[NS] [NSFW] I have no idea how known this is in this community. If I'm beign a captain obvious, I'm trully sorry. I'm just not very active in these communities nor know anyone closely that is into this either.
This is not a thread on porn morality. I know actual zoo porn might bring many negative things, I know there are mixed thoughts on this in this community, but that's not what I want to discuss here. I will talk about both actual porn and art porn in this topic. I will describe sex situations (not personal) so I added the "NSFW" in the title.
Thing is, I've always been somewhat concerned on how cultures behave and why, so I tried reading comments from zoo porn in different sites, and of all kinds of porn (human male to female animal, male animal to female human, actual videos, drawn porn, etc), and what I saw in these comments was really not what I expected.
First of all, most zoophile porn content seems to be "male animal on female human", and most people watching this are men. I personally prefer the kind of porn where I can feel more identified with the male in action for it to feel more "real" to me regarding the whole action. To put it clear, I don't like "male animal on female human" porn because I don't feel identified with the male in action because I'm a human, not a dog or a horse, so I prefer "human male on female animal", because I like female animal and I am a human male. What confused me about this first was that what most men actually watch is "male animal to female human". And when I found "male human on female animal"; I found out most commenters weren't only men, but men that appreciated the man in action and not the animal. In other words, most people watching "Male animal on female human" are men who appreciate the woman in action and ignore the animal pretty much, since it only seems to be like a sex toy for them. And most people watching "Male human on female animal" are men who also appreciate the man in action and not the animal, like what turns them on was the savagery of the man and not the act involving the female animal feeling and all of it as a whole. Most people watching zoo porn see animals as sex toys instead of partners, and what turns them on is the human in action, be man or woman, but not the animal.
In fact, the only site I know that only contains "human male on female animal" porn is called "gaybeast" (idk if it's allowed to mention porn sites, make me know if it isn't please). And I never knew why that site is called like that since there's literally nothing gay on it, until not long ago, when I realized about all of this matter. The reason is because most viewers and commenters from that site are homosexual men who like to see men fucking animals, it's their "savagery" what turns them on, according to the comments I see. The most common example would be men commenters talking about the size of the penis of the man in the video and that would like to be penetrated by them just like they do to the animal, and not appreciating the animal at all.
I see this in all types of porn content, be real or artistic. You can see literally the same behavior in people in sites like e621 and others (sites of furry porn basically).
In the case of art porn though, I found more comments. Many commenters say that they enjoy watching others having sex, and I haven't found anyone that seeks to feel identifie with the man in action to feel the porn more "real". Instead, most people just enjoy watching certain characters having sex without being necessarily involved in the action. And there's also the type of commenters that talk about how they want to see themselves more like animals than humans when it comes to bestiality porn, so they enjoy "animal on animal" art porn more exciting and appealing than "human male on animal" porn. In fact, "human male on animal" is so rare in digital art that I think I've seen all of it in matter of days and there's really hardly any of it if you compare it to "animal on animal" porn or "male animal on female human" porn.
This gets more personal when I think about what do I exactly like? This reddit place is literally the only one where I found people that find female animals as appealing as other people find women appealing, and not just as a sex toy. I've seen some comments on porn content that appreciated the female animal too, but those were very rare as well. And I still am the only person I know that prefers "human male on female animal" content in order to feel more familiar with the situation. In fact, I summarized this to some people on a site who are into furry porn, and they all thought I was saying that I'm homosexual or bisexual, when in reality I'm only straight. I don't find men in porn appealing at all, they are just the factor that makes me feel more like I was doing the thing to the female in question, which is the one I actually find appealing.
When I found out about all the bestiality porn that there is on the internet, I first thought there were actually a lot of zoophile people in the world, but after seeing this I understand that we are actually a lot rarer than I thought we were.
Have you ever thuoght about this? What do you think?
###This thread is in NO SALT mode!
Please be aware that rule 7 will be enforced more heavily in this thread and all disrespectful or derogatory comments in this thread will be immediately removed pending a report and moderator discretion.
Disrespect is defined as anything, intentional or unintentional, that appears to be meant to offend, shame, harass, or otherwise derogate another individual or group, within /r/zoophilia or without.
This does not include observations or fair criticisms whose verbiage is not inherently inflammatory and can be reasonably inferred or verified in some capacity. Potentially inflammatory opinions that are clarified as such and are in posts not intended to be inflammatory are not infractions. Our definition of disrespect is not meant to infringe upon freedom of speech, and if you think a post was wrongly marked for infraction, you are free to appeal it in a reply to a moderator's comment.
