Non-Human Animal Consent
| This article is a stub. You can help Zoophilia.wiki by expanding it. |
Consent is a very important concept in all the Modern Sexuality Movements. It is argued by many Anti-Zoos that Animals can not consent, and therefore Zoophillia is immoral. It is also argued by some Zoos that whether animals can consent is a red-herring argument, for so long as you respect the animal, and only mate during heat, this breaks no moral law. However, the idea among among most Zoos is that animals can and do consent to sex, and have very obvious means to withdraw their consent at any time.
This page discusses the topic of consent as it applies to non-human animals. For more information about the wider legal and social ramifications for consent based on sexual practices, see Sexual consent.
Consent
Consent is very important to Zoophiles – they get pleasure from giving pleasure to the animals that they are with.
Different species have various vocalizations as well as body language, and with these forms of communication they either deliver or withhold consent. Zoos are sure to make sure they get their animal’s explicit consent each step of the way, and doing otherwise can prove hazardous. Many animals such as medium or large dogs (not to mention ungulates, which weigh much more) are all certainly capable of delivering a firm ‘no’ that will leave the person with no doubt in their mind whether the animal wants sexual contact or not.
Signs of consent include solicitous behaviors such as pawing at the person, rubbing their face or other body parts against them, humping in males (and occasionally females) as well as females standing and flagging.
Signs of non-consent include bared teeth, pinned ears, fur standing on end, as well as hissing, growling, and other angry vocalizations. Freezing in place and widening of the eyes are signs of dubious consent and if the animal’s behavior does not quickly change toward positive, it is a sign that one must stop attempting to stimulate the animal.
Some animals are receptive at all times and always on the lookout for an opportunity to be sexual, while some others require a good bit of foreplay to get them aroused, and still others simply will not have sex with a human. Each animal is different and the best thing we can do to care for them is treat each of them as the individual they are and behave with them in accordance with their desires.
The Struggle for Zoophiles
Zoophiles wage a never-ending war against prejudices and ignorance to convey their morality. Those who have heard nothing of zoophilia yet can hardly understand why a number of humans are used to having sex with animals. At first glance, it seems to be unnatural that certain men or women love animals more than anyone else, but if you look deeper, you should recognize since our forefathers commenced domesticating wild animals, our relationship has steadily been getting closer and closer.
Research
Masters, in 1962, wrote "It has always been noted in fact, by ancient historians and up through Kinsey in our own time, that animals tend to become affectionately attached (not only physically) to humans who have sex relations with them, and sometimes have even been known to forsake intercourse with their own kind in testimony to their preference for relations with humans. Whatever one may think of bestiality, this does not sound as if it were an act of cruelty so far as the animal is concerned."
And ultimately speculated that: "One seems forced to conclude, the animal derives a considerable psychical and/or emotional pleasure from sexual contact with a being of a higher nervous, emotional, and intellectual organization, who is somehow able to provide the animal with non-material rewards which another animal is not able to offer."
Similar findings are also reported by Kinsey (cited by Masters 1962), and others earlier in history. Likewise, Miletski (1999) notes that information on sex with animals on the internet is often very emphatic as to how to give pleasure and identify consent beforehand, to the point that "one can find instructions on how to tell if the animal is in the mood for sex."
Destigmatization of Bestiality
Modern researchers zoophilia, from the Masters ( . English the REL Masters ) ( 1962 ) and ending with Andrea Beatz ( 2002 ), come to the following conclusions:
Emotions, relationships and motivation should be the main aspect of studying a problem. It is important to evaluate not only sexual intercourse as such, but also the nature of the act itself (Masters, Miletsky, Beats). Emotions, feelings of zoophiles and caring for an animal can be genuine, related, authentic and, as the animal needs, mutual, and not only serve as a substitute or a sign of their expression (Masters, Miletsky, Weinberg, Beats)
The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife, 1820 Japanese engraving Most zoophiles have (or have had) sexual relationships with humans, along with zoosexual ones. (Masters, Beats) Currently, the society is significantly misled about the problem of bestiality and its aspects. (Masters, Miletsky, Weinberg, Beats) Contrary to popular belief, in practice there is a significant popular or "latent" interest in mating and sexual behavior of animals, bestiality, both imaginary and real (Nancy Friday, Massen, Masters). Significant differences between zoophilia and zoosadism are emphasized by all of these researchers. Masters ( 1962 ), Miletsky ( 1999 ), and Weinberg ( 2003 ) note and comment on the serious social harm caused by many common prejudices about bestiality. Despite the fact that the results of modern research are consistent with the claims of supporters of destigmatization of bestiality, the public remains hostile to the idea of sexual relations between humans and animals.
Supporters of the revision of views on bestiality argue that the relationship between humans and animals can go beyond sexual relations, which is confirmed by research, and that animals, in turn, are also capable of forming genuine intimate relationships that can last for a relatively long time. time and functionally do not differ from any other love-sexual relationship.
Some researchers argue that at least some species of animals are capable of mutual sexual contact with humans.
Zoophiles
A person who has an attraction towards animals is called a zoophile . In everyday speech, the term "bestiality" means any person who has sex with animals and can have negative connotations . A distinction can also be made between "cattle" and "zoophile" (similar to the distinction between the terms "bestiality" and "bestiality" described above).
Among zoophiles, a similar distinction is also made: a "zoophile" is a person with a strong attachment to animals, which can be based on "family" relationships (including sexual), opposed to "possessive", not related to caring for an animal partner.
Examining twelve female zoophilia students, GB Deryagin revealed the following socio-psychological characteristics in them:
A large proportion of people with bisexual sexual orientation (up to 75%). Promiscuity and prostitution : 25% of the respondents had several dozen partners in their lives, another 25% - 10-20 partners; a third had sex for a fee. A large number of people who were sexually abused in childhood and adolescence and who participated in incestuous relationships: 60% of those surveyed were sexually abused , 16.7% were sexually abusive , and 25% were involved in voluntary incest . A wide range of sexual acceptability, including sadomasochistic , pedophilic and exhibitionistic practices. Nevertheless, in the same study, it is noted that persons who have had sexual contacts with animals do not observe mental degradation, there is no higher level of problems associated with family life than the control group , as well as an increased frequency of alcohol and other psychoactive substances. The age of onset of sexual activity is also not higher and not lower than typical for the considered social groups.
