Zoo are you born or are you made?

[JazzyPaws]

I've had similar thoughts.

I can attest to the fact that being around too many people messes with my head, and also too many people getting into my own personal business gets me uptight.

In my mind, there absolutely must be something genetic to this.

I mean, if you look at the history of humans and domesticated animals, k9s take the lead. I find it interesting that when you look at animal preferences amongst zoos, same thing. Could be a coincidence, sure.

But there's also been enough evolutionary time since it all started for some kind of mutual favoritism to have naturally evolved into both us and them.

And from an evolutionary standpoint, it could make sense. There is no doubt that we have helped each other as a species to get to where we are now. When you look at how much they have evolved since then, and considering that our relationships certainly contributed to survival of the fittest...

In my head, that seems to be the most plausible...

It almost feels like a pull and a tug.

Thru some generations, we've pulled the canine line into a genetically different animal, capable, first and foremost, to provide a function.

Who's to say, as you'd mentioned in a previous comment, that simply sexual acts could have been a part of creating a stronger bond to a household, such as protection, isn't exactly how humans, as a species, learned it's biologically possible.

Then let the genes take over and start hotfixing and we've come to a tug, where canines now support us and evolve along side us.

When our numbers get to high... Hotfix, zoophile numbers increase to slow population growth.

 

[K_9River_rat]

It almost feels like a pull and a tug.

Thru some generations, we've pulled the canine line into a genetically different animal, capable, first and foremost, to provide a function.

Who's to say, as you'd mentioned in a previous comment, that simply sexual acts could have been a part of creating a stronger bond to a household, such as protection, isn't exactly how humans, as a species, learned it's biologically possible.

Then let the genes take over and start hotfixing and we've come to a tug, where canines now support us and evolve along side us.

When our numbers get to high... Hotfix, zoophile numbers increase to slow population growth.

What's your line of work? I've noticed some things you've said here and there.

 

[Valkn]

I think they're both equally true for different people.

I'm certain people are born zoo. I feel like I was. I know a lot of people who are. It's a sexuality just like being gay or straight or bi. I don't think you can just 'become' zoo out of nowhere, I don't think exposure to it alone will 'make' someone zoo, no. I think the impulse has to exist in the first place to feel it, to act on it.

HOWEVER.

I do think it's possible for some people to turn to zoo, and I mostly see this with people who were abused, neglected, etc by humans as a child. We naturally turn towards animals for comfort, something that doesn't hurt us, judge us, speak ill of us. I definitely think in certain circumstances someone might choose an animal for some sort of deep psychological reason like this, where humans cause stress and pain to the person, relating more to their four-legged lovers and friends.

I think I'm personally a mixture of both. I've felt zooey thoughts since my earliest years, feeling something change in me when I met and pet my first dog and horse, but I also went through a lot of abuse and really clung on to the animals around me for some sort of port in a storm so to speak.

I think it's a deep question that there's a lot of ways to answer, with a lot of things to consider.

Very well said. I concur with you

 

[JazzyPaws]

What's your line of work? I've noticed some things you've said here and there.

I'm a jack of all, master of none. I get bored very easily, and with my brain being the way it is, Hi-Function Asperger's, I require constant stimulation. Sometimes that need is for researching random scientific stuff, reading journals.

As an example

I took an interest a while back in canine biology when trying to defend why I refuse to sterilize them unless medically necessary. That gave me a lot more insight to my sexual nature, which only enhanced my sexual experiences.

I'm ashamed to admit I pirated many textbooks. I never could afford college and several bad decisions, all my fault, put me on the wrong trajectory

 

[Valkn]

I feel like I was born attracted to animals and it progressed from a strong affinity to something more intimate. I've always been asexual with people, Yet I got aroused by seeing dogs mate before I even fully understood what they were doing and the why behind those feelings. Not gonna get too specific about my age then due to forum rules but I can say it's why I believe zoo sexuality can be a life long orientation for a lot of people.

I agree . I also got aroused by seeing dogs mating before I fully understood what they were doing.
For me definitely an orientation.

