stigmatize people for a sexual orientation(as more modern research is starting to class it btw. See Beetz, Miletski) is to force people, old ones like me but more importantly young ones, to hide parts of themselves. I wouldn't normally consider that a particular problem as I am a private person but the message they then receive as to who and what they are, some of which you can see on this thread, are extremely damaging. Even when I sit in a group of my fellow travelers do you know how hard it is to talk openly on this subject. For some it ever remains impossible. What if you're 12 years old, feel like I do, and learn that you are hated and despised. You think that suicide amongst the gay community is high, well, the suffering in the zoo community is there like no tomorrow. Ever since Kinsey we've known that animal lovers have been almost as populous (estimates ranging from 10-30 million in the US alone) as any other sexual minority group

Most of what I've said is not authoritative or in depth. I've tried to link sources that remain relatively neutral on the subject and not stuff written by zoophiles. You don't have to accept what I am, and I really don't care if you do, but when you start raining down hate on me for what I am I will stand up and object. I so wish I didn't have to hide my name, I'm relatively proud of who I am but I am desperately aware of the consequences of a witch hunt. I support and assist several local animal charities as I am able to. I support much tougher animal protection laws so long as they don't explicitly define sex as abuse. Many times an argument is made "he was let off because no one could find any harm so we need a new law" but the statement in itself should show the falsity of the thought, there was no harm.

Everyone who sees me with my animals, whether they know or not, has complimented me on my relationship with them. Horse people are constantly amazed at the interactions my mare and I have and how "impossible" it seems to them to have such a good relationship(I could list off a tonne of common horse problems that go away when you consider the animals feelings). People with decades of experience with horses I might add. I do no harm and I NEVER would, not even a little. My mare seeks out encounters sometimes, most times, even over food and equine companionship.

I hope that helps you understand some more of what zoophilia is.

 

[Flehmen]

A more accessible article on bestiality can be found in Scientific American:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...iles-make-scientists-rethink-human-sexuality/

 

[One Thousand Words]

I agree with this 100%. The animals aren't traumatized by it or really even negatively affected by it. To them, it's just something else that happened, because they don't even make mental note of it..... or particularly dislike, or like it for that matter. Their brains are so simple that they don't even comprehend it as much of anything. I agree that it's pretty sick though, I mean people are meant to be with other people not animals. The idea that there are people who have sex with animals is sick..... and also just downright bizarre.

Not all children experience trauma due to sex though. Most pedophillia is obtained by grooming their victim, making them feel special. It only once they realise that society considers their sexual relationships as wrong do they suffer. Children are easy to manipulate and it is the imbalance of power that makes pedophillia so wrong.

Most reasonable adults would also take offense in the intellectually handicap adult being groomed for sex, despite them physically being sexually mature. Animals should be held in the same regard. The emotional intelligence to give proper informed consent does not exist so it is equally as wrong to allow sexual relationships with them.

 

[shadowwoof]

Most reasonable adults would also take offense in the intellectually handicap adult being groomed for sex, despite them physically being sexually mature. Animals should be held in the same regard.

Please do not compare intellectually handicapped adults with animals, as this does them both a disservice. Intellectually handicapped adults face a completely different set of challenges than animals. However, my statement above holds. Sexual predation is never acceptable, and grooming anyone for sex is wrong.

The emotional intelligence to give proper informed consent does not exist so it is equally as wrong to allow sexual relationships with them.

A few things. Informed consent refers to medical procedures/trials, not a standard for sexual relationships. Additionally, animals do possess emotional intelligence of some kind.
http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf

Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors.

 

[Mysterie]

nice post flehmen, i dont really know how i feel about the subject, but i agree abject hate towards zoos is ill-conceived. sex is such a loaded subject.

 

[Wraiven]

Away you go, you sound like a severely neurotic individual - this is the OPs partner, a bit of sensitivity regarding the matter wouldn't hurt as she has come on this forum understandably confused and needing some constructive advice, perhaps difficult when you are a Neanderthal like yourself. Nobody is defending what he is doing, this all in your warped gung-ho mentality, of course what he is doing is unacceptable and he obviously has severe issues that need addressed, nobody in their right mind thinks that this kind of behaviour is normal, but what your are suggesting that this man is capable of is something completely different, which we will have to agree to disagree on. You are the kind of person that would have burned witches at the stake during the dark ages, mob mentality that sadly can't think outwith the parameters of a black and white world.

