• Suddenly unable to log into your ZooVille account? This might be the reason why: CLICK HERE!

2024 RMC Zoophilia Ethic's Study - Ground Breaking!

Status
Not open for further replies.
While I finished what was there I am disappointed in it being another case of "ask overly vague questions and make it a sliding scale with no way to elaborate or justify your answer" survey. Would have at the least liked to see them not ask the same question ten times in slightly different wording or ask something that doesn't leave me wanting to say "context matters" all the time. What can I do or say, I guess?

Really though, who or what defines small creature? Even the dictionary (as little worth it is) cant define it as more then subjective. I personally know people who think full grown pony stallions that are up to their chest is "small" or another who believes any pet bigger then a rat is "large". Hope the next one at least elaborates where the lines are for all of these things.
 
Ill pass on the survey thanks; my mental health is fine because I don't let societies hate bother me anymore ?

Simply put acceptance of yourself is independent of the approval of others if you want to be content being a zoophile in this harsh intolerant world!
 
Last edited:
I enjoyed the survey, did some introspection, I wish they would have touched on more interesting questions though. avanti per la scienza!

My critique is probably it does not touch on relations per say, it seems its mostly about self perception and perception of what laws should be.
 
Interesting survey. Also wanted to share this: 1712359018395.png

(It's about harmful sexual abuse (harm to the animal in pursuit of sexual gratification for the human), not normal and harmelss sexual act like the survey shows at the start)
 
this study was a dumpster fire, and I certainly hope you're not considering associating this site's name with anything further from these researchers. just my 2c...
 
5legs said:
Interesting survey. Also wanted to share this: View attachment 550244

(It's about harmful sexual abuse (harm to the animal in pursuit of sexual gratification for the human), not normal and harmelss sexual act like the survey shows at the start)
Click to expand...
This. I haven't been posting here but after this survey I might be a little more active because I enjoyed the opportunity to respond to these sorts of questions and the fact that they did distinguish between sexual abuse and consensual sexual activity was impressive to me. I agree that there should be penalties, especially equivalent to human on human penalties, the only exception would be to account for the fact there is a total lack of education and support and in those cases rehabilitation and re-education might be more suitable. I have more to say but it might align too closely with my responses.

I was also pleased to see those seven principles were something that seems to match my values and were made so long ago. It is a tragedy that this kind of academic thinking and organizing for zoophiles has been so suppressed I have to learn it from a study.
 
I liked this survey alot more than the previous highlighted one. Was it the Vienna-study?

The only problem I see with these surveys, is that they assume all sexual encounters with animals have to be some kind of abuse? I mean, there are diffirent ways to determine what is abuse? I don't think its abuse if a male dog mounts a naked woman while some do... But most male on female anmials looks like abuse, but I'm sure it isn't even tho I never had the pleasure, yet.
 
wibke.zeta said:
Done, even though it starts off with "penetrating animal with an object" questions, which was a bit jarring, verging on squick. Oh well.

If you feel some of the questions feel repetitive or similar, that's because they try to make sure you pay close attention, hardening their data set. Looks scientifically sound and worth participating in. You get some space to voice your own thoughts, please enjoy.

One or two of the questions seemed phrased in a way I could hardly make sense of. Please tell me I'm not the only one.

[comment written w/o reading thru thread first, apologies]
Click to expand...
I've never heard that word. read or learned/knew of either. thank you. i always enjoy learning new vocabulary.

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more





squick
/skwik/
verb
INFORMAL

  1. cause (someone) to feel intense disgust.
    "we get that bodily fluids can squick people out"
 
coyotespirit said:
this study was a dumpster fire, and I certainly hope you're not considering associating this site's name with anything further from these researchers. just my 2c...
Click to expand...
all of the surveys here have been dumpster fire. And frankly I dont think people should jump out on a limb just because an admin posts a link, in which information is collected by a government entity.
 
ZTHorse said:
Hello Zooville,

This is a new ground breaking survey and study looking into the ethic's of zoophilia and zoosexuality. Here is the details.

Thank you to the RMC and alexandra for continuing to support further research into zoophilia.

-also of note, this is the FIRST study we worked with that included the ZETA principles. This is monumental for studies going forward.
_____________________________________________________

You are invited to participate in a research study called “Examining the Mental Health, Social Supports, and Attitudes of Zoophiles.” As the title suggests, we are interested in better understanding individuals with a sexual interest in animals. Given the taboo associated with individuals with a sexual interest in animals, it is important to gain a better understanding of zoophiles and how to best support them. The study will take approximately 40-60 minutes and is completely anonymous.

To qualify, you must be 18 years of age or older, identify as someone with a sexual interest in animals, and be able to read and write in English well enough to complete the survey.

If you would like more information about the study or require assistance, please contact the researcher, Alexandra Zidenberg (alexandra.zidenberg@rmc-cmr.ca), Department of Military Psychology and Leadership, Royal Military College of Canada. This research received approval from the RMC Research Ethics Board on March 13, 2024.

