Editing Zoophilia (section)

== Perspectives on zoophilia ==
[[File:Franz von Bayros 020.jpg|thumb|right|256px|A depiction of [[wikipedia:Oral sex|cunnilingus]] between an adolescent girl and a [[wikipedia:Deer|deer]] by [[wikipedia:Franz von Bayros|Franz von Bayros]].]]

=== Research perspectives ===
Zoophilia has been partly discussed by several sciences: [[wikipedia:Psychology|psychology]] (the study of the human [[wikipedia:Mind|mind]]), [[wikipedia:Sexology|sexology]] (a relatively new discipline primarily studying [[human sexuality]]), [[wikipedia:Ethology|ethology]] (the study of [[Animal sexual behaviour|animal behavior]]), and [[wikipedia:Anthrozoology|anthrozoology]] (the study of human–animal bonds and interaction).

In the [[wikipedia:DSM-5|fifth edition of the ''Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders'']] (DSM-5), zoophilia is placed in the classification "other specified paraphilic disorder"<ref name="dsmv">{{Cite book|url=https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm|title=Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders|edition=5th|chapter=Other Specified Paraphilic Disorder, 302.89 (F65.89)|editor=[[wikipedia:American Psychiatric Association|APA]]|year=2013|publisher=American Psychiatric Publishing|page=705|isbn=978-0-89042-575-6|access-date=2024-09-20|df=mdy-all}}</ref> ("[[paraphilia]]s not otherwise specified" in the DSM-III and IV<ref name="dsmiv">{{Cite book|title=Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders|edition=4th|publisher=[[wikipedia:American Psychiatric Association|APA]]|location=District of Columbia, U.S.A.|year=2000|isbn=978-0-89042-025-6|oclc=43483668|df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name="milner">{{Cite book|editor-last1=Laws|editor-first1=D. R.| editor2 = O'Donohue, W. T. |last1=Milner|first1=J. S.|last2=Dopke|first2=C. A.|title=Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment|edition=2nd|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yIXG9FuqbaIC&pg=PA385|publisher=[[wikipedia:The Guilford Press|The Guilford Press]]|location=New York City|year=2008|pages=384–418|isbn=978-1-59385-605-2|oclc=152580827|chapter=Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified: Psychopathology and theory|df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name="lovemaps">{{Cite book|last=Money|first=John|author-link=wikipedia:John Money|title=Lovemaps: Clinical Concepts of Sexual/Erotic Health and Pathology, Paraphilia, and Gender Transposition in Childhood, Adolescence, and Maturity|publisher=[[wikipedia:Prometheus Books|Prometheus Books]]|location=Buffalo, New York|year=1988|isbn=978-0-87975-456-3|oclc=19340917|df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name="seto">{{Cite book|last1=Seto|first1=M.C.|last2=Barbaree|first2=H.E.|editor-last1=Hersen|editor-first1=M.|editor-last2=Van Hasselt|editor-first2=V. B.|year=2000|title=Aggression and violence: an introductory text|chapter=Paraphilias|publisher=[[wikipedia:Allyn & Bacon|Allyn & Bacon]]|location=Boston|pages=198–213|isbn=978-0-205-26721-7|oclc=41380492|df=mdy-all}}</ref>). The [[wikipedia:World Health Organization|WHO]] takes the same position, listing a sexual preference for animals in its [[wikipedia:ICD|ICD]][[wikipedia:ICD-10|-10]] as "F65.8: Other disorder of sexual preference".<ref name="icd10">{{Cite web|url=https://icd.who.int/browse10/2019/en#/F65.8|title=International Classification of Diseases Version:2019|website=World Health Organization (WHO)|access-date=2024-09-22|df=mdy-all|quote=A variety of other patterns of sexual preference and activity, including making obscene telephone calls, rubbing up against people for sexual stimulation in crowded public places, sexual activity with animals, and use of strangulation or anoxia for intensifying sexual excitement.}}</ref>