 

[K_9River_rat]

I'm a jack of all, master of none. I get bored very easily, and with my brain being the way it is, Hi-Function Asperger's, I require constant stimulation. Sometimes that need is for researching random scientific stuff, reading journals.

As an example

I took an interest a while back in canine biology when trying to defend why I refuse to sterilize them unless medically necessary. That gave me a lot more insight to my sexual nature, which only enhanced my sexual experiences.

Sounds a lot like me!

Never been diagnosed but it's been suggested.

I'm constantly tinkering with all things mechanical, electrical,electronic, hydraulic, pneumatic, with a heavy interest now in k9 evolution and behaviors, especially as how they relate to humans.

That's why I've been trying to see just how deep their brains go and treat mine (gawd I hate using a possessive to describe them) as equals and seeing how far they go to fill that role.

Wish I could get paid to just stay with them full time and devote every minute to that.

 

[JazzyPaws]

I'd like to analyse this, there is a few points I find interesting.

I do think it's possible for some people to turn to zoo, and I mostly see this with people who were abused, neglected, etc by humans as a child. We naturally turn towards animals for comfort, something that doesn't hurt us, judge us, speak ill of us. I definitely think in certain circumstances someone might choose an animal for some sort of deep psychological reason like this, where humans cause stress and pain to the person, relating more to their four-legged lovers and friends.

I agree that it is possible, and @K_9River_rat, this actually plays off your thought on the symbiotic bond.

What if this natural turn to animals due to trauma, is triggered by the very same thing. What if these deviations are some form of natural fail safe we've evolved into!

Fascinating

 

[JazzyPaws]

Sounds a lot like me!

Never been diagnosed but it's been suggested.

I'm constantly tinkering with all things mechanical, electrical,electronic, hydraulic, pneumatic, with a heavy interest now in k9 evolution and behaviors, especially as how they relate to humans.

That's why I've been trying to see just how deep their brains go and treat mine (gawd I hate using a possessive to describe them) as equals and seeing how far they go to fill that role.

Wish I could get paid to just stay with them full time and devote every minute to that.

Oh god...

Sorry for the wording but I BLOW MY LOAD for engineering

 

[JazzyPaws]

I'm kinda the same. i have been told i might have Asperger's and i love technical stuff (mainly robotics) but as of recently I have been focusing on the canine mind and trying to figure out just how close we truly are.

Canine psychology is something I really wanna dive into next.

 

[K_9River_rat]

I'd like to analyse this, there is a few points I find interesting.



I agree that it is possible, and @K_9River_rat, this actually plays off your thought on the symbiotic bond.

What if this natural turn to animals due to trauma, is triggered by the very same thing. What if these deviations are some form of natural fail safe we've evolved into!

Fascinating

Oh my what a deep rabbit hole we have found!!! Get the sandwiches, I'll get the beer.. oh, and bring the pups cuz looking like this one may take a while to explore

 

[K_9River_rat]

Oh god...

Sorry for the wording but I BLOW MY LOAD for engineering

? in looking at your screen name I couldn't help but think of my bench top oscilloscope.. Tektronics..

 

[JazzyPaws]

? in looking at your screen name I couldn't help but think of my bench top oscilloscope.. Tektronics..

I'm actually hoping ZT gets back to me about the change. It was literally two thing pop in my head and a number. I was super sketched about joining, I never thought it'd become more permanent.

 

[K_9River_rat]

It's just unfortunate that this subject is so taboo. If it wasn't imagine all the discovery's we would have made by now. Hell look at all the discovery's we are making here

To me it doesn't take any stretch of the imagination to think that ok, we crossed paths with k9s a looooong time ago.

Back then, things were a whole lot more different. Life was difficult at best.

We didn't have any sense of taboo regarding sex with animals.

Along comes k9, smelling our food, someone throws them some, k9 hangs around and somehow proves to be of some benefit.

Or maybe an orphaned pup was found.

Either way, they were there.

