Yep - We *can* all get along

[BlueBeard]

When zoophiles say "zoo," I kinda get the impression they mean "zoo like *me*."

Truth is, zoo ain't just one thing. How *I* am zoo differs from how *you* are... zoo (without getting into that whole discussion about what's just "bestiality" and what's "zoo"). Holy crap! We are one hugely diverse crowd!

The first step to getting along is realizing that completely "moral," "healthy," "NORMAL" people like "me" can have such a variety of opinions -- all equal to, and as respectable as, our own.

Know what hobbled the gay movement? -- The variety of "gayness" among gay folk. No one seemed content to admit that there's this huge continuum of human sexual orientations. You're either bi, gay or straight. Or... they've extended LGBT to LGBTQ and XXXXXX, ad nauseam. People love to have a smaller, more manageable set of "being-isms" that help them pigeon-hole other people instead of just taking folk at their word: "I am... this. Not your label, but this."

It caused a lot of divisive conversations...er, "fights." "Bi? Fuck me, you're just a horny sumabitch who'll fuck anything. Me? Now me, *I'm* a true gay person. I never consider women. You're married to a woman. Or, you sometimes have romantic relationships with women. Or... you *fantasize* about women. You're not gay. And Bi don't qualify."

And then even "bi" -- "I'd marry a man or a woman, whomever I fall in love with." But another, "I wouldn't kiss a man, ew, but I'd suck his dick."

Who is gay? Who is bi?

-- Who is ... "zoo"?

It's a continuum of varying degree. Let's not ever let variety among us be a cause for division. When I came to Zooville, it immediately was inviting to me. It showed inclusivity of the entire gamut of human-animal sexual interaction possibilities. It was "real." This is the way we are, for "real." And I really, REALLY love that all of us are represented here, welcome just as we are.

Some are getting pounded by their dog five times a day. Others are just oral zoos. Others don't have an animal partner right now, but are hoping "someday." Some are just exploring. Some are just living vicariously through the discussions of other zoos. Some are married to their partners. Some hit on a pet left in their care whom they've got a secret relationship with. Some hit on the stray in the alley. Some are here pining away for a human partner who is also into zoo; some want nothing to do with humans at all. Some are looking to own their own animals; some consider "owning" an animal an immoral concept. Some owners share their pets, some would NEVER do that! It's all... zoo.

What *I* do is maybe way, way different than what other zoos want to do, or do, or have done. But... embrace diversity!

The only "zooier than thou" claim in here should be left up to the podcast. (Haven't checked out the podcast yet? Oh man, you're missing out!)

 

[aqua]

Most, but not all.

Deciding where the line is will take as many of us as possible to contribute time and energy. But the inescapable fact is the line exists, it is somewhere, and some will fail to meet that minimum standard of conduct. We are at the bleeding edge of animal rights and welfare advocacy. This necessarily and permanently rules out activities, for example, where the non-human person has no possiblity to enjoy themselves, bears significant risk of injury, or worse. There are also more nuanced ethical issues to consider, like our responsibilities to highly intelligent captive animals, like dolphins, who might be eager to play with humans, but fully comprehend the nature of their captivity and total dependence on their caretakers, blurring the distinction between consent, acquiescence, and coercion -- concepts which must be crystal clear to protect life and advance our cause.

We already know what happens when we get things wrong and do nothing. It cannot continue.

?

 

[egoldstein]

It's a valid point, we've seen the line in the sand how many times? Oh you're not a True Zoo(tm) unless you ______.

I'm a relatively Big-Tent kinda guy where this is concerned. I get attached to my partners, but I'm OK with folks who feel like they're in love, folks who just like the sex, and pretty much anyone who's not causing harm or undue distress. If harm and distress are your thing or you just don't care, you can fuck off and move along though, might wanna move along quickly lest some folks take umbrage.

Anyone who's treating their non-human partners well, providing good care and a good quality of life is "one of us" to me, doesn't matter if sex is involved or not.

 

[Tailo]

When zoophiles say "zoo," I kinda get the impression they mean "zoo like *me*."

Truth is, zoo ain't just one thing. How *I* am zoo differs from how *you* are... zoo (without getting into that whole discussion about what's just "bestiality" and what's "zoo"). Holy crap! We are one hugely diverse crowd!

The first step to getting along is realizing that completely "moral," "healthy," "NORMAL" people like "me" can have such a variety of opinions -- all equal to, and as respectable as, our own.