If you're unsure about whether your post has dangerously high sodium content, submit a modmail with a copy of your comment. We will tell you how to keep your comment heart healthy when needed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
There's a lot of nuance in what attracts people to bestiality. The three main categories I see are zoophiles (attracted to the animals), people who like taboo and novelty, and people who are into domination/humiliation. There aren't really any hard lines between the groups, many people have aspects of multiple categories. You can have a zoophile who finds the taboo of it exciting and I've seen many people who are interested in being dominated by or dominating an animal they find attractive.
People who are purely attracted to the animals are generally though not the target audience of real-life porn. Porn focusing on the humans and on what non-zoophiles find attractive is going to have wider appeal. People who wouldn't necessarily be into bestiality might still watch a video if it has actors and themes they find attractive. It also might be hard to show things zoos find appealing while not showing faces/identifiable markings and while showing things non-zoos find attractive.
Interestingly I've found feral furry porn to be largely targeted at people who find animals attractive. The focus is mostly or entirely on the animal, shows personality and agency of the animal, and (allowing for stylization) largely shows animals as they are. In drawn porn targeted at non-zoos you see less of a focus on the animal, the animal isn't always even completely visible, there's less care in rendering their anatomy compared to the human/anthro and sometimes the feral even has humanoid anatomy.
People are weird, they like weird stuff, they don't like to admit it.
You won't find nice zoo porn the same way you won't find proper shemale porn; people just like the kink and weirdness of it and don't care on actual feelings, this is why it's mostly targeted at men that just need to jack off to keep going on with their day.
But it's marketing overall, if you want to make money you target the biggest audience. The experimenters, who don't give a shit and just want to watch weird stuff happening.
Haha, you arent being a captain obvious, but at the same time you arent the first to make these connections. Many people here know how messed up this stuff is when you really break it down.
Im glad you created this post, zoophiles sometimes shun the sex with animals porn industry, yet it is not often discussed as to why and whether it is our enemy.
First of all, let me just say that what you call "zoophile porn" is much more commonly accepted as "bestiality porn" in the sub. The reason being lies in the very conclusions that you made - that there is no real attraction to the animal involved. Hence there is no real zoophilic aspect to it. Im confident most people here would agree with me on this.
One of the biggest beneficiaries to zoophilia's bad name is this very concept. If you look up "zoophile porn" on the internet, you will come up with the very content that you have mentioned here. Imagine how an outsider would feel if there first experience with ever hearing the word "zoophile/zoophilia" is in that context. After watching some of that stuff, I would probably be disgusted if someone told me they were a zoophile as well...
You mentioned quite a bit about the audience attracted to these videos, a few words on that: I think it is a testimony to the fact that true zoophiles a significant minority with respect to the whole group of individuals who watch videos of sex with animals, like you mentioned. And from this results the misunderstanding on the part of the viewers that they are zoophiles (just because they watched a porno with the word zoophilia in it...), when in fact they are just another person interested in seeing a human get nailed by an animal, etc.
You will definitely find some people on the sub (granted they are straight zoos) who prefer "human male on female animal", myself included ;). This quite simply has to do with the fact that the focus of a true zoophile viewer would be on the animal and not the human. In other words, the average human onlooker would base the sexuality of the viewer on the human figure and not the animal figure, while a zoo would base it on the animal. There is an element of relatability in this too, as I have met homo zoos who prefer "human male/animal male" above "human female/animal male", showing that one would prefer the porn that is more directly related to their own sexuality.
Art porn is a mixed bag in my opinion. With the medium being much easier to create you can have people creating art porn for a whole variety of reasons, fetishes, and kinks. I think it is more zoophile-friendly sometimes, and by that I mean that you will find stuff sometimes that zoophiles will find appealing (in the case usually of feral furry porn). It makes sense that you are finding "animal on animal" porn. If you consider how furries attempt to take on a new physical persona with the usage of the fursona, then "animal on animal" porn would be something they would enjoy more as it would keep them away from their human character beneath the fursona.
All in all I have to agree with almost everything you have said, and it really is unfortunate. This is definitely something that a zoo should be aware of, and I think most are, at least to a lesser extent. Im interested in seeing how some of the other people comment on this post :)
I thought it was obvious. The porn was never really made for us, but for fetishists so they can have easy money.
Mostly directed to heterosexual males and that's why there's so much male animal on female human. I've seen a thread in one of the bestiality subs where it was asked why they're here. If I remember correctly they all answered because of their fetish.