Click the link below to begin the study:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FBWX55J
Click to expand...
I don’t speak much English, helping me with a translator... but I would have participated with Pleasure ;).
 
Although it had repetitive questions, and some of the wording was very questionable, It seemed alright. It seems to try and keep zoophilia as paraphilic when trying to ask about mental health stuff instead of taking a strictly neutral stand.
 
Finished! Had some qualms with the way some questions were phrased but overall happy with participating in the survey.
 
Seemed pretty straightforward. I liked that it actually had an animal welfare section. That definitely felt new. The mental health questionaire was long but it was the entire central point of their study was to find out how to help zoos at mental health clinics. Gauging by responses here I imagine we all wrote more or less the same reply to it. I was glad to see the ZETA principles as well. The key problems I had were a definition of "small animal" was desperately needed. When Veterinarians say small animal they could mean anything from a fully grown german shepherd to a hamster. Which led to a greatly inflated number of "I do not know" responses, and I cannot for the life of me determine what the difference between "harmful sexual contact" and "animal sexual abuse" was ever supposed to represent. Maybe we can get these questions answered and posted to the front page of the questionaire so that future participants do not have the same issue.
 
ZTHorse said:
Hello Zooville,

This is a new ground breaking survey and study looking into the ethic's of zoophilia and zoosexuality. Here is the details.

Thank you to the RMC and alexandra for continuing to support further research into zoophilia.

-also of note, this is the FIRST study we worked with that included the ZETA principles. This is monumental for studies going forward.
_____________________________________________________

You are invited to participate in a research study called “Examining the Mental Health, Social Supports, and Attitudes of Zoophiles.” As the title suggests, we are interested in better understanding individuals with a sexual interest in animals. Given the taboo associated with individuals with a sexual interest in animals, it is important to gain a better understanding of zoophiles and how to best support them. The study will take approximately 40-60 minutes and is completely anonymous.

To qualify, you must be 18 years of age or older, identify as someone with a sexual interest in animals, and be able to read and write in English well enough to complete the survey.

If you would like more information about the study or require assistance, please contact the researcher, Alexandra Zidenberg (alexandra.zidenberg@rmc-cmr.ca), Department of Military Psychology and Leadership, Royal Military College of Canada. This research received approval from the RMC Research Ethics Board on March 13, 2024.

Click the link below to begin the study:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FBWX55J
Click to expand...
That was long, but it was nice to participate in a survey for zoophiles.
 
ZTHorse said:
Hello Zooville,

This is a new ground breaking survey and study looking into the ethic's of zoophilia and zoosexuality. Here is the details.

Thank you to the RMC and alexandra for continuing to support further research into zoophilia.

-also of note, this is the FIRST study we worked with that included the ZETA principles. This is monumental for studies going forward.
_____________________________________________________

You are invited to participate in a research study called “Examining the Mental Health, Social Supports, and Attitudes of Zoophiles.” As the title suggests, we are interested in better understanding individuals with a sexual interest in animals. Given the taboo associated with individuals with a sexual interest in animals, it is important to gain a better understanding of zoophiles and how to best support them. The study will take approximately 40-60 minutes and is completely anonymous.

To qualify, you must be 18 years of age or older, identify as someone with a sexual interest in animals, and be able to read and write in English well enough to complete the survey.

If you would like more information about the study or require assistance, please contact the researcher, Alexandra Zidenberg (alexandra.zidenberg@rmc-cmr.ca), Department of Military Psychology and Leadership, Royal Military College of Canada. This research received approval from the RMC Research Ethics Board on March 13, 2024.

Click the link below to begin the study:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FBWX55J
Click to expand...
I found the survey very vague and felt I was shamed and portrayed as sick or maladjusted. I don't see how this survey will provide correct data of any kind.
 
Trying to take the survey but many of the questions are a bit puzzling or vague. "Do you believe the same standard for harm is applied to accepted sexual acts for commercial purposes?" What does that even mean? Also, the survey doesn't define harm. Are we talking about physical and psychological risk to the animal? That's what I assumed but then another question asks you to rate the harmfulness of sexual fantasies when no actual sexual contact occurs.
 
Max13 said:
I mean, certainly interesting the RMC is conducting this, (can't wait to see what the headlines look like when the conservatives get wind of this - I live in Canada). But idk it felt like every other professional survey.

The only thing I disliked, is a lot of the questions were phrased as if you only had a sexual attraction to animals, and it wasn't asked until the demographics information at the end about human attraction. Which is... Weird.
Click to expand...
I agree. I wrote the following "
I would just like to point out that in several questions there was an underlying assumption that zoophiles are not also attracted to humans. It is assumed to be an either or situation. I know that not to be true . I am both. "
At the end though they asked about human sexuality but it seemed as though it was more pro- forma.
 
ftmz00 said:
I agree. I wrote the following "
I would just like to point out that in several questions there was an underlying assumption that zoophiles are not also attracted to humans. It is assumed to be an either or situation. I know that not to be true . I am both. "
At the end though they asked about human sexuality but it seemed as though it was more pro- forma.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Like everything else, it's a spectrum
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top