Enough With The Cute Pictures; On To The Kinky Shit

“Zoo” is traditionally defined as “a garden or park where wild animals are kept for exhibition” (Merriam-Webster).  Did you know, however, that “zoo” is also a common abbreviation for the term “zoophile,” a sexual identity espoused by persons who enjoy sex with animals?  Zoo Week here at The Tub just got a whole lot more exciting, huh?

To assuage your fears right off the bat, the purpose of my article today is not to defend the rights of zoophiles (who, for the record, differentiate themselves from “bestialists” in that they’re not just having sex with animals for their own physical gratification; they genuinely “love” the animals they have sex with, seek to provide a pleasurable sexual experience for their animal partners, and only engage in “consensual” sex).  I myself am not a zoophile (literally, lover of animals).  To be perfectly honest with you, I’m not even a liker of animals. 

Big animals render me uncomfortable.  (I fear they will step on me.)  Flying animals render me uncomfortable. (I fear they will shit on me.)  Tiny animals render me uncomfortable. (I don’t know what exactly I fear with them, but in college I was known to close my eyes and assume the fetal position when mice and/or squirrels ran through my apartment.)  Dead animals render me either nauseous (when seen flattened on the highway) or ravenous (when seen seasoned on my Chipotle burrito).  Point of the story: you don’t need to worry about Tori having sex with any animals.  You don’t even need to worry about Tori engaging in “heavy petting” with any animals.  It just ain’t gonna happen.

Nonetheless, issues pertaining to zoophilia are of interest to me, specifically because of the oft-made leap “If you let a man marry another man, what’s next?  A man marrying a horse?”  (I imagine that the forefathers of the people who make this leap used to ask questions along the lines of “If you let a woman vote, what’s next?  Fish suffrage?”)

Anyway, given the fact that being gay is purported to be just a leap away from f’n a leapfrog, I figured I should learn more about my cousins over in the zoo community.  So I read this article (which is quite fascinating, though long and only accessible if you have ProQuest authentication) and did I ever do me some learnin'!  (According to my friend Alexis, I was actually supposed to read this article like four years ago for a policy analysis class I took at Cornell.  To be honest, I was never one for required readings, but I have to say that I'm fairly alarmed that I wouldn't have even taken a gander at an article about people who have sex with animals.  I must have had some really engaging math homework that night or something.)

Apparently, a big draw for zoophiles is the fact that animals provide you with “unconditional love.”  By virtue of the fact that humans can talk to (and consequently argue with) one another, human relationships can become difficult and frustrating; such is not the case when you’re involved with an animal.  Says Roy, 36, "Humans use sex to manipulate and control. Humans have trouble accepting who you are; they want to change you. Animals do not judge you; they just love and enjoy the pleasures of sex without all the politics."  This is actually an interesting point.  Perhaps lots of men get so fed up with their wives’ bitchin’ that they wish they were married to literal bitches instead of figurative ones.  (Another big draw for zoophiles is said to be the size and smell of animals’ genitals.  This is not an interesting point.  This is just gross.)

I could go on and on with shocking anecdotes from the zoophile article, but I shan't sully the tub with such filth.  (Well, I'll sully it only briefly . . . One of the study's subjects had his first sexual experience with a chicken.  How is that even possible?!  Another one lost his virginity to a dolphin.  Oh, and a full 45% of the animal-lovers interviewed worked in the computer field.  Keep an eye on those co-workers of yours, Justin Douglas!)  But I really don't want to mock right now.  (Well, I want to mock, but I won't, because I'd like to eventually get to a point.)  The real take-home message I got from this article was that all the study participants legitimately cared for the animals they were sexually involved with.  Sure, the fact that these guys would rather get their jollies from an "uncomplicated" relationship with a husky than from actual human interactions is hella weird and probably indicates some severe psychological disturbance, BUT their descriptions of love are genuine.

Having read about the experiences of zoos, I found myself wondering whether sex between animals and people is really that horrendous an offense.  I mean, it’s certainly not my cup of tea, but who am I to impose my cup of tea on others?  Shouldn't I be content to drink my own cup of tea and allow others to decide independently what sort of hot beverage they’d like to sip?  I wondered whether the offense I take when people leap from gay marriage to man-on-llama action was evidence of extreme bigotry.