At some point, I'd have to bet male k9 and female human did the dirty. Maybe woman had just gotten knocked up by her man.

Woman gives birth. I know it isn't a pup, but easy to see how k9 also views and treats the baby as the fruit of his own loins, and we already know how wolves are about defense of the pack and especially their young.

Wolves have evidently been portrayed in cave paintings with men hunting. Again, looking at modern dogs, no stretch of imagination there.

Men get horny while out hunting while their woman is back at the cave, a full 4 day hike away. No sense of taboo then, so easy to see how the obvious could happen there.

All of this and more makes me think that at one point in time, k9s and humans were basically one, and sex between them was likely the norm and happened more often than not (knot lol).

What did that do for our own and their genetics over that long of a period of time?

It would be reasonable to assume that over many generations the genetic bond was strengthened, simply due again to survival of the fittest, since back then, having a k9 at your side that was willing to die to defend you or your family was likely a much greater commodity back then than it is now, and those that didn't have one at their side was most certainly in greater peril in those times.

Add to that their life spans relative to ours. So roughly 3x longer for us meant that they've actually had potentially 3x more evolution in the same time span as us since then.

Which would then go towards answering the question of why is there more dogs willing and wanting to have sex with a human than the other way around???

Just some of my thoughts

 

[JazzyPaws]

Oh my what a deep rabbit hole we have found!!! Get the sandwiches, I'll get the beer.. oh, and bring the pups cuz looking like this one may take a while to explore

So, collectively so far we can find some common ground in that

1. That possibility exists that the genetic code for zoophilia exists.

2. This genetic code could potentially lay dormant for one's entire life. Leading to

3. The idea that one can become zoo, could possibly be part of a bigger set of code, one that can be either off, on, or somewhere in between.

4. The idea of nurture thru abuse (maybe a poor combination of words but it is what is is), causing zoophilia to appear, could be a result of this possible code set, in our genes, being activated as a result of an evolutionary symbiotic relationship between human and beast.

5. This genetic code could have begun being written as a result of physical relations, between humans and beasts, over the course of history, in order to create a deeper, more loyal bond, in order to elevate a working animal.

6. The possibility exists this code could be activated as a natural response to population density. As a built in population control method, much like other potentially sexually deviating characteristics beyond the normal of species reproduction and survival of the whole.

7. This evolutionary code, in the animal, could also be the reason so many specific types have this level of intimacy with humans at all

8. With respect to our lifespans. Canines have had 3x the evolutionary generations to enhance and decide whether this code was worth saving, or evolving out. This would suggest the animals survival coding has deemed this useful.

Did I miss anything?

 

[Valkn]

So, collectively so far we can find some common ground in that

1. That possibility exists that the genetic code for zoophilia exists.

2. This genetic code could potentially lay dormant for one's entire life. Leading to

3. The idea that one can become zoo, could possibly be part of a bigger set of code, one that can be either off, on, or somewhere in between.

4. The idea of nurture thru abuse (maybe a poor combination of words but it is what is is), causing zoophilia to appear, could be a result of this possible code set, in our genes, being activated as a result of an evolutionary symbiotic relationship between human and beast.

5. This genetic code could have begun being written as a result of physical relations, between humans and beasts, over the course of history, in order to create a deeper, more loyal bond, in order to elevate a working animal.

6. The possibility exists this code could be activated as a natural response to population density. As a built in population control method, much like other potentially sexually deviating characteristics beyond the normal of species reproduction and survival of the whole.

Did I miss anything?

Very interesting and provocative thoughts in deed

 

[JazzyPaws]

Very interesting and provocative thoughts in deed

There are a few very bright minds here. Poking the right spots I bet we could create a unique zooville theory, collectively, as to how zoophilia could be a part of some natural process.

 

[JazzyPaws]

So, collectively so far we can find some common ground in that

1. That possibility exists that the genetic code for zoophilia exists.

2. This genetic code could potentially lay dormant for one's entire life. Leading to

3. The idea that one can become zoo, could possibly be part of a bigger set of code, one that can be either off, on, or somewhere in between.