A slow but broadening trend can be seen in the academic literature of the 21<sup>st</sup> century towards greater acceptance of zoophilia as a legitimate sexual expression rather than a deviant one. In the DSM-5, for instance, zoophilia rises to the level of a "diagnosable disorder" only when accompanied by distress or interference with normal functioning, otherwise being regarded as another element of the psyche to reflect on and harmonize with the rest of one's life.<ref name="dsmv" /><ref name="implications">{{Cite journal|last1=Miletski|first1=Hani|date=2015-01-21|title=Zoophilia—Implications for Therapy|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01614576.2001.11074387|journal=Journal of Sex Education and Therapy|volume=26|issue=2|pages=85–89|url-access=subscription|doi=10.1080/01614576.2001.11074387|s2cid=146150162|df=mdy-all|quote=Zoophiles may come to the attention of sex therapists, counselors, and educators for a variety of other reasons. Living a life of secrecy, as many zoophiles do, can lead to many psychological issues such as depression, anxiety, feelings of isolation, and suicide ideation.}}</ref>

Zoophilia may also be covered to some degree by other fields such as ethics, philosophy, law, [[animal rights]] and [[animal welfare]]. It may also be touched upon by [[sociology]] which looks both at zoosadism in examining patterns and issues related to [[sexual abuse]] and at non-sexual zoophilia in examining the role of animals as emotional support and companionship in human lives, and may fall within the scope of [[psychiatry]] if it becomes necessary to consider its significance in a clinical context.
The ''Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine'' (Vol. 18, February 2011) states that sexual contact with animals is almost never a clinically significant problem by itself;<ref name="scidirectpii">{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.jflm.2011.01.004 |title=A new classification of zoophilia |year=2011 |last1=Aggrawal |first1=Anil |journal=Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=73–8 |pmid=21315301}}</ref> it also states that there are several kinds of zoophiles:<ref name="scidirectpii"/>

{{div col}}
# Human-animal role-players
# Romantic zoophiles
# Zoophilic fantasizers
# Tactile zoophiles
# Fetishistic zoophiles
# Sadistic bestials
# Opportunistic zoophiles
# Regular zoophiles
# Exclusive zoophiles
{{div col end}}

Additionally, zoophiles in categories 2, 3, and 8 (romantic zoophiles, zoophilic fantasizers, and regular zoophiles) are the most common, while zoophiles found in categories 6 and 7 (sadistic bestials and opportunistic zoophiles) are the least common.<ref name="scidirectpii"/>

Zoophilia may reflect childhood experimentation, sexual abuse or lack of other avenues of sexual expression. Exclusive desire for animals rather than humans is considered a rare paraphilia, and sufferers often have other paraphilias<ref name="LawsO'Donohue2008">{{cite book|author1=D. Richard Laws|author2=William T. O'Donohue|title=Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yIXG9FuqbaIC&pg=PA391&dq=zoophilia+rare#v=onepage|date=January 2008|publisher=Guilford Press|isbn=978-1-59385-605-2|page=391}}</ref> with which they present. Zoophiles will not usually seek help for their condition, and so do not come to the attention of psychiatrists for zoophilia itself.<ref name="Roukema2008">{{cite book|author=Richard W. Roukema|title=What Every Patient, Family, Friend, and Caregiver Needs to Know About Psychiatry, Second Edition|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=t7Mg3iuc9ygC&pg=PA133&dq=zoophilia+other+paraphilias|date=August 13, 2008|publisher=American Psychiatric Pub|isbn=978-1-58562-750-9|page=133}}</ref>

The first detailed studies of zoophilia date from prior to 1910. Peer reviewed research into zoophilia in its own right started around 1960. However, a number of the most oft-quoted studies, such as Miletski, were not published in [[peer review|peer-reviewed]] journals. There have been several significant modern books, from Masters (1962) to Beetz (2002);<ref name="Beetz2002">Beetz 2002, section 5.2.4 – 5.2.7.</ref> their research arrived at the following conclusions:

*Most zoophiles have (or have also had) long term human relationships as well or at the same time as zoosexual ones, and that zoosexual partners are usually dogs and/or horses (Masters, Miletski, Beetz)<ref name="Beetz2002"/><ref name="Aggrawal2008">{{cite book|author=Anil Aggrawal|title=Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uNkNhPZQprcC&pg=PA257&dq=zoophilia+most+common+animal#PPA258|accessdate=13 May 2012|date=December 22, 2008|publisher=CRC Press|isbn=978-1-4200-4309-9|page=257}}</ref>
*Zoophiles' emotions and care for animals can be real, relational, authentic and (within animals' abilities) reciprocal, and not just a substitute or means of expression.<ref>(Masters, Miletski, Weinberg, Beetz)</ref> Beetz believes zoophilia is not an inclination which is chosen.<ref name="Beetz2002"/>
* Society in general at present is considerably misinformed about zoophilia, its stereotypes, and its meaning.<ref name="Beetz2002"/> The distinction between zoophilia and zoosadism is a critical one to these researchers, and is highlighted by each of these studies. Masters (1962), Miletski (1999) and Weinberg (2003) each comment significantly on the social harm caused by misunderstandings regarding zoophilia: "This destroy[s] the lives of many citizens".<ref name="Beetz2002"/>

Beetz also states the following:

{{quote|The phenomenon of sexual contact with animals is starting to lose its taboo: it is appearing more often in scholarly publications, and the public are being confronted with it, too. ... Sexual contact with animals – in the form of bestiality or zoophilia – needs to be discussed more openly and investigated in more detail by scholars working in disciplines such as animal ethics, animal behavior, anthrozoology, psychology, mental health, sociology, and the law.<ref name="BeetzPodberseck">{{cite book|author1=Anthony L. Podberscek|author2=Andrea M. Beetz|title=Bestiality and Zoophilia: Sexual Relations with Animals|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Z-GbOvrbniQC&lpg=PT91&dq=beetz%202002%20zoophilia&pg=PT94#v=onepage|accessdate=13 May 2012|date=September 1, 2005|publisher=Berg|isbn=978-0-85785-222-9|page=94}}</ref>}}

More recently, research has engaged three further directions: the speculation that at least some animals seem to enjoy a zoophilic relationship assuming [[Sadism and Masochism|sadism]] is not present, and can form an affectionate bond.<ref>Masters, 1962.</ref> Similar findings are also reported by Kinsey (cited by Masters), and others earlier in [[history]]. Miletski (1999) notes that information on sex with animals on the internet is often very emphatic as to what the zoophile believes gives pleasure and how to identify what is perceived as [[Sexual consent|consent]] beforehand. For instance, Jonathan Balcombe says animals do things for pleasure. But he himself says pet owners will be unimpressed by this statement, as this is not news to them.<ref>{{cite news|author=Jonathan Balcombe |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/may/29/animalbehaviour.evolution |title=Animals can be happy too |newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|accessdate=13 May 2012 |location=London |date=29 May 2006}}</ref>

Beetz described the phenomenon of zoophilia/bestiality as being somewhere between crime, paraphilia and love, although she says that most research has been based on [[criminology|criminological]] reports, so the cases have frequently involved violence and psychiatric illness. She says only a few recent studies have taken data from volunteers in the community.<ref>[http://www.scie-socialcareonline.org.uk/profile.asp?guid=fac3acab-5377-4f9a-a9f0-007248ee2e43 "Bestiality/Zoophilia: A Scarcely-Investigated Phenomenon Between Crime, Paraphilia, and Love"]. Scie-SocialCareOnline.org.uk. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101115133416/http://www.scie-socialcareonline.org.uk/profile.asp?guid=fac3acab-5377-4f9a-a9f0-007248ee2e43 |date=15 November 2010 }}</ref> As with all volunteer surveys and sexual ones in particular, these studies have a potential for [[self-selection]] bias.<ref name="Slade2001">{{cite book|author=Joseph W. Slade|title=Pornography and Sexual Representation: A Reference Guide|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Opv9nz2M5c0C&pg=PA980&dq=%22volunteer+selection%22+sex|year=2001|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|isbn=978-0-313-31521-3|page=980}}</ref>