They hold this whole illogical "male animals can consent because they can hump but female animals can't" mentality. It's probably an excuse for themselves so they can accept their fetish, but they actually hate male human on female human porn.
But honestly, I've seen some fucked up shit in the comments.
One who asked advice on how to pick up a stray from the street so they can rape them, one said he fucked a pregnant dog so hard he fucked the puppies inside of her. So there are fetishists who like female animals. They're just rare or disgusting.
As for furry porn, I see the same shit in a way. But almost every gif or video with male human on female human are antis whining like usual. Though, there's rarely any of it, but there is loads of female human on male human. It's a damn shame it is.
But then again, they're furries. Not much should be expected.
To be honest, we should distance ourselves from the ones that produce "zoo porn" like fetishists and furries.
We're not them in any way, we're just some zoos who need to sexually relieve themselves.
I mean... fucking gross but also impossible lmao.
In a way, it is possible. If you think about it...
Well actually, I don't recommend thinking about it. Fuck.
The cervix is much stronger than you'd think... but yeah, this would be painful, very painful.
Why illogical? Males are in control of the intercourse, females aren't.
Maybe consent is the wrong word, but it is far less likely to be rape in general if a male dog is humping a human female than vice versa.
Mainly because it's the reasons of why anti-zoos are against bestiality. They think animals don't understand the act.
If that was true, then that would not change the fact that male animals could give consent or not.
But even if males are more in control of intercourse, that does not change anything. It's still illogical to think like this because the point here is giving consent.
Both female and male dogs are just as obvious at giving consent. They all have their own mating rituals and just because males are more in control doesn't mean anything.
Even if it is, it does not prove anything. So... what's your point, then?
Also, they used the word consent in these arguments, so again: No, just no.
I think males can easily 'consent', more-so than females as they're the ones sticking their penis in the vagina. They control thrusting, how aggressive it is and can pull out easily if there's discomfort. The females can't do this. If the thrusting of the male human is hurting the female dog, what can the bitch do? I don't know but would like to learn.
Well, the female human gets into position and the dog lashes its penis in. If it didn't want to do it then it would never stick its penis in the vagina and hump. Once the dog starts engaging then it obviously wants it. This is as close to consent as you can get without verbal communication. If there's a guarantee that the female human wants it then it's never rape.
Then if a male human has intercourse with a female dog then how does the female show it wants sex? How does the human know when the bitch wants to stop? How does the human know if the bitch is in pain? The female human doesn't know if the dog is in pain either, but it doesn't matter as much, as the dog can pull out much more easily.
Please explain. I don't know of any bitch rituals.
I just can't see it, please explain.
Bitches can easily show they want it by flagging.
Also, it's quite sad that you can't realize that bitches will resist if they don't like it.
Animals easily show when they are in pain or don't like it.
I really don't think this is your subject, and it shows.
That's not true at all. Seriously, are you one of those ''males can't be raped'' crazies? If so, get out. Be ashamed.
Just because they do the act doesn't mean they understand it, like non-sexually mature animals. Some are even forced into this, which is obviously rape.
Have you never seen an animal have sex? I genuinely feel bad for you... Why are you even here?
Just because you don't know their mating rituals, doesn't mean they don't have any.
Also, you believe that male dogs have mating rituals and bitches don't. That's a very incomplete mind you have there, because that makes zero sense.
Flagging is one of their mating rituals, and the most common one.
When I put my finger or tongue in her, she can either say yes: Flag and push her vag into my finger/tongue or she sometimes tries to climb on top of me and ''mount'' me so she can hump my finger.
Or no: Resisting, usually walking away and sometimes even get a toy or a bone instead, showing she isn't interested at all.
Resisting and making sounds. You know, like any fucking animal does?
Animals are clear and direct. They won't keep it a secret.
Knots (can't get out), being sexually trained, being forced into it, etc.
''doesn't matter as much'' my ass.
They both say ''yes'' or ''no'' with their language.
If they resist, it's an obvious now.
If they don't resist and clearly show that they want to have sex, it's a yes.
Both answers are the same, except they ''say'' it differently.
I thought it was harder to resist a penis going into you than for you to stop thrusting.
I disagreed with you saying that it is just as obvious for male and female animals to give consent, and from your long explanation of flagging (that doesn't actually involve a penis, so it's not a guarantee that she wants penis in vagina) I still disagree.
I've had dogs myself all my life so I know generally this is true. But I wasn't sure if they easily showed during sex. I've read on here that many male humans rely on tail wagging as communication of pleasure, when questioned on whether this was definitely a signal of pleasure they never mentioned sounds or squeals for discontent so I wasn't sure.