4. The idea of nurture thru abuse (maybe a poor combination of words but it is what is is), causing zoophilia to appear, could be a result of this possible code set, in our genes, being activated as a result of an evolutionary symbiotic relationship between human and beast.

5. This genetic code could have begun being written as a result of physical relations, between humans and beasts, over the course of history, in order to create a deeper, more loyal bond, in order to elevate a working animal.

6. The possibility exists this code could be activated as a natural response to population density. As a built in population control method, much like other potentially sexually deviating characteristics beyond the normal of species reproduction and survival of the whole.

Did I miss anything?

Fuck I did

It's a new point so I'll reply with it.

X. The fact that certain domestic animals understand what sex is, with humans, and can comprehensively consent, is a result of that long developing bond, being written into the evolutionary code of beasts.

 

[Kazegami]

It seems simple to me... Being sexually active means a higher chance of making babies, we are just one of the many variations that propagate our species.

 

[K_9River_rat]

So, collectively so far we can find some common ground in that 1. That possibility exists that the genetic code for zoophilia exists. 2. This genetic code could potentially lay dormant for one's entire life. Leading to 3. The idea that one can become zoo, could possibly be part of a bigger set of code, one that can be either off, on, or somewhere in between. 4. The idea of nurture thru abuse (maybe a poor combination of words but it is what is is), causing zoophilia to appear, could be a result of this possible code set, in our genes, being activated as a result of an evolutionary symbiotic relationship between human and beast. 5. This genetic code could have begun being written as a result of physical relations, between humans and beasts, over the course of history, in order to create a deeper, more loyal bond, in order to elevate a working animal. 6. The possibility exists this code could be activated as a natural response to population density. As a built in population control method, much like other potentially sexually deviating characteristics beyond the normal of species reproduction and survival of the whole. Did I miss anything?

I think that about covers it.

I just don't think that k9s being the preferred animal where zoos are concerned is purely coincidental.

And if there were genetic code on both sides to support it....

Kinda flips things on it's head!!

Our behavior is rooted in our DNA whether we like it or not or want to say we're good enough that we don't need our DNA to be good like some seem to think.

On the contrary, we are what we are BECAUSE of our DNA, and if this has been around THAT long, trying to say it's a mental illness is akin to saying having thumbs is a birth defect...

 

[JazzyPaws]

I think that about covers it.

I just don't think that k9s being the preferred animal where zoos are concerned is purely coincidental.

And if there were genetic code on both sides to support it....

Kinda flips things on it's head!!

Our behavior is rooted in our DNA whether we like it or not or want to say we're good enough that we don't need our DNA to be good like some seem to think.

On the contrary, we are what we are BECAUSE of our DNA, and if this has been around THAT long, trying to say it's a mental illness is akin to saying having thumbs is a birth defect...

Exactly. I did add a point. I realize I did miss the thing about the flipside with the animal.

 

[K_9River_rat]

There are a few very bright minds here. Poking the right spots I bet we could create a unique zooville theory, collectively, as to how zoophilia could be a part of some natural process.

Exactly. I've been running that concept through my head now for 5 plus years. You're the first one that's seen the BIG picture I've been trying to lay out.

Most just grab one or two things and make an argument.

But when you start pulling everything into it, to me it becomes more than "possible", and starts going towards "probable" and perhaps even "likely"..

 

[JazzyPaws]

Exactly. I've been running that concept through my head now for 5 plus years. You're the first one that's seen the BIG picture I've been trying to lay out.

Most just grab one or two things and make an argument.

But when you start pulling everything into it, to me it becomes more than "possible", and starts going towards "probable" and perhaps even "likely"..

Maybe the point form, and reigniting the topic will help!

 

[K_9River_rat]

Exactly. I did add a point. I realize I did miss the thing about the flipside with the animal.

Did you get the part of due to differences in life spans basically leaves k9s with what could amount to 3 fold the evolutionary progress in respect to us?