Medical research suggests that some zoophiles only become aroused by a specific species (such as horses), some zoophiles become aroused by multiple species (which may or may not include humans), and some zoophiles are not attracted to humans at all.<ref name="earls" /><ref>{{cite journal |pmid=15895645 |year=2005 |last1=Bhatia |first1=MS |last2=Srivastava |first2=S |last3=Sharma |first3=S |s2cid=5744962 |title=1. An uncommon case of zoophilia: A case report |volume=45 |issue=2 |pages=174–75 |journal=Medicine, Science, and the Law |doi=10.1258/rsmmsl.45.2.174}}</ref>

Researchers who observed a monkey trying to mate with a deer in 2017 ([[interspecies]] sex) said that it may provide clues into why humans have interspecies sex.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jan/10/snow-monkey-attempts-sex-with-deer-in-rare-example-of-interspecies-mating|title=Snow monkey attempts sex with deer in rare example of interspecies mating|first=Hannah|last=Devlin|date=10 January 2017|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|accessdate=12 March 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/01/macaque-monkey-sika-deer-interspecies-mating/|title=Monkey Tries to Mate With Deer in First Ever Video|date=11 January 2017|website=Nationalgeographic.com|accessdate=12 March 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://mashable.com/2017/01/10/snow-monkey-deer/|title=Sex between snow monkey and deer shows different species may mate if they're 'deprived', study says|first=Marissa|last=Wenzke|website=Mashable.com|accessdate=12 March 2018}}</ref>

===Historical and cultural perspectives===
{{Main|Historical and cultural perspectives on zoophilia}}
[[File:Judensau from Frankfurt.jpg|thumb|right|The taboo of zoophilia has led to stigmatised groups being accused of it, as with [[blood libel]]. This German illustration shows [[Jews]] performing bestiality on a ''[[Judensau]]'', while Satan watches.]]
Instances of this behavior have been found in the Bible.<ref name="aggrawal_2009_16_3">{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.jflm.2008.07.006 |title=References to the paraphilias and sexual crimes in the Bible |year=2009 |last1=Aggrawal |first1=Anil |journal=Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine |volume=16 |issue=3 |pages=109–14 |pmid=19239958}}</ref> In a cave painting from at least 8000 BC in the Northern Italian [[Val Camonica]] a man is shown about to penetrate an animal. Raymond Christinger interprets that as a show of power of a tribal chief,<ref>[http://www.archaeometry.org/sxx.htm Archaeometry.org], Link to web page and photograph, archaeometry.org</ref> and so we do not know if this practice was then more acceptable, and if the scene depicted was usual or unusual or whether it was symbolic or imaginary.<ref name="Bevan2006">{{cite book|author=Lynne Bevan|title=Worshippers and warriors: reconstructing gender and gender relations in the prehistoric rock art of Naquane National Park, Valcamonica, Brecia, northern Italy|url=https://books.google.com/?id=WzxmAAAAMAAJ&q=Coren+del+Valento+animal&dq=Coren+del+Valento+animal|year=2006|publisher=Archaeopress|isbn=978-1-84171-920-7|page=}}</ref> The "Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art" says the scene may be humorous, as the penetrating man seems to be waving cheerfully with his hand at the same time. Potters seem to have spent time depicting the practice, but this may be because they found the idea amusing.<ref name="Bahn1998">{{cite book|author=Paul G. Bahn|title=The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art|url=https://books.google.com/?id=xwm_D1u_UTsC&pg=PA188&dq=%22prehistoric+art%22+bestiality|year=1998|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-45473-5|page=188}}</ref> Dr "Jacobus X", said to be the [[pen name]] of a French author, said this was clearly "before any known taboos against sex with animals existed".<ref>''Abuses Aberrations and Crimes of the Genital Sense'', 1901.</ref> Marc Epprecht states that authors such as Jacobus X do not deserve respect because their methodology is based on hearsay, and was designed for voyeuristic titillation of the reader.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://books.google.com/?id=dJdErRqoBeQC&pg=PA193&dq=%22Jacobus+X%22+taboos|title="Bisexuality" and the politics of normal in African Ethnography|journal= Anthropologica|volume=48|pages=187–201|number=2|year=2006|author=Marc Epprecht|jstor=25605310|doi=10.2307/25605310}}</ref> Masters said that since pre-historic man is [[prehistoric]] it goes without saying that we know little of his sexual behaviour;<ref>Masters, Robert E. L., ''Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality'', p. 5.</ref> depictions in cave paintings may only show the artist's subjective preoccupations or thoughts.

