The following entry is in response to an article from Scientific American's website. The article below (written in 2010) presents excellent information and cerebral consideration regarding the subject of zoophilia as a sexual orientation. I, for one, commend the author of this article and am immensely grateful to have found this publication. I personally distinguish between the terms 'bestiality' and 'zoophilia.' Not all who feel love and sexual attraction for nonhuman species distinguish between the two terms. To me, 'bestiality', as the author of this article suggests, is the term used to describe human-nonhuman animal sexual relations as a surrogate for human-human sex. There are those, myself included, who much more readily resonate with the term 'zoophilia.' To me, 'zoophilia' describes intimate interspecies sex and relationships out of a genuine preference for said nonhuman animal.
These issues definitely warrant further consideration and exploration. At least in my experience (and talking to others with similar sexual orientations), zoophiles are NOT deviant perverts who are backward farm people with low intelligence and a paucity of potential female human partners (as Kinsey's work seems to suggest). This notion is highly offensive to those who identify as zoophiles. To me (I hesitate to speak in generalities because like everything else, each person and personal concept of sexuality are unique unto themelves), my love for nonhuman animals is not about some kinky fetish thrill or due to some need to attain a lover surrogate [rather than a human male]. As an omnisexual, my attraction is not confined to the rigid little boxes or labels which many seem to want to stick people in. I am me, period.
Anyway, I'm rambling now...so check out the article if you're interested:
Animal Lovers: Zoophiles Make Scientists Rethink Human Sexuality
No comments:
Post a Comment