No it's not, that's why I'm asking you so many questions.
No.
Yes of course, I should have elaborated. From the pornography I've watched, a good deal of female humans get into position and allow the dogs to start penetrating. The humans just stay in position. If the female just does this then it can never be rape. It's a guarantee. Zero risk. And I assume this is what the majority of females on here do as they seem to be very reluctant to cause any pain thankfully. There is more of a guarantee that it isn't rape or painful if it's male dog on female human than if the genders were swapped. Of course both genders can be raped, but it's much easier for females to be raped.
Not female animals.
To learn. And I'm on your side mainly, I feel sympathy for people wired in a sexual orientation that society deems evil despite it not being your choice. It's also fairly common in the animal kingdom. Animal welfare is very important to me and I find it illogical that we can perform murder, mutilation, false imprisonment of animals for entirely selfish reasons other than our own pleasure (no need for meat) but can't have for the most part consensual sex.
Of course! And I was sure they did have rituals. Of course they have rituals. I just didn't know of them.
Maybe I didn't explain myself properly, but you really misunderstood me. I'm just asking questions.
Nope.
You've based the incompleteness of my mind on something I never said and it's the complete opposite of what I believe...
I'm assuming most people on here don't do this. I'm assuming most don't actively look to rape.
I'm sure you know what you're doing, but I just believe there is a higher risk of pain inducing when it's male human on female animals. Male humans are also more likely to want dominance and be more violent than female humans, so it's an added risk.
It is not pleasant conversing with you.
It's easily showed trough body language. How much times do I have to repeat it?
Then we have no option but to agree to disagree, because in that case there's no convincing anyone.
I just think it's still just as obvious and already explained why enough times.
I've accidentally hurt her a little once. Accidentally pushed against the area under her clit, and from my experience they're not so comfortable when you try too much stuff there. It didn't hurt her much at all, but I know she didn't like it.
So you only watched animals have sex on porn or only have seen male animals fuck eachother?
Wow, you missed out.
If you don't know much about it then I don't recommend choosing a side yet and staying neutral at least.
Especially because some ethics of zoophiles here might surprise you. I've been here for a year now and I still get surprised by how much I hate other zoophiles here.
But whatever, that's your choice. Just trying to save you from dissapointment and disgust.
Even if it's not our choice, it doesn't matter. If our acts were truly unethical then we did indeed deserve what happens to us. In fact, even worse than that. Preferably death, but that's not true so no reason to think about that.
All I see is typical human behavior from them. Nothing new.
Funny how they want to kill our animals, yet death is worse than ''rape.'' Their ethics? Non-existant.
Oh and... save all your sympathy for the animals, not the humans. Don't feel bad for us, but for them.
Not just because we're humans, but because it's not a big deal. Oh no, others hate us. Words offend me! I need help!
Yeah well I wouldn't know you knew, because it looked like you didn't.
You'd be surprised...
And hey, that also counts for zoophiles who have sex with female animals.
But if you didn't know, this sub supports animal sexualy exploitation, or at least partly. I was surprised about that fact.
Seems a bit more like an unfair assumption to me.
And if so, you realize that male humans can also have sex with male animals? Wouldn't that also add more risk for male animals?
Not the first one to say that so welcome to their club.
Well hey, I'm a depressed mess. What do I do about it?
Cry and suffer it all away?
Yes, I have heard many times where bestiality porn makers target, but I didn't have a chance to check it, because naked humans really disgusts me. That's why I watch mostly furry porn, they have tons of animal on animal. Real porn would be better of course, but it's really hard to find something new about crocodiles, while furries uploads something about ten arts per day. I'm not a furry, so instead of imagining myself as a dragon for example, I try to imagine the situation in first person.
Your post is based on comments, so I will add that I'm not registered on those sites. I haven't seen a good enough reason to to this.
The same goes for many other types of pornography. The primary consumers of lesbian porn are heterosexual males, for instance.
[removed]
part of that is also because it is so taboo that even making art of it is "dangerous". the artist is likely to get labeled as a zoophile, which can cause a lot of trouble for them. .. or at least that's what i hear.. i admit to not knowing first-hand.
I dont think it would be dangerous, I just think it would be impractical. If one was making porn for revenue, or maybe even for appealing to the interest of viewers, then they would surely fail in their goal by creating "human male on animal" porn as opposed to "male animal on female human". Not many people other than zoos have any interest in viewing "human male on animal", so why bother ever producing it if the majority would prefer the ulterior?