What this lady needs to do is go with her partner for counselling, find out where these ideas come from, how long he has had them and find out how deep they are and also more importantly can he stop. Then she can make a decision on if she would like to continue with this relationship. Now, the OP has been through his internet history, all she found were disgusting animal porn videos or whatever, it seems that there was no indication of something more sinister.

Edit: This post is directed at Wraiven, JessFR must have been posting at the same time as me (good post Jess, much the same as what I was typing!).

Not true. First, a Neanderthal mind will attack first, ask questions later. A neanderthal uses no logic whatsoever and their vocabulary equally horrible. I would not have burned witches at the stake, I would not have put a stake through the heart of an already dead corps, (Vampire Hunters) in fact, I am a very open minded individual. However, on this particular subject, I stand strongly about. I don't mind people looking in to the psychology of zoophilia, or even possibly getting somebody some much needed help...but defending the act with justifications and ignoring the potential danger of a mind that can actually be sexually aroused by such acts; I will not. Do you not agree that in order for a man or woman to be sexually aroused by an animal that it would take a dangerous level of desensitization? How desensitized does one have to be before they actually start justifying to themselves that laying with animals is acceptable? How far off from that level of desensitization would one have to be before they start justifying to themselves that it is okay to molest children?

The subject brings up many questions that I feel deserve answers. The subject deserve real studies, which there has been very little.

I am a play it safe kind of guy. And to me, any person who finds sexual amusement in watching animals have sex with humans or enacting such desires, throws an immediate red flag...a red flag that says, "Keep this one away from your kids."

 

[CosmicG]

I don't necessariky agree with the point that if a man is sexually aroused by zoophilia then he is certainly likely to molest children...But I mean, I wouldn't trust the guy with my children either.

 

[MUSHET]

Of course it throws a red flag up, but it's the same kind of red flag that would be thrown up if someone was a flasher (just for talking sake here). Even if that person only flashed middle aged women, never kids, you wouldn't want that person babysitting yours kids anyway, not because they are a child molester because clearly they are not, it's just because you wouldn't want this person looking after your kids because it's something that is wrong and vile.

Also, your desensitised argument is a bit wobbly too. You can apply desensitised to violence too, it takes dangerous levels of desensitisation for people to get thrill out of murder, fighting, stabbing or even raping, but these people don't necessarily want to commit these acts on children. It's the same with 'zoos', the majority want to have sex with animals, or a particular species of animal, because they find the animal sexually attractive, just in the way I find a woman attractive, or whatever your sexual orientation is. They don't find children attractive, so why would they want to sexually abuse children? 'Zoos' don't consider themselves rapists or abusers, it's not about power or an easy target like a sexual predator, they actaully have feelings for the animals. It's fucking absurd.

I'm not justifying what they do as you keep saying, I'm just pointing out that the majority won't be kiddy fiddlers, it's an irrational fear, I want the OP to face the issue at hand, not worry about something else that most likely is not the case.

 

[ForGreatScience]

The key word is, "potential."

Yes and true logical arguments depend on logical necessity, not simply potential. I'm not supporting any side, just making a philosophical point. I just get a little bit ticked out about misuse of the term "logic" (sorry, I majored in philosophy and it might have made me kind of an asshole).

 

[Wraiven]

Of course it throws a red flag up, but it's the same kind of red flag that would be thrown up if someone was a flasher (just for talking sake here). Even if that person only flashed middle aged women, never kids, you wouldn't want that person babysitting yours kids anyway, not because they are a child molester because clearly they are not, it's just because you wouldn't want this person looking after your kids because it's something that is wrong and vile.

Also, your desensitised argument is a bit wobbly too. You can apply desensitised to violence too, it takes dangerous levels of desensitisation for people to get thrill out of murder, fighting, stabbing or even raping, but these people don't necessarily want to commit these acts on children. It's the same with 'zoos', the majority want to have sex with animals, or a particular species of animal, because they find the animal sexually attractive, just in the way I find a woman attractive, or whatever your sexual orientation is. They don't find children attractive, so why would they want to sexually abuse children? 'Zoos' don't consider themselves rapists or abusers, it's not about power or an easy target like a sexual predator, they actaully have feelings for the animals. It's fucking absurd.

