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

Difference between Zoophilist and Beastality?

A zoophile wants a loving partnership with an animal (and loves to be loved back), like a "normal" man wants a partnership with a woman (and vice versa). You can really just take a human/human relationship and substitute one human with an animal, then make small adjustments for necessity (no, the dog cannot pick up their own groceries, we are not delusional).

A bestialist wants sex with an animal. There is no love or long term commitment involved.

A zoophile likes sex with an (preferable his) animal, too, but for him (or her) this is a part of the relationship besides many others like just spending time with each other. For a bestialist, sex with animals is like a fetish thing. You do it, because it seems to be a horny thing, but next year something else might pique your interest and there are certainly no efforts to look into how to build a barndominium 5 years down the path together.
 
My concept of a stereotypical bestialitist is someone that goes to animal sex parties, uses dog dicks as dildos, has lots and lots of homemade pornography of themselves having sex with their dogs, and chiefly just regards dogs (or horses) as sex objects.

A zoo (I refuse to add 'phile' to that) is a person that falls in love with an animal in the same way that that person would fall in love with a human and might or might not have sex with that animal. Non-zooey humans can have sexless marriages that are still loving, so I think that so can zoos. They are still zoos.
 
"Bestialists" are zoophiles. A zoophile is a person that experiences sexual attraction to animals. No commitment or romantic love is required to be a zoophile. Only prerequisite is sexual attraction. :)
 
aditya9696 said:
Can anyone explain the difference between Zoophilist and Beastality?
Click to expand...
The LEGAL definition (the one that matters!) is that "bestiality" (correct spelling) is the physical act of sex with another species and "Zoophilia" (again correct spelling) is one of several reasons to perform bestiality. "Beastiality" is a buzzword invented by pornpushers to help sell their product.
 
caikgoch said:
The LEGAL definition (the one that matters!) is that "bestiality" (correct spelling) is the physical act of sex with another species and "Zoophilia" (again correct spelling) is one of several reasons to perform bestiality. "Beastiality" is a buzzword invented by pornpushers to help sell their product.
Click to expand...
Finally... Someone that got it better.

Springhaas said:
"Bestialists" are zoophiles. A zoophile is a person that experiences sexual attraction to animals. No commitment or romantic love is required to be a zoophile. Only prerequisite is sexual attraction. :)
Click to expand...
So basically to you "bestiality and zoophilia" is exactly the same? I once researched that zoophilia meant an attraction to animals. Meaning you have a deeper bond than normal. Bestiality is just doing the act... But research is opinions. Not facts. Forgot.
 
No, bestiality and zoophilia are not the same. Bestiality is sex with animals. Zoophilia is sexual attraction to animals.

What I said was "bestialists" and zoophiles are the same thing, which they are. Of course some exceptions - if someone rapes an animal because they like feeling of power and control but do not feel sexually attracted to animals, they aren't a zoophile. But I was speaking in reference to ZooVille and the sort of "bestialists" we have here. They are sexually attracted to animals, so they are zoophiles.
 
Springhaas said:
No, bestiality and zoophilia are not the same. Bestiality is sex with animals. Zoophilia is sexual attraction to animals.

What I said was "bestialists" and zoophiles are the same thing, which they are. Of course some exceptions - if someone rapes an animal because they like feeling of power and control but do not feel sexually attracted to animals, they aren't a zoophile. But I was speaking in reference to ZooVille and the sort of "bestialists" we have here. They are sexually attracted to animals, so they are zoophiles.
Click to expand...
Not really.

I've had a lot of sex because I was horny and so was an available partner. That's lust and is probably the most common kind of sex. Bestiality is when that partner is a different species.

I've also had sex because one of us in a long term relationship was horny and the other wanted to please. That goes both ways and is where love starts. Zoophilia is when that partner is of a different species.

Please note that both can happen to the same individuals and at the same time.

The reason distinctions are important is that there are many other reasons to have sex. If it's for power and control, it's rape. If it's for submission and to be controlled, it's masochism. Or it could be for the body fluids. Or the thrills. Or many other things. What all these other reasons have in common is that they are fetishes, not to be confused with orientations. They focus a part of the partner, not the whole.
 
Zoophilia does not require a long term relationship or love. If you perform sexual acts due to sexual attraction to the recipient, that makes you a zoophile.

As I said, there's exceptions to where bestiality is performed by non-zoophiles, but I was speaking in reference to ZooVille. The vast majority of "bestialists" here feel sexual attraction towards animals, making them zoophiles.
 
Springhaas said:
Zoophilia does not require a long term relationship or love. If you perform sexual acts due to sexual attraction to the recipient, that makes you a zoophile.