Philosopher, animal rights activist, and militant vegetarian Peter Singer has publicly stated that zoophilia is a-okay by him.  Singer is highly opposed to what he terms “speciesism” – discrimination on the grounds that a being belongs to a certain species.  His argument basically goes that there’s no solid way to differentiate between animals and humans.  (Paraphrasing Singer: Yes, most animals are dumber than most humans, but there are some really stupid people out there.  Yes, most animals are less attractive than most humans, but there are some really heinous-looking people out there.  If we’re not going to kick mentally disabled and/or fugly people out of the human race, then we should probably start letting horses in.  Or something like that, but with more big words.)  Singer claims that future generations will look back on contemporary treatment of animals with the same shame and disdain that we currently feel looking back on the treatment of blacks during the time of slavery.  Anyway, according to Singer’s framework, taboos against inter-species relations can be likened to past taboos against inter-racial relations.  So long as human/animal relationships are respectful, he's all for 'em.

I was enormously fascinated by Peter Singer’s ideas during my senior year of college.  (I never could jump on board with the whole vegetarian thing though.  Steak tastes so good; it can't be wrong.  Plus, vegetarianism is seriously overplayed in the lesbian community.)  And thinking about what he has to say in light of the zoophiles' claims of love that transcends species boundries, I couldn't help but wonder whether the dude might be right.

But then I stopped being insane and remembered that the it's totally gross for people to have sex with animals.  I also remembered that I'd been rambling on forever without a single mention of Lindsay Lohan.  So before my liberalism leads me to proclaim something completely outrageous, let me conclude with the following thought: just because you're having trouble landing a sexy chick like LiLo doesn't mean you should f a sheep!  There is a veritable smorgasbord of Lindsay photos available on the internet and masturbating while you look at those is always more honorable than having sex with an animal.  Because, seriously, if you ever did have the good fortune to get a date with Lindsay (or any person, really) and it came to the fore that you'd been bonin' an equine, there's absolutely no way that's gonna go over well. 

"Men in Cages" runs Friday afternoons.  You can read more about Tori here.

Comments

[Caitlar]

I wish LiLo would go back to her Mean Girls hair. Sigh.

[the mayor]

I can't wait for Rory to weigh in on this!

[Jerome]

Did you intend the very clever pun involved in "heavy petting"?

[D.C.]

I wish LiLo would go back to her Mean Girls cup size.

[Kate]

I hear you, Tori. Anyone who's ever experienced the hiss of a wrinkly turkey vulture early in the morning knows that not only are big birds creepy but they are definitely not sexually attractive. How do these people come out of sex with large animals unscathed? Don't they worry about their fleshy bits?

[Tori]

Ha, Kate, technically you have slept with a turkey vulture (and 20 adolescent girls). You skank, you.

Also, I thought everyone should know that I attended a dinner party this evening and when asked, "Oh, what did you do today Tori?" I was forced to respond, "I contemplated humans having sex with animals."

[alexis,right?]

for the record, if your waiter at Chili's overhears you saying, "I don't really thing it's that wrong to have sex with a dog" you might be asked to leave. ooh, now im embarassed and i don't know what's worse: that I go to Chili's or that I don't think it's that bad to have sex with a dog.

[Tori]

Alexis, Chili's is nothing to be ashamed of! It is in fact my number one favorite restaurant. I like it so much that the last time I was there, I ordered not just one dinner, but two. Mmm . . . fajitas AND ribs.

(In other news, I have seriously gained like 30 pounds since returning from Patagonia. So maybe I should stop going to Chili's so often . . . and resume going to Chile, where I certainly wasn't ever getting two dinners.)

But seriously, Alexis (and others), I'm interested in your thoughts on the relative wrong-ness of sex with animals. I know it's a pretty taboo topic to discuss, but after reading that article, I think the ethics involved are actually quite complex and interesting. Anybody else dare to weigh in with some intellectual/philosophical thoughts on the matter of zoophilia?

[Inactive account]

The animal can't give consent -- that's a big problem.

[Tori]

Do animals consent to being put in zoos?

[Inactive account]

No; I'm not a big fan of zoos, either.

