Zoosexuality

Sexual orientation and zoosexuality

The concept of zoosexuality refers to sexual orientation as opposed to fetishism, paraphilia, or mental ailment. The term seems to have been introduced by Masters in the 1960s. At this time, in line with Kinsey's work, minority sexualities and various sexual attractions were beginning to be seen as anything other than a sign of a mental anomaly.

Hani Miletski was arguably the first formal research author discussing whether or not there is a sexual orientation towards animals.

The term 'zoosexual' itself is used by researchers like Miletsky in the 1990s being envisioned as a value-neutral term that would be less likely to be emotionally charged or rhetorical. Its use in nominal form can be applied both to a zoosexual person and to a zoosexual act.

In his doctoral thesis on zoophilia from 1996, Donofrio says her findings support the opinion of the American Psychiatric Association (American Psychiatric Association) expressed in its diagnostic manual ( DSM-IV ) as bestiality n in itself is not a "clinically significant problem" and its incidence is relatively uncommon. Studying the question further, he also concludes that the conception and recognition of a sexual orientation towards animals (as opposed to a simple classification as paraphilia ) was supported by his study.

In a 1999 study described as "monumental" and "pioneer" , a reference work which analyzes the question in a global way and reviews all the work on the subject, Miletsky was the first researcher to formally consider whether an actual sexual orientation existed (as opposed to sexual fetishization) on the grounds that a scale similar to Kinsey's could apply to it.

Considering that zoosexuality would imply a sexual orientation towards animals and that the thesis of Donofrio (1996) supports the fact that zoophilia is a sexual orientation, on a scale like Kinsey's concerning sexual orientation, those who would not feel any attraction towards animals would appear at the zero points. Individuals whose desire and attraction relate to animals would be assigned the 6th position. In this continuum, between the two extremes, would appear individuals who have fantasies of sexual contact with animals, who have had incidental or more regular experiences with animals, or who place their sexual activity with animals at an equal place. than those involving humans, or finally, those who prefer and

When asked whether there is a sexual orientation towards non-human animals, Miletsky responds positively in his book. According to her, people show different levels of sexual inclination towards animals. Some have feelings of love or affection for their animals, others have fantasies about them and admit to being sexually attracted to them. She says:

"As we know, sexual orientation can be fluid and changeable over time and according to circumstances. We can thus place all people at different levels of the Kinsey scale by applying it to sexual orientation towards animals. Thus, it is logical to assume that the majority of the human race will be placed at the zero points of such a scale ... but the present study shows that there are humans whose place on such a scale is definitely not zero In fact, there are a few individuals whose place on this scale could even be the other extreme (6 = exclusive inclination towards animals)." These results have also since been accredited by Andrea Beet who in her 2002 book: Love, Violence, and Sex with Animals agrees that there has been a lack in previous studies and that:

"The results of this study are consistent with the view of recent authors ... that in fact a sexual orientation towards animals - a zoosexuality - does exist, even if it is not appropriate to look at all people who have sex with animals as zoosexuals". A series of articles from 2005-2006 published in the Journal of the International Society for Anthrozoology also supports this view.

A 2005 article, Zoophilia, between pathology and normality published by doctors from the Munich Polyclinic of Psychiatry and Psychology, establishes that:

"Bestiality, a sexual preference for animals, has lost its character as a severe mental disorder. In clinical practice, it is rarely seen these days, especially since it was decriminalized in Germany in 1970. The results of this study do not offer an explanation for the causes of bestiality. It is notable, however, that the subjects in question were socially well adjusted and fitted into good interpersonal relationships. ". The authors also draw attention that zoophilia exhibits a wide variety of manifestations.

Comparisons with other sexual orientations

Akeret (1995) presents in his book some of his most memorable clients, one of whom was in love with a polar bear. He claims that treating this client for his bestiality "appeared no less difficult than trying to cure a homosexual of his attraction to men.