As I said, there's exceptions to where bestiality is performed by non-zoophiles, but I was speaking in reference to ZooVille. The vast majority of "bestialists" here feel sexual attraction towards animals, making them zoophiles.
Click to expand...
Emotional attraction =/= Sexual attraction

Understanding that distinction is one the most important parts of growing up. Until recently the local cat lady counted as Zoophile because she loved her cats like children. Then the porn pushers used the word to "legitimize" their wares and the antis grabbed it and ran with it. I refuse to yield my word to our enemies and I suggest that you consider how debate usually goes when you let the other side define the terms.
 
dogluver101 said:
So basically to you "bestiality and zoophilia" is exactly the same? I once researched that zoophilia meant an attraction to animals. Meaning you have a deeper bond than normal. Bestiality is just doing the act... But research is opinions. Not facts. Forgot.
Click to expand...

To quote Wikipedia on this (no matter what some people think about Wikipedia):
"Zoophilia is a paraphilia involving a sexual fixation on non-human animals. Bestiality is cross-species sexual activity between human and non-human animals. The terms are often used interchangeably, but some researchers make a distinction between the attraction (zoophilia) and the act (bestiality)."

That's a far spread definition that most people might apply to those terms.
 
caikgoch said:
Emotional attraction =/= Sexual attraction

Understanding that distinction is one the most important parts of growing up. Until recently the local cat lady counted as Zoophile because she loved her cats like children. Then the porn pushers used the word to "legitimize" their wares and the antis grabbed it and ran with it. I refuse to yield my word to our enemies and I suggest that you consider how debate usually goes when you let the other side define the terms.
Click to expand...

Some more typical "hucus pocus" from caikgoch The local "cat lady" was never seen a zoophile. Just an eccentric who lived with a lot of cats. Porn has nothing to do with YOUR having sex with your horses. If one loves horses, fine. But once you started having sex with them. Your just another guy committing bestiality. You're just another "holier than thou" zoophile claiming their shit doesn't stink.
 
Last edited:
CritterFunatic said:
To quote Wikipedia on this (no matter what some people think about Wikipedia):
"Zoophilia is a paraphilia involving a sexual fixation on non-human animals. Bestiality is cross-species sexual activity between human and non-human animals. The terms are often used interchangeably, but some researchers make a distinction between the attraction (zoophilia) and the act (bestiality)."

That's a far spread definition that most people might apply to those terms.
Click to expand...

I am not saying you are wrong with your post.

However, I would pose the general suggestion that quoting sources from "elsewhere" (like others also did) is not the perfect way to handle this question. This is because most of these "outside" sources are likely the writings and musings of "outsiders", i.e. mundanes. These people have less of a clue than the encompassing us, the insiders to this thematic complex. For this reason - i speculate - all the potentially applicable words (zoophilia, bestiality, sodomy, horse-ripper ...) are "interchangeable", i.e. a mundane chaos where they try to talk about something which they don't really fully are aware of in all aspects but think it's all horrible.

But we here need a distinction between people who go for a model/lifestyle where they love a specific animal (or call it they are just desperately needing a wife-substitution for easy emotional supply - if that makes you happy, no problem). And people who just wanna fuck and nothing else whatsoever.

And since we are these groups, I'd say it's us who can come up with these words and their meanings. Even if we can't agree here, it seems. It's a bit like groups of do-gooders (sorry) discussing what the new word for "colored" should be, because "colored" is super offensive. So discussions rage what would be non-offensive. Easy solution: Go and ask the people affected what they wanna be called. Turns out it is "black", if we must.

So I am a zoophile, because I am partnered with my mare, whom I had the pleasure to take care of for the last 4 and 1/2 years.
But that's me.
 
ZTHorse said:
The zoo dictionary is available as a sticky topic as standard definitions used in the zoo community.

In short, bestiality is the act, zoophilia is the reason.
Click to expand...

I read your dictionary just now. It says there exactly what I said in my first post within here.

I am slightly confused since I feel your post now is somewhat contradicting the dictionary by picking up the over-emphasis from above how 'bestiality is the act which also zoos do at the moment of sticking it in' - which is technically true but applies fuzziness to things.

Also I simply call it "having sex" but technically yeah. Also I guess no reasonable person would deny this technicality.
 
pferdefreund said:
I read your dictionary just now. It says there exactly what I said in my first post within here.

I am slightly confused since I feel your post now is somewhat contradicting the dictionary by picking up the over-emphasis from above how 'bestiality is the act which also zoos do at the moment of sticking it in' - which is technically true but applies fuzziness to things.

Also I simply call it "having sex" but technically yeah. Also I guess no reasonable person would deny this technicality.
Click to expand...

I dont believe there is any fuzziness in the dictionary.

