Interest in bestiality (i.e. the act of having sex with an animal) doesn't apply to me, but I'm still a zoophile (being sexually attracted to animals (among other more appropriate lifeforms)). I can't really tell you how it started for me. But I learned early that certain topics were taboo, which only made me more curious. Sexuality, especially exhibited by animals was rare to see, mostly only in documentaries and only ever mentioned when dryly refering to animal reproduction as if animals didn't have sex for joy. I never truely believed that and was always curious about finding out more. In my childhood I was fascinated by the variation of reproductive organs seen in pets and farm animals and the horse of a mounted policeman who emptied his bladder right next to me at a parade, right at my eye level caused further interests to take shape. When growing up I found it strange that people had no trouble objectifying animals in all sort of ways and lacked the ability to see them as the living beings they are, with everything this encompassed. So I entertained thoughts about the subjects people never talked about. When growing up, I often imagined myself in the role of a male animal (since I am a male) and being busy breeding away. I didn't do this that often, but occasionally when I got horny.
My interest in animals only grew from there, but I was always more interested in the more elusive creatures than in the easily available ones, which might be the largest factor that seperated me from other zoophiles. I never truely cared about the availability of animals, but I always cared about the needs of animals in general, the needs of my favorite species especially and to satisfy my curiosity by spotting and encountering wild and exotic animal genitalia. So while most zoos are into dogs and horses, I'm not. At least not entirely, especially sexually. I mean I love dogs (platonically that is), but I'm not into their genitals, as they look weird and sickly to me, way too veiny and too purple and red for my taste. Horse genitals are okay, but they are also sooo commonplace, you see them in every NSFW furry- and zoo-space. To me there's nothing special about them anymore. So I'm more into under-representated species, the ones people rarely talk about. This includes species that are anatomically NOT compatible with humans. But that's fine. Remember when I said I wasn't really into bestiality? I meant it. Of course I also have bestiality fantasies from time to time and might mention here or there that I'd love to help a specific creature getting off, but that's mostly it and certainly the extend of my interests. I was never truely into penetrative sex myself when it came to humans, this also extends towards animals. I don't have the urge to stick my dick into things, so I also don't go out of my way to look for opportunities to do so. But if an animal was ever begging for some relief and I got the opportunity to help out, I'd probably do so by providing masturbation. That's why I'm also into species that would otherwise be anatomically incompatible, because I don't intend to bone them.
That said, let me give you a quick run-down about my experiences with zoophile communities over the years...
The thing is, when I was new among zoo communities, especially learning about the Z.E.T.A. Principles, I thought that my mindset was more common among zoos. But over time I found out that I'm mostly alone in this regard. Some people I met iRL even went so far as to calling me a non-zoo simply because I didn't try to screw their pet when I had the chance. That shocked me and made me think much about their as well as my morals. To expect someone else to fuck ones own pet certainly doesn't sit well with me. No offense towards those zoos who have good relationships with a pet owner and have properly bonded with the pet in question. But to expect a random stranger to do so out of the blue really rubbed me the wrong way. I was told by that guy that he suspected that I faked my interest in zoophilia in order to come off as tolerant and supportive and gain acceptance in a way people today farm karma-points on reddit or something. That was nonsense of course but it really made me wonder if I needed to remain in those communities. Especially since they welcomed more and more abusers over time and became less and less wholesome. So I skipped the first community I dwelled in before and looked for others over the years, only to see more of the same things over and over again. Abusers here, delusional people lying to themself about themselves (more about that later) there, nothing to miss, easy to pass by. It never truely changed. Even here in the forum are people trying to re-define what they call "zoophiles" and some people in the local subforums only look for sexual hookups which can lead to abusive situations. Lately this community started to self-police itself by banning people posting abuse porn or who exhibit toxic behavior. I have never really seen a community I was part of do that before. And although it feels it happened way too late for me personally, because I'm kinda salty about my past experiences that accompanied me for half my life by now, I still like to see if this can make a difference. It's certainly something I appreciate.
Also there's the delusional part I mentioned before. It's a trend some zoos exhibit who try to re-define what "bestiality" and "zoophilia" means, by linking bestiality with abuse and zoophilia with "love", claiming that this is why it's called "zoophilia" and not because it's one of many paraphilias from a list of paraphilias. As if that would make it worse or otherwise more undesirable to consider oneself a "zoophile". I mean, I'm around since before there was the internet and in my part of the world people used to call people being into animals "sodomists". Sodomy not only means sex with animals, but also homosexuality as well as anal sex, so it's not a precise term anyway (not that there is anything wrong with the other meanings). But also it was a deragotary term. I embraced "zoophilia" when I heard it first, because it sounds so much more positive to be called to be a "zoophile" than being called being a "sodomist". And in the end I don't like lying to myself. I have a sexual interest in animals. By book-definition this is what zoophilia is about. So the term certainly applies to me. But there's certainly a difference between how I experience zoophilia and how the overwhelming majority of other zoophiles experience it, which, as mentioned before, make me an outlier even among "likeminded people" or "my people" as I used to consider other zoophiles. Zoophilia certainly is a broader spectrum with a variety of expressions. At least I hope so, as I certainly wouldn't like to be the odd one out. But then again, even if this was the case, I would have to accept that. Because it certainly beats being in denial about ones definitions and lables. I am a zoophile. I just don't be the same type of zoophile others are.