Miletsky in his work addresses an equivalent but the darker similarity with other minority sexual orientations:

feelings of not being loved, low self-esteem, anger, and stress had these feelings because they were in the zoo. In the 12 months preceding the study, the majority of men (57 = 69%) and women (9 = 82%), however, said they were happy in their personal lives. "

Emotion in Zoosexuality

Emotions in Men

In 1962, in his work, Masters questioned the extent to which human individuals participating in an act of bestiality regarded the animal that was their sexual partner as a person. He replied as follows:

"The human expects the animal to derive satisfaction from relations with him, as it would for another person, and he is disappointed if this reaction does not occur", attribute to him emotional capacities and some conceptual skills, and "in short, he considers them a personality, a consciousness similar to human, which differs from him more erotically than spiritually. This is part of why individuals are able to 'fall in love' with animals, especially those with whom they have had repeated sexual experiences .... " Wondering in the same work if it was possible for a human being to be in love, in the romantic sense of the term with an animal and if it was possible, with the limitations linked to its nature, that an animal could have a mutual affection, he commented:

"In this area, the attitudes and emotions with which the subjects (human) in approaching their object (animal) are considered decisive ..." We can say that there is "a real feeling for the animal on the part of the human ", and can approach what is called 'erotic love' where only humans are involved ... Although relatively rare, there are cases ... where the human being actually falls 'in love' with animals, a love including sexual relations, but also romantic elements like tenderness, spiritual affection, and even jealousy. " Likewise, Beetz states:

"The emotional side does play a role for some people who have sexual contact with animals, this fact being recognized by several sources, eg Bornemann (1990), Cerrone (1991), Davis (1954), Donofrio (1996), Hentig (1962), Kinsey et al. (1948), and Miletski (1999) For example, Hentig (1962) mentions a patient described by Hirschfeld: The man was deeply in love with a horse, had built a luxurious stable especially for him, pampered him, was in his own words loyal to his horse and would probably end his life if the latter died before him. A novelty - at least in his time - was the prospect of Ullerstam (1966) who suggested that both emotions and erotic feelings can be reciprocal between man and animal. Kinsey (1954) also expressed the opinion that sexual contact can lead to a very strong emotional attachment to the animal and that in some cases the animal becomes accustomed to this kind of interspecific contact to such an extent. that he neglects possible sexual partners of his own kind. "(Beetz section 5.2.11) Williams and Weinberg (2003) found that "almost all [the zoophiles in their study] claimed to be in love with an animal partner and to have perceived that their animal partner was in love with them." Finally, according to Kurrelgyre (1995, cited by Miletski) "Many zoos find satisfaction simply by giving pleasure to their animal."

Emotions in Animals

There have been fewer studies of animal responses to the zoosexual activity. Masters, in 1962, wrote:

"Where Sadism and Sadomasochism are not present, there is a lot of room for doubt as to whether there is cruelty. In fact, ancient historians like Kinsey in our time have always noted that animals tend to be emotionally attached (not just physically) to humans who have sex with them, and sometimes even forego sex with their own species, indicating their preference for dealing with humans. bestiality, it doesn't sound like it's an act of cruelty as far as the animal is concerned. " Masters ultimately speculated that:

"One seems forced to conclude, the animal withdraws therefrom, whether it is psychically [16] that emotionally - where both - pleasure in having sexual contacts with a being of a higher intellectual, emotional and nervous organization, who is in a way able to offer the animal non-material rewards that another animal is not able to offer. " Drawing inspiration from Masters, Alfred Kinsey "accepts as a fact that animals can develop a great deal of affection for humans who have sex with them."

Miletski (1999) information on sexual practice with animals on the internet is often very emphatic on how to give pleasure and interpret consent , and how to avoid injury, to the point that she concluded that "we can find instructions on how to know that the animal is okay with sex, as well as suggestions, such as cutting their fingernails before engaging in any sexual act with an animal, so as not to physically harm the animal. "

Beetz adds to these findings that in acts other than "sexual violence", sexual contact "of appropriate anatomy and size" does not necessarily cause pain or injury to the animal.

Observing the capacity of animals to have genuine emotions, Jonathan Balcombe argues in his book (2006) that animals have a greatly developed sense of pleasure in life, and not just elementary responses like pain [18] referring to this book, Wayne Pacelle , President and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) comments: “Dr. Balcombe argues with conviction that animals are individual beings with a wide range of emotions and feelings. and I think it does - it follows that we have to debate the ethical consequences from his important point of view. "

Intersubjective Emotions

• The main bibliography, see: Zoophilia
• Andrea Beetz Ph.D .: Bestiality and Zoophilia (2005), ISBN 1-55753-412-8
• Andrea Beetz Ph.D .: Love, Violence, and Sexuality in Relationships between Humans and Animals (2002), *ISBN 3-8322-0020-7
• Professors Colin J. Williams and Martin S. Weinberg: Zoophilia in Men: a study of sexual interest in animals. - in Archives of sexual behavior, Vol. 32, No. 6, December 2003, pp. 523–535
• Hani Miletski Ph.D .: Bestiality - Zoophilia: An exploratory study, Diss., The Institute for Advanced *Study of Human Sexuality. - San Francisco, CA, October 1999
• Hani Miletski Ph.D .: Understanding Bestiality and Zoophilia, 2002, available at Hani Miletski's *Homepage ( Book review in Journal of Sex Research, May 2003
• Josef Massen: Zoophilia - Die commerciale Liebe zu Tieren (Zoophilia - the sexual love of / for animals) (1994), ISBN 3-930387-15-8
• REL Masters Ph.D .: Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality, an objective examination of perverse sex practices in different cultures (1962), ISBN LIC # 62-12196
• Brian Daly Ph.D.,: "Forbidden Love: My journey with animals"

