I think zoophilia is abnormal. But does abnormal have to be wrong?

A while ago, I read this sentence on a website. Apparantly, someone had found out about the fact that there are people that have, or want to have, sex with dolphins:

Reading that sentence shows that the author, probably just your average person, feels that having sex with dolphins (but most likely animals in general) is wrong and actually bad for the dolphin. But where does this come from? I can understand that people find zoophilia bizarre and perhaps even disgusting. Everybody has his own taste. But why can't most people think rationally about this.

Say, I'm about to have sex with a dolphin (one day, hopefully). The animal is about 5 to 8 times heavier than me, is very intelligent, muscular and lives in the water. At any time the dolphin can swim away or seriously injure me if I'm in the water with her. But, she doesn't and we have sex. At what point am I hurting this 'poor' dolphin?

It always amazes me how little thinking is put into someone's opinion. Someone thinks it's disgusting (and there is nothing wrong with that, as said, we all have our taste) and then instantly decides it's wrong. Actually, I think most people just follow the crowd. They don't form their own opinion, they just follow the crowd. Even worse, in most countries/states it is illegal. Surely, if the law says it's wrong it must be wrong, right? Even animal rights [SPAM] sometimes try to get people behind bars for having sex with animals.

Why is the world so collectively biased when it comes to zoophilia? Zoophilia, freely translated, means 'love for animals'. Then why do people think that someone who loves animals would abuse and/or hurt them? Yes, there are people that (sexually) abuse animals and what these people do is wrong, but the majority doesn't. Also, I have my doubt about certain 'abuse' cases that make the news. The 'hurting' done to the animal often seems to make no sense at all and seems more or less fabricated as an excuse to get someone arrested. A while ago, I read a story of a man that got arrested for having sex with a mature rottweiler bitch. However, bestiality was legal in that state. He still got arrested however, because apparantly him having sex with a rottweiler caused swellings on the vagina and that made him an animal abuser. I've asked a few people on the chat if they had ever heared about this happening or had any experience with this but nobody had. And to me, it also sounds far-fetched.

The Dutch government wanted to make bestiality illegal a while ago (thankfully, that didn't happen, but only because more important matters came up). What was their arguement for wanting this ban? "It hurts the integrity of the animal". After months of thinking, I still can't figure out what they mean by this. Simply put, I'd say they don't have a good reason for a ban yet they still want it. If there would've been a vote (or ever will be in the future) over this proposed new law it would've been passed, even without logical arguements? And why? Because not a single politician would have the guts to stand up for zoophilia.

Is it abnormal to love one that loves you? I think not. If that "one" happens to be an animal, so what? I see it as a "mutual admiration" situation. As for sex, if the animal initiates the action, that is its way of showing love and trust in the human.
If the human starts the action and the animal is ok with it, again, that is a show of love and trust.
Forcing an animal into anything, including sex, is abuse and should not be condoned!!

recently I was reafing an article reguarding zoophilia; and it staighted that sex with animals was prohibited then "damned" by the christian church - them saying it was a sin and against the laws of God and christ etc etc etc..... but what was interesting about this article was that the church did NOT call it a sin until the mid- 1700's.

Cetacean, I think it's no use to wonder why are people so biased about zoosexuals. Nothing will change their oppinions, so I think it leads nowhere, all we can do is to wait decade or two till society understands having sex with animal needn't to be harmful to it. The same thing was with gays and lesbians, in 1960's they were considered perverted and sick, now in many places they are tolerated and don't need to hide with their love anymore. One day it will be the same with us, and now we can only try to find more open-minded persons and convince them who we really are, the more of them will be there, the easier it will be to learn public the true about us. Look how many stereotypes you can hear about us:
- Animal cannot tell you it consents (what about raising tail, rolling belly up etc?)
- Zoophilia, unlike homosexualism, is not between two adult, aware PEOPLE (so it must be wrong)
- Animal is harmed (no matter mare reaches orgasm with human's hand inside)
- It is abusive to animal, since it's not aware (typical confusing animals with children)
- It is unnatural (mr John said, then ate his dish from microwave and went to drugstore to buy contraceptive)
Et cetera, et cetera...
I think this is the answer for the question why do people find zoophilia wrong. People don't want to look closer at the topic, they hear stupid stereotypes everywhere and are sure this is the true. As we say where I live, it's easier to turn Vistula back with staff than break down stereotype. How many times it was cause of so many problems? One of the worse points of human nature is that we prefer to listen popular opinions than learn more from the source. But fortunately, time changes that, it always has and I'm sure with zoophilia will be the same, first signs of that are already visible (ever heard about Egon Kraak? All his neighbours accept his equine sweetheart) Be good hope Cetacean, as I am, zoos will win ;)

Hope one day I'll be able to hear my neighbour asking how's it with my mare and seeing nothing abnormal in it...