[Kate]

I recently was fortunate enough to hear about a video in which a woman was mounted from behind by a horse. I have a very profound love of horses and always have; I think they are intelligent, sensitive creatures, and I do in fact enjoy riding them all day long. However, I have no desire to be mounted and humped by a mammal with one of the largest members in all the animal kingdom. Ouch. I'm trying to be open-minded about people wanting to have sex with animals; how could I call myself a free-thinker if I wasn't? Maybe if more people were allowed to engage in "love relationships" with animals then we would have less maltreatment of animals (...or more?) Animals do have complex forms of communication, and if someone out there feels that they can understand those meanings and interpret them correctly as "I want to make sweet love to you, human" I can't think of a whole lot of logical reasons why that shouldn't be ok. Still, I can't really get around the fact that it's pretty much impossible to gain concrete consent from an animal. If a woman is raped, the person who raped her can't say "well she was giving me all the right non-verbal cues" and get away with it. As animals generally don't have the power to say yes or no, I think it's a tough call. Even if animal communication and body language can be deciphered, I don't think it's enough to go on. Even if the horse mounts you from behind.

[Phylan]

Consent? Are you kidding? No, of course they can't consent, but unless you're a vegetarian I don't see how you can argue that it is morally reprehensible to rape an animal, since we murder them for food all of the time. Unless you think rape is a more serious crime than murder, in which case, well, what the hell?

[the mayor]

I am horrified that the morality of "animal love" is actually being contemplated and then discussed on this website. As far as I'm concerned, this is a topic is already decided -- Rory has already made it completely clear that there is nothing wrong with a little animal love.

[Jill]

Even after hearing you explain your post during said dinner party, I am still unable to stomach your post. I give you credit for a) reading articles to prep for this post, and b) actually writing this post. I'm as open-minded as the next WASP married woman, but animal sex is beyond my realm of understanding. I thought vaginas sometimes smelled badly, but a chicken's vag? Yikes.

[Tori]

So Jilly, after discussing sex with animals with you at Friday's dinner party, I went on to discuss sex with animals with people at a party I attended on Saturday. And when I brought up the point that no, zoophiles aren't just having sex with animals because they can't get human partners; they actually PREFER sex with animals because animals love you unconditionally, someone replied, "That same argument could be advance in favor of having sex with one's own mother."

In sum, if you let the gays start getting married, you're gonna have to let people start marrying their pets. And if you let people start marrying their pets, you're going to have to start letting people marry their parents. And really, that's just f'd up.

[Inactive account]

What about marrying your sister or brother? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6424937.stm

[Phylan]

Great, Tori's gone all Rick Santorum on us.

[Tori]

Tori does indeed put the "Tor" in Rick Santorum.

As far as brother/sister lovin' is concerned, it made for a spectacular story in "Middlesex," so I'm all for it.

[Lauren]

Yeah, being a product of incest did not complicate Calliope's life at ALL.

[Gary]

Hi,
I enjoyed your post and find the subject matter fascinating.
The internet frees people to read about and comment on practices which are taboo in society. Imagine discussing this issue with your parents over Sunday dinner.
Dad: "If I was going to do it I'd probably choose a nice, docile mare who wouldn't kick me."
Mum: "But Geoff, I am a nice, docile mare who doesn't kick you and you never seem up for it with me these days!"
Seriously though, I think that many humans are indiscriminate in their sexuality (an erstwhile colleague once said about me that I would f*** a hedgehog if it stood still for long enough)and it seems that all animals are. This offers an amicable arrangement for many horny males (females seem to be far more discriminating and think of sex with animals mainly if they are desperate and/or being paid though there are some oft-repeated tales of lonely old spinsters finding plenty of things to do with the penises of their pet dogs in the privacy of their homes)
I think that we are all animalistic in our sexuality so cannot see why it should be made illegal.
I think a lot of people who don't and have never done it are enabled to feel morally superior when someone is exposed as an animal molester.
It will always be a taboo, however, as it always will be taking advantage of animals who can never take advantage of us.

[Tori]

I'm glad it's sex with animals that keeps people coming back to the blog, year after year . . .

Beastiality really was our bread and butter . . .