[[Pindar]], [[Herodotus]], and [[Plutarch]] claimed the Egyptians engaged in ritual congress with goats.<ref name="BulloughBullough1994">{{cite book|author1=Vern L. Bullough|author2=Bonnie Bullough|title=Human Sexuality: An Encyclopedia|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=y5HFtMkmFMYC&pg=PA61&dq=bestiality+%22ancient+egypt%22+religious |date=January 1, 1994|publisher=Taylor & Francis|isbn=978-0-8240-7972-7|page=61}}</ref> Such claims about other cultures do not necessarily reflect anything about which the author had evidence, but may be a form of propaganda or [[xenophobia]], similar to [[blood libel]].{{citation needed|date=March 2016}}

Bestiality was accepted in some North American and Middle Eastern indigenous cultures.<ref name="Noram">{{cite book|author=Judith Worell|title=Encyclopedia of Women and Gender: Sex Similarities and Differences and the Impact of Society on Gender|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/?id=7SXhBdqejgYC&pg=PA298&dq=bestiality+indigenous+gender|date=September 2001|publisher=Academic Press|isbn=978-0-12-227245-5|page=[https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofwo0000unse_g9b9/page/298 298]|chapter=Cross-Cultural Sexual Practices|url=https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofwo0000unse_g9b9/page/298}}</ref> Sexual intercourse between humans and non-human animals was not uncommon among certain Native American indigenous peoples, including the [[Hopi]].<ref name="Voget61">Voget, F. W. (1961) "Sex life of the American Indians", in Ellis, A. & Abarbanel, A. (Eds.) ''The Encyclopaedia of Sexual Behavior'', Volume 1. London: W. Heinemann, pp. 90–109.</ref><ref name=Taleyesva>{{cite book|last=Talayesva|first=Don C|title=Sun Chief: The Autobiography of a Hopi Indian|year=1942|publisher=Yale University Press|page=78|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ebB-BbI0wx8C&printsec=frontcover&vq=zoophilia#v=onepage&q=intercourse%20chicken&f=false|author2=Simmons, Leo William|accessdate=12 December 2012|isbn=9780300002270}}</ref> Voget describes the sexual lives of young Native Americans as "rather inclusive", including bestiality.<ref name="Voget61"/> In addition, the [[Copper Inuit]] people had "no aversion to intercourse with live animals".<ref name="Voget61"/>

Several cultures built temples ([[Khajuraho]], India) or other structures ([[Sagaholm]], [[tumulus|barrow]], Sweden) with zoophilic carvings on the exterior, however at [[Khajuraho]], these depictions are not on the interior, perhaps depicting that these are things that belong to the profane world rather than the spiritual world, and thus are to be left outside.{{citation needed|date=March 2016}}