Having been a zoo all my life, I guess I should weigh in on this topic. I've done a lot of research over the years, and the whole prohibition about sex with animals is religiously motivated, starting with Leviticus in the Bible. Probably made sense back then. Those early tribes were a warmongering bunch, always smiting people and getting smited, and had to keep their numbers up. When Moses was wandering in the desert he came up with these laws. The mere fact that the law had to be written down would indicate there must have been a whole bunch of guys in his tribe screwing the goats when they should have been making babies. The law has no relevance today, since the sanctions against it in Leviticus are about the same as shaving your beard or eating shellfish. Nobody quotes Leviticus today without sounding ridiculous. Nary a word about "laying with beasts" in the New Testament. Didn't keep religion in general from glomming onto this idea. It seems to me that the early Church had to find some way to make people more "devine" or "godlike". One of the common things that all mammals share is sex, so the religious doctines started to try to make human sex somehow special, and over the years humans and animals were gradually separated by religious threats and religiously motivated legislation. At the same time, religion has made sex in general gross and disgusting and something to be hidden. Again, this is a way to further separate humand from the other animals. They have not been able to disguise the fact that humans ARE animals. Personally I am proud of the fact that I am an animal, and that evolution has brought my species to the level we are. But we should not forget our roots.

I wanted to address a couple of points from a previous post about stereotying of zoophiles:

- Animal cannot tell you it consents (what about raising tail, rolling belly up etc?)
Has anyone ever tried to make it with a cow or other large animal that was not in mood? They can say NO perfectly well. Of course, if you continue anyway, by restaining or otherwise making the animal submit, then you are just a rapist, and should be judged accordingly.

- Zoophilia, unlike homosexualism, is not between two adult, aware PEOPLE (so it must be wrong): People are animals, so if the sex is between two adult animals, what can be the problem?

- Animal is harmed (no matter mare reaches orgasm with human's hand inside): Again, if the animal is harmed, it's a rape situation. Or the perpetrator could be a sadist who gets off on harming animals. Again, this sort of person should be dealt with to the full extent of the law.

- It is abusive to animal, since it's not aware (typical confusing animals with children): Well, animals may not be aware of what's going on in the human's head (and vice versa), but they know what feels good and what doesn't. If it feels good to them, they will allow it. How can that be abusive. Also, antizoophiles always equate bestiality and pedophilia. Animals don't live as long as people in many cases, so they mature sexually a lot faster than people. Just because the animal is not eighteen doesn't mean it isn't mature.

- It is unnatural (mr John said, then ate his dish from microwave and went to drugstore to buy contraceptive): No, it's perfectly natural. Animals have been breeding between species forever. As long as two species are similar enough to make the physical connection, it has probably happened.

Whew... my longest post ever! Before I bore everybody, I will stop, but I want to recommend two books that you should find interesting: "Biological Exuberance" by Bruce Bagemihl, and "The Beast Within" by Joyce E. Salisbury. Both should be available at Amazon.

If you got this far, thanks for reading...

I would give an opinion, but I fear that certain people would not like it :(

Grow up, Torran..... This is not a political thing.


LadyR

Well said Lady, as for my two cents, i belive that people fear things that are different. As with homosexuals another minority in the sexual preferences
department it has taken time to bcome recognised, and accepted, and i belive
that zoophilia aventually will be.

why the bias ? Ingorance and organized religion (Funny how the two seem to all ways come as a set isn't it?)

but it wont if we all keep quiet :shutup:

Here's the thing. While the terms "beastiality, and zoophilia" are not specifically mentioned in many state laws, it can still be prosecuted under animal cruelty laws that DO exist in all states. This means a criminal record, loss of our beloved animals, and on top of it all, the loss of everything else that I (for example) have worked for all these years.