"Bestiality" could be swapped for interspecies intercourse or anything else. Its just that word has an immediate knowledge and absoluteness of what it is to anyone hearing the word. It means sex with animals. Its a word that is very very narrowly defined and thus is easier to use in english for all sorts of things.

Zoophilia is the mental/emotional state while bestiality is the physical state. There are inactive zoos. Active zoos. Active bestialists. Inactive bestialists. Thats why making the word active into an adjective in the dictionary made sense as a defining term to the state of the zoo or bestialist in question in the language.

You can be an inactive zoophile. A non-bestiality partaking person at a particular time. Etc. Etc.
 
silkythighs said:
That's just wrong. I had sex with two dogs because I liked the sex. But I had NO romantic or deep emotional feelings towards them. Besides since when is this so called "dictionary" the official one for the community.
Click to expand...
Go to a library and pull up an encyclopedia. Look for those two words. The definition is literally the same. But in your eyes, it seems facts are opinions. So what do you think should be the official definition?
 
Zoophile: Someone who has platonic, emotional and/or romantic feelings towards animals.
Bestialist: Someone who has sexual relations with animals.
 
pferdefreund said:
And since we are these groups, I'd say it's us who can come up with these words and their meanings. Even if we can't agree here, it seems. It's a bit like groups of do-gooders (sorry) discussing what the new word for "colored" should be, because "colored" is super offensive. So discussions rage what would be non-offensive. Easy solution: Go and ask the people affected what they wanna be called. Turns out it is "black", if we must.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but have to say that's not how words and language work. You can either agree or disagree with a set definition, but you can't really take an established term and slap your own definition on, saying "I'm an insider, I know better what that word truely means."

I mean, yeah, we, as zoos, want to be seen in the best possible light, but we are also quite biased (as any interest group probably is) and might twist and turn around the issues. I'm not new to zoo communities, I have been around for more than 20 years and have seen dozens of attempts to redefine what those words mean.

From equating zoophilia with the general love for animals, claiming that every pet owner is a zoophile, if they are emotionally invested in their pet to equating bestialists as evil animal abusers who don't care for animals, only think about sex and see animals as fuck-toys. I'd say all those attempts to redefine words just make the waters muddier and make it more complicated for people to identify themself properly. It helps nobody to let communities with specific interests redefine what the word that describes them means.

Many communities already suffer from that, like the furries. Ask 100 furries what being "furry" means and you get 200 different, sometimes mutually exclusive answers, except the obvious "A furry is a fan of anthropomorphic animals and the media and artwork surrounding the concept". The same applies to zoos. Some zoos define the term, as the rest of society does, with the sexual attraction to animals. Others compare it with romantic love and invent their very own, personal, individualistic definition.

Heck, there was a time, when one zoo basically said into my face, that I wasn't a zoo because when I visited him and his dog was in heat I didn't pay any attention and didn't try to get something on with her. He didn't asked, if I was into females (which I, around that time, wasn't). He didn't ask, if I was into dogs (which I am not. I like them. Very much so. But not in this regard). He didn't ask, if I was just modest and wouldn't just hump the pet of my host (which I would be. Even if I was interested in that dog, I wouldn't have behaved in that way). So he concluded "Guy visits me, guy doesn't fuck my dog, guy isn't a zoophile.", easy as that. He even added, that I probably was only around to gather approval from my "faked tolerance" towards the "true zoos". As if I would need approval from some interest group that I'd pretend to tolerate.

But yeah, according to your viewpoint, he would be right be redefining what it meant to be a zoo and suddenly I wouldn't be a zoo anymore. Which is nonsense, of course. But that exactly happens if you let people redefine what words mean to them.

I think it's more important that people think about how the words relate to them or how they relate to the words, instead of redefining the meaning of words to fit them like a glove.

And as unpopular as that is, I still agree with the definition, that zoophilia (like any paraphilia) is a sexual attraction (that might include romantic feelings for some people) to animals, why bestiality is just the act of having sex with an animal. The whole "zoophilia is about love" thing is an appeal to emotion and tries to sugarcoat what zoophilia truely is. Yes, outsides might think sex with animals is gross. They might think that animals can't consent to sexual acts. They might think that all zoos are nutcases. But it helps nobody if we lie to ourself by saying "Oh, no, zoophilia isn't about sex. It's about love. And love is beautiful. Everybody has to realize this!" Because zoophilia really isn't about that first and foremost. It can include love for some people, but that isn't universally true.
 
silkythighs said:
Zoophile: Someone who has platonic, emotional and/or romantic feelings towards animals.
Bestialist: Someone who has sexual relations with animals.
Click to expand...
So, what would you call people being sexually attracted to animals, but not having sex with animals then, if that's not supposed to be called a "zoophile" anymore?
 
Bestialists and zoophiles differ in that the former is not romantically involved with animals, while the other one is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top