I noticed that
@dawny0826 skipped over this part of the Wikipedia Zoophilia article:
"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 abuseand 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;[35] it also states that there are several kinds of zoophiles:
[35]
- Human-animal role-players
- Romantic zoophiles
- Zoophilic fantasizers
- Tactile zoophiles
- Fetishistic zoophiles
- Sadistic bestials
- Opportunistic zoophiles
- Regular zoophiles
- Exclusive zoophiles
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.
[35]
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
[36] 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.
[37]
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-reviewed journals. There have been several significant modern books, from Masters (1962) to Beetz (2002);
[38] 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)[38][39]
- 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.[40]Beetz believes zoophilia is not an inclination which is chosen.[38]
- Society in general at present is considerably misinformed about zoophilia, its stereotypes, and its meaning.[38] 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 the lives of many citizens".[38]
Beetz also states the following:
"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."
[41]
More recently, research has engaged three further directions – the speculation that at least some animals seem to enjoy a zoophilic relationship assuming sadism is not present, and can form an affectionate bond.[42] 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 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.[43]
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
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.
[44] As with all volunteer surveys and sexual ones in particular, these studies have a potential for
self-selection bias.
[45]
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.
[2][46]"
Zoophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