 

[JazzyPaws]

So start with 1

The possibility of the gene at all

Obviously we find it stimulating. This means there is a wave of chemicals being created and sloshed around the brain. This could only happen if our genetic code, understood how to respond to stimuli.

It's proven that most people would not get hard staring at an animal, to that means it would have to be dormant, or regressed.

Then there are some people who are stimulated, similar to how a, what we shall call for sake of not repeating "normal model of reproductive survival", "typical", would be. Which suggests some genetic code is causing this combination of electrical and chemical reactions to occur, in what would typically be reserved for fertile partners.

Those microscopic machines already have the coded instruction set for what "buttons" to push, to release the drugs. Otherwise, similar to a machine, it would error out, and not happen. So instructions must exist in some fashion or another.

I would say the possibility of a genetic instruction set existing is almost certain.

Anyone else?

 

[JazzyPaws]

Did you get the part of due to differences in life spans basically leaves k9s with what could amount to 3 fold the evolutionary progress in respect to us?

I did not!

I'm going to go back and edit the main post to add both additional points, so that there's a fixed reference point.

 

[K_9River_rat]

There are a few very bright minds here. Poking the right spots I bet we could create a unique zooville theory, collectively, as to how zoophilia could be a part of some natural process.

And all of this could potentially explain so much that we see today.

One question I ask myself, is what if we lived in a society that was accepting of zoos? Would our numbers be higher?

In other words, if this is in genetic code, how many have walked around suppressing their natural urge? How many had an urge and never admitted it?

I think on the prehistoric end, it would have been less likely to encounter zoo exclusive. I would think it would have been more just do what you want in the moment kinda thing.

 

[K_9River_rat]

So start with 1

The possibility of the gene at all

Obviously we find it stimulating. This means there is a wave of chemicals being created and sloshed around the brain. This could only happen if our genetic code, understood how to respond to stimuli.

It's proven that most people would not get hard staring at an animal, to that means it would have to be dormant, or regressed.

Then there are some people who are stimulated, similar to how a, what we shall call for sake of not repeating "normal model of reproductive survival", "typical", would be. Which suggests some genetic code is causing this combination of electrical and chemical reactions to occur, in what would typically be reserved for fertile partners.

Those microscopic machines already have the coded instruction set for what "buttons" to push, to release the drugs. Otherwise, similar to a machine, it would error out, and not happen. So instructions must exist in some fashion or another.

I would say the possibility of a genetic instruction set existing is almost certain.

Anyone else?

Angels are singing in my head!!!!!

EXACTLY!!!!!!!

THANK YOU FOR THE BETTER WORDING!!!

 

[K_9River_rat]

Angels are singing in my head!!!!!

EXACTLY!!!!!!!

THANK YOU FOR THE BETTER WORDING!!!

Add to that too.. I've gazed upon animals without physical sexual arousal, yet certainly admired them in a sexual manner

 

[JazzyPaws]

And all of this could potentially explain so much that we see today.

One question I ask myself, is what if we lived in a society that was accepting of zoos? Would our numbers be higher?

I definitely think the number of visible zoo's would be higher, simply as a result of not having to hide. I would certainly be open if I could.

In other words, if this is in genetic code, how many have walked around suppressing their natural urge? How many had an urge and never admitted it?

This, I feel, is a number we could even guess. I'd say at least 300% of active zoophiles, at least watch porn. And 500% at minimum have had an urge, at least once.

I think on the prehistoric end, it would have been less likely to encounter zoo exclusive. I would think it would have been more just do what you want in the moment kinda thing.

Before advanced sentience and generations of evolution among all species involves? I would imagine so! And exploratory time when life was new and finding its roots.

 

[K_9River_rat]

And another thing..

This being a mental illness just doesn't sit with me. I can accept all of my other odd quirks as something, but not this.

Illness would be something that screws up my life, but the only way this screws with my life is nothing natural because it only lies in the opinions of others.

It doesn't make it more difficult for me to work a job, hold a conversation, work an electronic equation or take care of myself.

Literally the ONLY threat to me involving this comes from others..