The Importance Of Sex With Animals

Register to read the introduction… This viewpoint is often derived from the notion that humans are eminently superior to animals; often this has a religious basis. Religiously, animals have been regarded as under Man's rule, for us to use and even destroy as we please (though this has considerably softened in contemporary environmental- conscious times); though sex could be considered just another use, it would be absolutely taboo for a human to actually relate to an animal on its own grounds. Especially as sex is regarded as existing solely for procreation, and perhaps for the expression of love, sex with an animal is absolutely forbidden. The concept that one might love or relate to an animal is highly threatening to the Church's anthropocentric world-view. This arguement, like most arguments with religious basis, is compounded with problems, the foremost being that homo-centrism is little more than a Western excuse for human dominance and rationalizing atrocities such as the meat industry and animal abuse and neglect. That being the case, I will address the non-religious issue: that bestiality is degrading relative to what humans should be and should do in their relationships and sexual activity. This arguement is not without appeal; for surely, a partner with whom you can relate to on the same intellectual level, and with whom you can share activities of human nature is to be sought. Of course, this point has merit. However, it is also not to be denied that deep emotional bonds with animals are possible, and they do share aspects of our lives in a different fashion. True, one cannot discuss philosophy with them, but even the chaste pet owner can relate to them on an emotional and physical level. Zoophiles extend that to the sexual realm. It may, perhaps, be considered immoral for the zoophile to substitute human relationships with animal ones; however, not all zoophiles are animal-exclusive, and even …show more content…
A pathology to be cured? As of today bestiality is still on the psychologist's list of paraphilias or mental disorders, much like homosexuality was a few decades ago. In the case of homosexuality, psychologists were simply unaware of the committed and happy relationships that were possible with homosexuality. Out of plain and simple ignorance, they condemned an entire sexual orientation as a mental sickness. I would make a similar analogy to bestiality- psychologists are simply unaware of the relationships that are possible with animals. Of course not all of those practicing bestiality even consider connecting with an animal so deeply; remember the lonely shepard. However, there is a considerable community of individuals who find themselves much happier when loving and consumating animal relationships than when restricting themselves to humans; and, barring a concrete wrong ( such as animal abuse) I for one will not condemn that happiness. To all appearances, it is fulfilling and complete, it is not indicative of any psychological shortcoming; and when abstaining from internally accepting or practicing bestiality, many zoophiles experience the same symptoms that homosexuals do while still in the closet - most notably extreme loneliness, isolation, and depression. Bestiality cannot be cured, and at least one psychologist has expressed the view that there is no need to change it. From Actaeon's