Within sociological frameworks, research on zoophilia is often focused on understandings of bestiality. Thus, interpretations by sociologists and zoophiles alike have not been brought to the forefront for analysis. In order to understand zoophile as differentiated from bestiality as an orientation, paraphilia, or lifestyle, it is critical to first decipher the sexual desires and actions of such individuals through a queer theorist lens and acknowledging the role of power dynamics. Sociologists and zoophiles recognize the importance of considering and analyzing zoophilia within the LGBTQ+ spectrum and as a paraphilia. This paper discusses zoophilia as it relates to sexual desires, actions, and orientations, underlining the notion that zoophilia
…show more content…
Despite the distinctions between bestiality and zoophilia, researchers recognize that there are significant commonalities. For example, the two both anthropomorphize animals to justify their sexual relations, either through objectification or through people giving animals certain human characteristics, such as the ability to love and to consent to sex (Rudy, 606). Research on zoophilia is primarily done through interviews and questionnaires with an emphasis on anonymity, acknowledging the influence of the Internet and online forums (Miletski; Navarro and Tewksbury; Williams and Weinberg). Specifically, Navarro and Tewskbury state the influence that the Internet has had on zoophiles communicating with and supporting each other, as well as on how researchers can analyze these individuals to further understand their sexual behaviours, as well as for locating participants for studies on zoophilia (871). Thus, zoophiles’ understandings of themselves is equally important compared to how researchers interpret the …show more content…
While the overwhelming majority of zoophiles identified in studies are male (Williams and Weinberg, 525), the sex of the animals varies. That is, (male) zoophiles are less inclined to be attracted to a certain sex of an animal than they are in general toward animals and in their desire to be in a receptive or insertive sexual position with an animal (Williams and Weinberg, 529-530). With this basis of understanding in zoophilic attractions, cultures throughout history have had varying beliefs about having sexual relations with
Despite the distinctions between bestiality and zoophilia, researchers recognize that there are significant commonalities. For example, the two both anthropomorphize animals to justify their sexual relations, either through objectification or through people giving animals certain human characteristics, such as the ability to love and to consent to sex (Rudy, 606). Research on zoophilia is primarily done through interviews and questionnaires with an emphasis on anonymity, acknowledging the influence of the Internet and online forums (Miletski; Navarro and Tewksbury; Williams and Weinberg). Specifically, Navarro and Tewskbury state the influence that the Internet has had on zoophiles communicating with and supporting each other, as well as on how researchers can analyze these individuals to further understand their sexual behaviours, as well as for locating participants for studies on zoophilia (871). Thus, zoophiles’ understandings of themselves is equally important compared to how researchers interpret the …show more content…
While the overwhelming majority of zoophiles identified in studies are male (Williams and Weinberg, 525), the sex of the animals varies. That is, (male) zoophiles are less inclined to be attracted to a certain sex of an animal than they are in general toward animals and in their desire to be in a receptive or insertive sexual position with an animal (Williams and Weinberg, 529-530). With this basis of understanding in zoophilic attractions, cultures throughout history have had varying beliefs about having sexual relations with