Giving terms a chance. (self.zoophilia)
submitted 2013-10-02 21:19:55 by Tundrovyy-Volk
Hello! Would any zoos support a change/adoption of terms in relation to sex with animals? The bad connotations of "bestiality" in the public sphere have led me to believe that it may be beneficial to zoophiles if we changed the usage of that term. I would propose that "bestiality" be used to mean non-consensual and/or harmful sex with animals, while "zooerasty" be used to mean consensual and non-harmful sex. Would you support a change in terms to separate zoos from sadists? Would you suggest a different word be used over "zooerasty"?
People have tried. It doesn't work. But good news, Zoophilia has been declassified as a Mental Disease.
I haven't seen us try.
I'll rephrase (Currently, for those in the practice of animal loving, we all do) Those that don't, are the haters.
You've crushed my optimism.
If you're posting here though, you should already know that these are the terms that you'd use. So you're on the good side of things anyway. Cheer up. I don't use either term. I try not to talk about it. If I have to I say, "Cuddled with a shep' the other day."
Non-zoos will still be okay with it. Just try and never say bestiality or zoophilia in public. It'll be taken the wrong way 100% of the time and no amount of explaining "I love them! No! For real!" will ever help.
I'm glad I'm not the only one saying these exact things. Zoos and people with even a passing interest in the subject have it better than they've had it in thousands of years. There are now websites that offer a wealth of information and support from like-minded individuals. For the first time, people who feel ashamed or "broken" in some way can connect to other people within a few clicks of a mouse and learn they are not alone, learn how to take care of themselves and their animals, receive support and learn the do's and don'ts, share stories of intimacy and generally learn to be responsible and safe.
But people need to stop trying to make zoosexuality "happen", it's not going to happen. There's no real need for it to happen either. There should be no need for anyone to be more "open" about it at all unless some very odd legal precedent comes up where people married to animals need to start sharing benefits. And I don't see that happening either . Yes, sometimes people are persecuted when caught, but most people who get caught are showing off in some way, to other people they don't know well or on camera over the internet, or while hopping someone's fence. All things you should never do.
It wasn't previously either. Definitions didn't change, they just changed the terminology from "paraphilia" to "paraphilic disorder" across the board so that there would be less confusion.
It's noted specifically in a part (I'd read, and I'll paraphrase)
"Zoophilia in and of itself, shall not be treated, lest it be accompanied by life-altering actions that may bring about harm to the individual or potential harm to society, or the animals involved."
So, it's stated in such a manner that if that's all you're into, leave it be, but if you're into that because you also like to cut the animal up afterward, wear it around like a skin and then force people to watch you do it........ then you need to treat the other stuff going on. But... just animals and you gettin' freaky in the bedroom or barn? Not something the DSM wishes to take on any longer.
It's nice that it's explicit, but that same harm criteria was already apart of the previous edition for all paraphilias. What we refer to when we say "zoophilia" (attraction to animals) hasn't been listed for a while now.
Still, I sorta hate it about myself some days, and like it others. it's rather crippling.
Even in gay vs homosexual, some people don't care. They still hate people anyway.
So, are you going to publicly speaking about the terminology changes? Maybe, on Fox News? (They like foxes, right?) j/k you'd probably get burned at the stake.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia#Terminology
[deleted]
Wall of text incoming because it's late and I can't sleep.
Most people who are involved in the... I don't know what to call it, for the lack of a better term I'll say "community" already distinguish between bestiality and zoophilia pretty much how you describe it, maybe with a slight bit of errata;
Bestiality and bestiality type content has more to do with people who are turned on sexually by the act of sex with an animal, or watching someone else. This may have more to do with the idea of doing something very "wrong" and degrading. A huge amount of the bestiality porn out there is made by people who are only doing it for the money or because it's "gross." And a huge amount of the consumers enjoy it for that reason.
Zoophiles on the other hand hold animals in much higher regard and usually have an actual attraction and/or connection to animals. It doesn't even need to be sexual, and most zoos don't even talk about it or even use terminology like bestiality or zoophilia outside context of forums like this anyway.
And of course there's a huge grey area in between these two terms anyway.
I feel that when a group tries to start forming its own vernacular, making up new words, they recede further from acceptance, and start to become isolationist. The reasoning is, when outsiders see a group speaking their own language, about a subject that's not well understood and very easy to form negative judgements about, the imagination will take over and people will assume far worse, that there's a much more organized collective at work. ("There's an underground group going around preying on YOUR pets, tune in to news at nine to hear more...")
I have the odd opinion that everything is okay in the world of zoophilia. Sex with animals is taboo and illegal, and this is okay because it protects animals from abuse from those aforementioned bestiality enthusiasts. Meanwhile people who love animals and do not abuse them shouldn't have to worry about the law because they should be in the habit of being very discrete anyway. There's no reason for anyone to get caught or called out unless they start putting cameras in our bedrooms.
As for the social stigma? There's not much that can be done. Your consenting partner has no voice of their own, and most people will always look at pets as helpless, small, hairy children, so that sexual exploitation of these hairy children is unthinkable. Most people also do not find animals attractive in that way at all either. It's not a matter of convincing them otherwise, they're just not wired that way. It's not evolutionarily beneficial to feel attraction to another species that you cannot reproduce with, so perhaps it is a malfunction of some kind, a disorder, as it has been classified.
But who said all disorders have to be harmful? Maybe it's also a blessing that we get to experience a kind of connection or intimacy that others could never imagine.
It's pointless to try to change the names. Each name means something different to each person.
Agnostic is an example. There are many definitions of the word depending on who you ask.
Any word you come up with to denote animal-human sex is not going to matter to anti-zoos or old zoos who arrive to discover the name for what they do has been changed by a few people.
Faggot? In GB it's a stick. Or a cigarette. In the USA it's a gay person, or anyone from 4chan. There are gays who are faggots, and gays who are not faggots.
Gay means "happy" to some people, "homosexual" to others, and "bad" to some.
Welcome to the English language.