I'm not justifying what they do as you keep saying, I'm just pointing out that the majority won't be kiddy fiddlers, it's an irrational fear, I want the OP to face the issue at hand, not worry about something else that most likely is not the case.

I think that makes a good close for our discussion.

 

[MUSHET]

Cheers for the debate.

 

[Wraiven]

Yes and true logical arguments depend on logical necessity, not simply potential. I'm not supporting any side, just making a philosophical point. I just get a little bit ticked out about misuse of the term "logic" (sorry, I majored in philosophy and it might have made me kind of an asshole).

I did not study philosophy on a grad level. I have a love for philosophy but never majored in it. I do however write scripts for comic books. I know that does not make me a philosopher, but I do appreciate anything in life that expands my knowledge. I always find new ways to expand my intelligence. I learn something new every day. I'll keep in mind in the future that logic depends on necessity. Let me ask you this...is it not logical to come up with potential by using proper logic?

 

[HeatherWesling]

The conversation me and him had plus the two phones I looked through, told me that this isn't the only thing he watches and he doesn't watch it often. I've seen it with my own eyes. I just think to watch it at all is a little messed up. He admitted to doing it when I treated to relieve deleted data out of both the phones. He cried I asked him how long he had been peeking at it and he said a couple years ago. He said he never told me because it was messed up and pretty much begged me not to leave. I don't think he bullshitted me for a rise I think he told me because I was about to see it on my own. That night he was shaking in his boots.

 

[HeatherWesling]

What started it all was because I thought he was cheating because of him always having his phone on him. I had yo use the internet on his phone and messed up and had to get on the web history to retrieve a website and noticed all his web history was deleted. I got pissed a plugged his phone into my laptop and it all flew out of his mouth like a gunshot

 

[ForGreatScience]

Let me ask you this...is it not logical to come up with potential by using proper logic?

Well I guess you could try to say something like.

Premise 1: There is a potential that X's are Y's.
Premise 2: There is a potential that Y's are Z's.
Premise 3: Here is an X.
Conclusion 1: There is a potential that the X is a Y. (from Premise 1 and 3)
Conclusion 2: There is a potential that the X is a Z (from premise 2 and conclusion 1)

But the problem in those conclusions are so weak because they don't say anything at all about how big the potential actually is. In fact here's something that fits that form:

P1: There is a potential for mammals that they are dogs.
P2: There is a potential for dogs that they are German Shepherds.
P3: I am a mammal.
C1: There is a potential that I am a dog (from p1 and p3)
C2: There is a potential that I am a German Shepherd (from c1 and p2)

So no I don't really think potentials belong in strict logic. Seems more like the realm of statistics but I have not studied that. Also I haven't actually studied philosophy on a grad level, just undergrad.

 

[MUSHET]

Does he want help, as he ever went further than looking at animal porn?

 

[HeatherWesling]

Does he want help, as he ever went further than looking at animal porn?

He has said he wants help multiple times. He has also repeated to me that he knows its messed up and doesn't even know why he does it.

 

[HeatherWesling]

I'd like to add to all of these responses. Back then parents married their daughters off at 13 and 14 so I've always wondered how it became a problem. Also as far as intelligence no matter how smart each one is why are we all mammals then? Shouldn't they have a separate stem of species? I just don't understand how they are different but in the same group. I'm pretty open minded so I don't agree or disagree. I just can figure the difference between the two.

 

[Wraiven]

I'd like to add to all of these responses. Back then parents married their daughters off at 13 and 14 so I've always wondered how it became a problem. Also as far as intelligence no matter how smart each one is why are we all mammals then? Shouldn't they have a separate stem of species? I just don't understand how they are different but in the same group. I'm pretty open minded so I don't agree or disagree. I just can figure the difference between the two.

I can help answer that question. When Europeans first started settling America, they came over in droves of men. A lot of men. Women were far and few in between in those days. So wealthier men would marry younger females around the age of 13 because mothers and fathers wanted their daughters to live in wealth. There were not that many females at that time, so it was considered a necessity of life. However, there was still turmoil within the families that married off their daughters because back in those days, giving birth, especially at the age of 13 - 17 meant almost certain death for the woman giving birth. It was dangerous for a female of that age to give birth in those days. Once America had plenty of females, the need to marry the daughters off at such a young age was no longer required, so the laws were changed. However, it was never considered okay...it was considered a necessary evil for survival.