References

https://www.animalzoofrance.com/wiki/Zoosexualit%C3%A9

Miletsky, chapter 13
Miletsky, chapter 13
UK Home Office "Review of sexual offenses" 2002
"the sexual perversion of dull, insensitive, and unfastidious persons. It flourishes among primitive peoples and among peasants. It is the vice of the clodhopper, unattractive to women ...", Havelock Ellis, Studies in the psychology of sex, 1927
Quoted by Miletsky, 1999, p.65.
Beetz (2002) section 5.2.25: "One of the most monumental and recent studies on human-animal sexual contact was conducted by Miletski in 1999"
Review by Vern Bullough Emeritus Professor at SUNY, Professor at California State University, Past President of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex, and Alfred Kinsey Award Winner for Outstanding Sexuality Research) published in Journal of Sex Research, May 2003: "In sum, this study is a path-breaking one and gives us a better understanding of the topic. Much work still needs to be done, but Miletski should be complimented for her pioneering efforts ..." ( Online version )
"The findings of this question ... clearly indicate that different people have different levels of sexual inclination toward animals." Is there a sexual orientation toward nonhuman animals? "- yes, so it appears ... it very clearly shows that some people ... have feelings of love and affection for their animals, have sexual fantasies about them, and admit they are sexually attracted to them. Sexual orientation, as we know it, can be fluid and changing with time and circumstances ... We can place people on all levels of the Kinsey scale, even when we apply this scale to sexual orientation toward animals. It is logical to assume that the majority of the human race will be placed around the zero point of this Kinsey-like scale ... but the current study shows that there are some humans whose place on this Kinsey-like scale is definitely not zero . In fact, there are some ... individuals whose place on this scale would be the other extreme (6 = sexual inclination exclusively with animals). "(Miletski ch.13 pp.171-172)
"Findings of this study agree with the view of recent authors ... that indeed a sexual orientation towards animals - a zoosexuality - exists, even if it is not appropriate to regard all persons who have sex with animals as zoosexuals." (Beetz 2002, section 5.7)
Journal of the International Society for Anthrozoology, published by Dr Anthony Podberscek of the University of Cambridge Department of Veterinary Medicine in Great Britain , exact citation to be obtained
Dittert, Seidl and Soyka, Zoophilia between pathology and normality , Klinik und Poliklinik fur Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Klinikum der Universitat Munchen University of Munich, Germany. Indexed PubMed 15197450 [1]
"Zoophilia, a sexual preference for animals, has lost its character as a severe mental disorder. In clinical practice it is rarely seen nowadays, particularly since it was decriminalized [in Germany] in 1970 ... Findings from this study do not offer explanations about the causes of zoophilia. It is noteworthy, however, that the subjects in question were socially well adapted and displayed good interpersonal social skills. "
Beetz 2002, section 5.2.4. "Not clearly named in this list is the form of zoophilia, that is characterized by an emotional as well as a sexual attraction respectively love to an animal, which is called zoosexuality by other authors (Donofrio, 1996; Miletski, 1999). attraction is experienced and not deliberately chosen, and the animal does not serve as a surrogate in such a relation. "
quoted by Miletsky, p. 41
Miletsky, chapter 8
The term psychical is used, meaning, "of the psyche ". Not to be confused with "physical, meaning," of the body ".
Beetz 2002 section 5.2.6: "Except of the violent sexual acts with animals described above, it should be noted, that in many cases the sexual contact with a mammal of suitable anatomy and size does not necessarily cause pain or injuries to the animal . "
Jonathan Balcombe, Pleasurable Kingdom , 2006: Publishers description states that the book: "suggests that creatures from birds to baboons feel good thanks to play, sex, touch, food, anticipation, comfort, aesthetics, and more. Combining rigorous evidence, elegant argument and amusing anecdotes, leading animal behavior researcher Jonathan Balcombe proposes that the possibility of positive feelings in creatures other than humans has important ethical ramifications for both science and society. "