Know what hobbled the gay movement? -- The variety of "gayness" among gay folk. No one seemed content to admit that there's this huge continuum of human sexual orientations. You're either bi, gay or straight. Or... they've extended LGBT to LGBTQ and XXXXXX, ad nauseam. People love to have a smaller, more manageable set of "being-isms" that help them pigeon-hole other people instead of just taking folk at their word: "I am... this. Not your label, but this."

It caused a lot of divisive conversations...er, "fights." "Bi? Fuck me, you're just a horny sumabitch who'll fuck anything. Me? Now me, *I'm* a true gay person. I never consider women. You're married to a woman. Or, you sometimes have romantic relationships with women. Or... you *fantasize* about women. You're not gay. And Bi don't qualify."

And then even "bi" -- "I'd marry a man or a woman, whomever I fall in love with." But another, "I wouldn't kiss a man, ew, but I'd suck his dick."

Who is gay? Who is bi?

-- Who is ... "zoo"?

It's a continuum of varying degree. Let's not ever let variety among us be a cause for division. When I came to Zooville, it immediately was inviting to me. It showed inclusivity of the entire gamut of human-animal sexual interaction possibilities. It was "real." This is the way we are, for "real." And I really, REALLY love that all of us are represented here, welcome just as we are.

Some are getting pounded by their dog five times a day. Others are just oral zoos. Others don't have an animal partner right now, but are hoping "someday." Some are just exploring. Some are just living vicariously through the discussions of other zoos. Some are married to their partners. Some hit on a pet left in their care whom they've got a secret relationship with. Some hit on the stray in the alley. Some are here pining away for a human partner who is also into zoo; some want nothing to do with humans at all. Some are looking to own their own animals; some consider "owning" an animal an immoral concept. Some owners share their pets, some would NEVER do that! It's all... zoo.

What *I* do is maybe way, way different than what other zoos want to do, or do, or have done. But... embrace diversity!

The only "zooier than thou" claim in here should be left up to the podcast. (Haven't checked out the podcast yet? Oh man, you're missing out!)

You have written that post to bring back people together after the pinapple-on-pizza schism, haven't you?

 

[BlueBeard]

You have written that post to bring back people together after the pinapple-on-pizza schism, haven't you?

BWAHhahahahaha.... Forgot about that one!

Yeah, I suppose it's kind of related. You see such a broad representation of bestiality/zoophilia in here. It ranges from the guys with pecker in hand stroking furiously to a woman being mounted and gals rubbing one out at lunch to a similar vid... to folks who have deep, romantic relationships with an animal, and sex may or may not be a part of it, but isn't the primary point. That's a HUGE range of behaviors. And they're morphing all the time. Some members talk about first being turned on by the idea of sex with an animal, and eventually they find out they are in love with the animal.

It ranges from those who chose to isolate themselves from their RL communities or feel those communities alienate them, to salespeople whose livelihoods depend on their ability to form and maintain interpersonal relationships. That's a huge range of social preferences/skillsets/comfort levels.

It's kids living in their parents' basements yet or sneaking on here in the private of their dorm room... to mothers/fathers, grampas and grammas; atheists to ministers; city folk to farmers.

-- And pineapple on pizza to can't-eat-pizza-at-all, gluten-sensitives.

All the various types of zoo interest somewhere on those lines.

But... we *do* have to have lines. I agree with what's been said so far. And I agree with the rules of this community: No puppy fuckers. No chicken dickers. No animal torture. No incest posts. No pedophilia posts.

There's no doubt some folks who are into those things in here, though. Long as they don't talk about it, no one needs to know, I guess. I always tell people it's pointless to think your community is safe from predators because you harassed a guy to death until he moved, that guy who was caught, did his time and located on the other side of the tracks across town. You know how people do, they send fliers around, they set up watch groups, etc., all focused on *that* dude.

"Honey, he's the guy they *caught*. We all *know* about him. Sheriff's already watching him. When you got him to move his ass all the way to Dubuque, you didn't improve much. You were oblivious to all the guys who've been driving up and down the street casing your kid's playground while you were distracted by him."

So gotta guess they're here. And right next to them? Maybe a bogus profile or two that helps anti-zoos keep a close eye on us from the inside.

Never know who's here. Just assume they are, I guess. That's *why* we have to have some rules limiting what's talked about in here. Some people are just waiting to make that connection.

Instead, teach them all a lesson about what live and let live looks like, what "community" means, and ... that there's no harm or malice from the vast majority of zoos. And those that are malicious or injurious to others? It wasn't *because* they were zoo. Zoo in their case was beside the point.