It's not quite 'dangerous' but there's an interesting double standard in furry art where animal penises are acceptable but animal vaginas aren't. I don't really get it, but I'm sure some psychologist could write an essay on it. And yeah, this is obviously less of a thing in the more blatantly zoo circles.
i would imagine part of it is also a lack of knowledge of what proper species-appropriate vaginas look like, or a lack of a desire to find out (which admittedly also seems to put to what you say - that it's not acceptable; not something to even think about let alone research).
That plays into it somewhat, especially for exotic species, but there's no shortage of references for canine and equine vulvas. But yeah, there is more than just one factor, like I've seen a few people who didn't know that there's any variety to vagina shape between species. Among the people who are aware though I've seen disgust as a primary reason for preferring human vaginas on female characters much, much more often than when someone talks about a preference for human penises on characters.
also true.
as i said, part of it. maybe not a lot, but i believe it's there.
You have reached the same conclusions as I did many years ago. I've been telling people that most of those who watch bestiality porn, especiall when it comes to male animal on female human, are not zoophiles. The most common viewer are men attracted to human females.
I've sometimes chatted with these men, when I was younger and watched that type of porn. I'm a female zoophile, attracted to male canines. These men would gladly send me bestiality porn with male dogs. But they didn't understand why we didn't like the same details. I complained about the camera focusing too much on the woman, usually only showing the dogs genitals. And if they showed the dog, the dog was often ugly. These men, bestiality porn fans, couldn't understand. "What do you mean, ugly dog or handsome dog?". The only thing important to them, was usually that the dog was big. Any other factor: fur colour, face, ears... totally unimportant to them, and they couldn't understand how someone else would care about such things.
Bestiality porn fans often have trouble understanding that actual female zoophiles aren't always sympathethic to them. They are also bad at explaining what exactly turns them on. Some of them have told me it's the taboo. Sometimes I've noticed that they assume that a woman willing to have sex with a dog, must be extra-ordinary slutty and horny. As if dogs were worse than human men, not just another preference... So they assume that I, who have an interest in dogs, would be willing to fuck the owner of the dog as well. :/ Some of the porn also hint at the woman being degraded by the act, that it's hot because of the humiliation.
I've been on SO many discussions forums where a wife notices that her husband has been downloading bestiality porn with male dogs (or horses) and human females. She worries: is her husband a zoophile? Will her husband rape the family's female dog? I usually answer: no. There is no risk, because if he was attracted to female dogs, he would download porn of female dogs.
Thank you for sharing this. I 100% agree with everything you say. It's good to see I'm not the only one who thought this.
I've thought about it, yeah.
I'm of split minds on it. It sucks that a lot of people genuinely don't seem to care about their animals beyond sex. But it's nice there's another demographic that understands the appeal of dogs/animals as sex partners. With a self-identified zoophile, I know I am talking to somebody who puts animal welfare first or at least attempts to. With someone who has a fetish for animal sex, they might care about animals or they might view them as just a toy. It all depends.
I prefer male animal/female human for the same reason (putting myself in their shoes), but it's not legal to view here so I don't.
Thought I'd just throw in my 2c from the perspective of a hetero male who enjoys beast content but has no sexual interest in animals. I feel like I have more to relate to with the animal in beast stuff rather than men in mainstream porn. That's not from any otherkin bs or anything like that, it's more in the way I feel people view me and how I feel people view animals. I also LOVE animals in every way except sexually. I've never seen one I haven't wanted to go up to and interact with in some way and it breaks my heart when I see animals that are poorly treated - in any context, porn included. There's just no bullshit with animals(unless it's a bull I suppose). That's also one of the things I like about beast as opposed to mainstream. It seems more real. It seems like both parties are actively engaging and both receiving immense pleasure - at least in the stuff I like. I have no idea how representative I am of my side of the viewership. Considering the amount of content which I've seen and how much of it really does nothing for me, there must be a ton of us who enjoy completely different aspects to each other. I'm also interested in the fact that, as you point out, the vast majority of content is male animal vs human female. Is that reflective of the ratio of human females who are genuine zoos to males who are genuine zoos, or is it simply a result of the fact that there are many men, like myself, who enjoy watching women with animals and therefore a higher demand for that stuff to be uploaded and shared?
I'd say it's the latter. There's more demand of it just because that's the zoo porn heterosexual people watch. Male human on female animal is what homosexual people watch (in general terms), and since there's just less homosexual people than heterosexual, there's less demand so less content as well.