In the Church-oriented culture of the [[Middle Ages]], zoophilic activity was met with execution, typically burning, and death to the animals involved either the same way or by hanging, as "both a violation of [[Religion and sexuality|Biblical edicts]] and a degradation of man as a spiritual being rather than one that is purely animal and carnal".<ref>Masters (1962)</ref> Some witches were accused of having congress with the devil in the form of an animal. As with all accusations and confessions extracted under torture in the [[witch trials in Early Modern Europe]], their validity cannot be ascertained.<ref name="BulloughBullough1994"/>

===Religious perspectives===
Passages in [[Leviticus 18]] (Lev 18:23: "And you shall not lie with any beast and defile yourself with it, neither shall any woman give herself to a beast to lie with it: it is a perversion." RSV) and 20:15–16 ("If a man lies with a beast, he shall be put to death; and you shall kill the beast. If a woman approaches any beast and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the beast; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them." RSV) are cited by Jewish, Christian, and Muslim theologians as categorical denunciation of bestiality. However, the teachings of the [[New Testament]] have been interpreted by some as not expressly forbidding bestiality.<ref name="Plummer">{{cite conference |last=Plummer |first=Keith |title=To beast or not to beast: does the law of Christ forbid zoophilia? |year=2001 |url=http://place.asburyseminary.edu/trenpapers/892 |conference=53rd National Conference of the Evangelical Theological Society |location=Colorado Springs, CO}}</ref>

In Part II of his ''[[Summa Theologica]]'', medieval philosopher [[Thomas Aquinas]] ranked various "unnatural vices" (sex acts resulting in "venereal pleasure" rather than procreation) by degrees of sinfulness, concluding that "the most grievous is the sin of bestiality".<ref>[http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/aquinas-homo.html Fordham.edu] Aquinas on Unnatural Sex</ref> Some Christian theologians extend [[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]]'s view that [[Antithesis of the Law#Adultery|even having thoughts of adultery is sinful]] to imply that thoughts of committing bestial acts are likewise sinful.

[[File:Khajuraho-Lakshmana Temple erotic detal3.JPG|thumb|right|Man having intercourse with a horse, pictured on the exterior of a temple in [[Khajuraho]].]]

There are a few references in [[Hinduism|Hindu]] scriptures to religious figures engaging in symbolic sexual activity with animals such as explicit depictions of people having sex with animals included amongst the thousands of sculptures of "Life events" on the exterior of the [[Hindu temple|temple complex]] at [[Khajuraho]]. The depictions are largely symbolic depictions of the sexualization of some animals and are not meant to be taken literally.<ref>Swami Satya Prakash Saraswati, ''The Critical and Cultural Study of the Shatapatha Brahmana'', p. 415.</ref> According to the Hindu tradition of erotic painting and sculpture, having sex with an animal is believed to be actually a human having sex with a god incarnated in the form of an animal.<ref name="PodberscekBeetz2005">{{cite book|first1=Anthony L. |last1=Podberscek |first2=Andrea M. |last2=Beetz |title=Bestiality and Zoophilia: Sexual Relations with Animals |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Z-GbOvrbniQC&pg=PT12 |accessdate=4 January 2013 |date=1 September 2005 |publisher=Berg |isbn=978-0-85785-222-9 |page=12}}</ref> However, in some Hindu scriptures, such as the ''[[Bhagavata Purana]]'' and the ''[[Devi Bhagavata Purana]]'', having sex with animals, especially the cow, leads one to [[Naraka (Hinduism)|hell]], where one is tormented by having one's body rubbed on trees with razor-sharp thorns.<ref name = "mani">{{cite book|author = Mani, Vettam|title = Puranic Encyclopaedia: A Comprehensive Dictionary With Special Reference to the Epic and Puranic Literature|url = https://archive.org/details/puranicencyclopa00maniuoft|publisher = Motilal Banarsidass|year = 1975|location = Delhi|isbn = 978-0-8426-0822-0|oclc=2198347|pages = [https://archive.org/details/puranicencyclopa00maniuoft/page/368 368–70]}}</ref>