good for you for being vegetarian. I'm still a meat eater, but I wish there were much tighter regulations within the meat industry to reduce the suffering of the animals. Of course I would be happy paying higher prices.

Thank you for the response. You are far more well-versed in the legal side of this than I am. Like I said, from what little research I did it seemed like the laws banning homosexuality and zoophilia were one in the same, and that the lgbt movement indirectly helping the zoo community in that way. I had only read some (apparently dated) articles about a few other countries. I was just pleasantly surprised that it looked like society might be (even accidentally) loosening legal restrictions. Usually when that happens, it opens the door for a marginalized and unfairly criminalized society to come to light, and show people that they are not the monsters under the bed that people think they are. At that point, some places give a little more, just to test the waters, while more conservative places have knee-jerk reactions (gay marriage wasn't ILLEGAL in some states until after it was LEGAL in others, for example). That is what usually starts the gradual process towards acceptance, which usually takes a decade or so. I have done a bit of study on different civil rights movements. Usually the overall process from "no visibility" to "general social acceptance" takes anywhere from 20 to 50 years. When laws start to change, you're usually already past "grass roots campaign", and at least people OUTSIDE the mainstream know and sometimes even accept the community as a whole, and with 10 - 15 years you have some good momentum. The internet is a good catalyst for that because of places like this, where otherwise silent communities have a (relatively) safe place to congregate.

You are right though, it would appear that that legal window is not currently upon us. Thank you for the articles.

We are recently experiencing a tsunami of anti animal sex laws in Europe, but you forgot to mention how all of that started. I guess that anyone has heard about the "Mr Hands" case, the guy from Washington who died from a perforated colon. This happened in 2006 and led to the first wave of new laws against interspecies sex. Some people in Germany started to investigate, scanned the internet and found lots of animal porn. They also found BF, one essential source of their rejective stance against "zoophiles". For me, it is totally understandable that those antis got the impression of a growing internet sex cult posing a threat to animals as well as society in whole. They have seen the growing user numbers, growing "contributions" from German citizens and finally decided to do something. The first petition against "zoophilia" was born. The initiator, Mrs Silke Lautenschläger, explicitly said that "zoophilia" once was a thing only done by a few single persons, with only a few animals involved, but now, it has grown into a sex cult. What once was "tolerable" as an outlet for but a few, has mutated into a semi industrialised and organized underground culture, with sex parties and animal porn making, with the famous animal brothels ,etc. As someone involved in the community for more than 20 years, I sadly have to agree on that, at least partially. The animal brothel claims are based on the impressions given by having a close look into any "meetup" section on "zoo" boards, especially BF. Lots of people searching for "fuckable" lifestock and a significant number of people offering their animals for sex acts. It surely isn´t a proof for professional animal brothels, but gives a hint at existing amateur brothels. We all know that "renting" animals for sex to random strangers a.k.a. "zoo friends" is true and happening frequently. What once was an unproblematic orientation to deal with, has now become an underground business undermining society. The usual "leave me alone, I just want to live with my animal" zoo has turned into someone fueling the international porn mafia, is luring "newbies" in and builds structures comparable to organized crime ("zoo networks").

The anti zoo petitions were rejected several times, many politicians turned them down because they didn´t see the need to act. What got them to act was screenshots of BF and other "zoo sites" clearly showing that something needs to be done about the clandestine scene of animal exploiters. When freedom is given to people, only a few will use it responsibly, the vast majority will abuse it. That´s a fact. The responsibly acting zoos lost their freedom because of people who can´t live up to the responsibilities involved in zoophilia.

So, there´s no conspiracy, no anti zoo atmosphere; the new laws were necessary, whether we like it or not. We shouldn´t aim for total legalization, we should aim for regulation instead. I´d be glad to swap all animal porn for a strictly regulated , but tolerated zoophilia. I´d be content with the possibility of a monogamous relationship with an animal, supervised by the state. The anti "zoo" laws are actually aimed at the beasty scene and all of the negative stuff going on there. One final thought: You never hear about someone getting caught without animal porn or fencehopping involved. Zoophilia mostly takes place in the solitude of one´s own home. How can you get caught when you take the precautions taught by the original zeta rules? Stay away from porn, don´t talk to strangers about your sexuality, don´t film yourself while doing it and you´ll be fine. No evidence = no sentence. Plus, you´re totally exaggerating the effects of the law. Take it from me as a practicing zoo for more than 20 years: even without a law against it, you would be equally fucked if your sexuality became publicly known. The law basically changes nothing for a zoo; it only becomes even more important to act responsibly all the time. Again: Don´t film yourself, don´t participate in "animal sharing circles", don´t get involved with the scene too much, don´t fencehop. Stay at home, keep your sexuality secret and enjoy the relationship with your own animal.