Personally, I don't believe that it is the buisness of the general public what my sexual preferences are. I do not wish to carry my lifestyle like a flag. The same can be said for my feelings towards gays. I don't care if the person is gay. What I do NOT want to see, is THEIR lifestyle paraded like a flag. To be perfectly honest, it really isn't any of my buisness what they do inside their homes, anymore than it is anybody elses business what I do inside MY home.

While I would much rather not have to "lock down" when I am being intimate with my dog, I'm not about to parade my lifestyle to the general public.

I personally believe people have the general assumption that Zoo's will do anything to get off up to hurting an animal for their own pleasure, which we all know couldnt be further from the truth. Alot people that condem it just flat out dont understand it.

I think some people are just scared of this lifestyle, Someone told me when I was a kid that people are afraid of others that are diffrent than themselfs.Maybe one day it'll be an accepted form of sexuality but until then I won't change my love just because people don't understand it. thank you

Here's some questions I've wanted to ask for a while:

Have any of your "normal" (forgive me for using that term) friends or relatives ever found out that you're a zoo?

How did they react to it?

Were they shocked and horrified, disgusted and angry at you, possibly even disowning or breaking their friendship with you, reacting just as they would if you told them you were a pedophile that abused children? ...or did they consider listening to your views, and learn to accept your 'lifestyle choice' with time?

was there ever a case where that person became slightly zoophilic themself or even switched over to your side after hearing your testimony?

How much does most of society condemn zoophilia anyway?

How many nonzoo people in the past have come onto this website before and shouted condemnations and curses at everyone here? I suspect they are always immediately booted out when they do so, but how often does it occur?

Has this forum ever been attemptably shut down or busted up by police or online censors or detective investigations?

It's so little talked about, I don't even know just exactly how common zoophilia is... It might be alot more widespread than we think, most people are just too afraid to tell another soul abou it. I've heard somewhere that it's estimated that up to 50% of all farmers (indicated in a census) admit to having sexual relations with a farm animal at least once in their life.

I'm actually a rather passive zoophile, I just fantasize. I have two dogs, and I often get an erection when petting them, but I'd never let on to them that I do. I just continue patting them on the head and hugging them affectionately as any normal person would, because I love them deep down, and would never insult or scare them by trying to come onto them.

but I've never tried having sex with them before. For one thing, I'm just not that sexually attracted to dogs, and I don't have access to the animals I'm really attracted to, also, seeing as I like bears, even if I did have access to a female bear I wouldn't try it, as a she-bear would probably kick my ass if I tried to come onto her.

I'm... how you put it... too "shy" to approach animals in such an "awkward" manner, for such a complex (and rather unnatural) biological process. I love my dogs deep down, a love that transcends sex by far. They are my closest friends, and usually, even your closest human friend is someone you share an absolutely plutonic relationship with.

...I still respect all the zoophiles in here, as long as they deeply care about and love their nonhuman sex partners, and do not in any way abuse the animals in the process. I'm just too "shy" to come onto animals myself, that's all.

...However, I do differentiate between zoophilia and bestiality, for I've heard that bestiality is abusive and forces sex, or "rapes" the animal, and is just raw sex that doesn't give any thought to the animal at all, but merely to the person's sick pleasure from abusing it. Zoophilia is a love for animals, and technically, from the greek root words "zoon" for animal, and "phile", for friend, a zoophile isn't necessarily a sexual penchant for animals, no more than "sinophile" is a sexual attraction to chinese people. It's just a love, fascination or friendship with them. We've just perverted the meanings of certain words, like "pedophilia", which technically should just mean someone that likes working with children, and NOT in a sexual manner either. Pedophilia is sick. I sure hope no one in here thinks it's acceptable.

...also, I condemn anyone depraved enough to think about having sex with or masturbating with a baby animal, such as a puppy, calf or foal. In a way, this is the equivalent of pedophilia, as baby animals are not yet sexually mature, and are thereby not aware of what's going on and are being sexually abused.

I remember reading an article on the net a long time ago that said 10% of the world’s population was zoo in some way and of that 80% where men and 20% woman, so for every 100 people you pass in the street 10 are possible zoo. :thinking: