Zoosexuality and the Law

This is a tricky topic for me to discuss because I was a practicing zoosexual from 1975 to 2000, and still considered my sexual orientation to be a "female-roled zoosexual " even though I've been 100% celibate zoosexually since 2000, and 100% celibate with humans since 2000.

And I don't believe in my case, a law framed on the stance of;

                                       " Abuse to the animal "

                     would simply be completely untruthful

I can accept the law as; 

  " It is simply forbidden to have sex with a non-human animal 

Yet,

 "I do believe if one accuses another of abusing another, the accuser must prove there is abuse, and prove it simply isn't disgust that the accuser is at issue with"

 "I my case, I've only been the female roled partner with intact male animals and felt they always gave their " Consent ", simply by allowing me to be their female partner, then actual penetrating me and impregnating me with their semen, in turn

         " I felt I was truly performing as their female partner "

I do believe it is disgusting and unethical for a human male to penetrate a non-human animal with his penis, I don't think the non-human animal can give any form of " Consent "

 

 

 

 

 

 

My first idea is that zoosexual behavior must be classified by the role the human takes part in with the animal; Male or Female role.

For example,

I've always taken the female role with my male animal partners.

I believe the human should only be able to take the female role with a male animal, because a male animal can show a high degree of consent and desire by mounting and penetrating their human partner.

I don't believe that I could have gotten Edward or Max to mount and breed me if they didn't want to, as far as I could tell with both of them was; As soon as I showed to them that I could be and wanted to be their female sexual partner, they very much wanted to breed me routinely from that point on.

And without prompting on my part would make the first gesture showing they were wanting to breed me frequently, often many times a day.

(opens in new window)

           The Unjustified Prohibition Against Bestiality:

              Why the Laws in Opposition Can Find No Support in the Harm Principle

                                                  The Jurisprudence of Bestiality

                                                              Michael Roberts*

Michael Roberts is a 2009 graduate from Rutgers Newark School of Law and proud recipient of the Rutgers Outstanding Achievement Award for Excellence in Criminal Law. Currently he is law clerk to the Honorable Edward M. Coleman, P.J. Cv. In September, he is joining Jack Venturi & Associates where he will practice criminal and matrimonial law.

        " In the United States jurisprudence commonly means the philosophy of law "

Since there are many zoosexuals, who consider their sexual identity to be primarily or desire only to have a certain type of animal as their partner in a monogamous relationship.

I myself for example only wish to mate with one certain animal partner in a monogamous relationship (marriage context).

Certain animals be either a jack donkey or large bred dog.

I consider myself exclusively a zoosexual, meaning I wish only to be with these two type animals in a monogamous relationship as their female roled partner to breed.

Granted once Edward and I lived together it became a learned routine or habit for example; as soon as I got home from work, I'd greet him, hang out a bit then I go in and prepare my bottom for him so if he wished to breed me he could, 99% of the time Edward was ready and eager to mount and breed me. And he often would continue to breed me repeatedly until bed time.

                                                                          

Law and the Research

  • Society in general at present is considerably misinformed about zoophilia, its stereotypes, and its meaning.[35] The distinction between zoophilia and zoosadism is a critical one to these researchers, and is highlighted by each of these studies. Masters (1962), Miletski (1999) and Weinberg (2003) each comment significantly on the social harm caused by misunderstandings regarding zoophilia: "This destroy[s] the lives of many citizens".[35]

  • Society in general at present is considerably misinformed about zoophilia, its stereotypes, and its meaning.[35] The distinction between zoophilia and zoosadism is a critical one to these researchers, and is highlighted by each of these studies. Masters (1962), Miletski (1999) and Weinberg (2003) each comment significantly on the social harm caused by misunderstandings regarding zoophilia: "This destroy[s] the lives of many citizens".[35]

  I think as well there is a;  

  " The distinction between "Female-roled" zoophilia and "Male-roled" zoophilia is a critical "

MVI_0934_Moment(5).jpg

Sexual behavior in the human male

by

 

Kinsey, Alfred C. (Alfred Charles), 1894-1956

Sexual behavior in the human male-Kinsey1.jpeg
Sexual behavior in the human male-Kinsey2.jpeg
Sexual behavior in the human male-Kinsey3.jpeg
Sexual behavior in the human male-Kinsey4.jpeg
MVI_0934_Moment(5).jpg

Even though I have not had a sexual relationship with an animal since 2000, I still consider my preferred sexual partner to be a jack donkey, followed by a large breed male dog like a great dane.

I as well believe there must be laws or guidelines covering sexual relations between humans and non-human animals.

Web capture_10-4-2022_13824_12e3c130-a7e9-2090-d375-d5a0f5545ae5.filesusr.com.jpeg
Web capture_12-4-2022_195931_jaapl.org.jpeg
Web capture_12-4-2022_201045_jaapl.org.jpeg

The following excerpt from: " Commentary: Zoophilia and the Law ",

I strongly disagree with as far as my relationships with Edward and Max, I feel our sexual intimacy was intensely intimate, wonderful, and just as intimately bonding as could be found between two human beings.

By no means could my relationship with Edward or Max be defined as; 

            “unnatural or perverted sexual practice,” “crime against nature,”

    " This is simply not true, from my belief, I very much know both Max and Edward enjoyed being my male sexual partner due to their eagerness to mate with me day after day, month after month, and with Edward year after year ".

I never constrained them in any way, and they initiated sex as often as I would.

I think others should have to prove our relationship was harmful to us before making statements like above, I just feel a law should reflect truths.

Web capture_12-4-2022_202656_jaapl.org.jpeg
Web capture_12-4-2022_205322_jaapl.org.jpeg
Web capture_16-4-2022_132643_jaapl.org.jpeg
Web capture_16-4-2022_13129_jaapl_edited.jpg

Data collection methods resulted in an initial dataset of 472 bestiality-related arrests between 1953 and 2015. Two arrests, from 1953 and 1970, were excluded for lack of detail, as were three arrests for false charges; these exclusions would not likely have affected study results. Eleven juvenile offenders (i.e., 12–17 years old) were excluded for legal and privacy reasons. - 

     I would say that 472 or so arrests in 63 years is not a major human societal problem

                   especially since the U.S population has nearly doubled since 1953

              (United States of America 1953 Population: 165,909,9962015; 320,878,310

                                                         The study also states;

Criminal History of offenders;

Although there have been no studies focused exclusively on sex offenses with animals, prior research has found that people convicted of animal cruelty commit myriad crimes. A 1999 study found that animal abusers were more than three times more likely to have a criminal history involving property, drug, public disorder, and interpersonal violence offenses than people who had not committed animal cruelty offenses.

 In a more recent study, most animal cruelty offenders studied had been arrested previously for human sexual assault, weapons possession, and fraud, in addition to crimes involving property, drugs, and interpersonal violence.

Just from my researching the zoosexual topic, I'm sure there are many zoosexuals out there that have wonderful relationships with their animal partners, that by no means included abuse, or any other type sexually related crimes, or any crimes period.

And like myself, are " Preferential Zoosexuals ", and would have wished only to be with one individual animal partner in a monogamous relationship for life, and never had any sexual contact with a human being ever.

              And never committed any crimes, besides speeding tickets etc.

Because my sexual orientation is " Preferential female-roled Zoosexuality", just as below; Conversion therapy can't work to change my sexual orientation as a sexually inverted (female-roled person) as well as change my desire to have only a male donkey or male dog as my sexual partner. I've always preferred only to have a zoosexual orientation. And is the only reason I've been celibate the last 16 years.

 

 

                                The only solution is Celibacy

Just as;

                     Conversion therapy is the pseudoscientific practice of attempting to change an individual's sexual orientation from homosexual or bisexual to heterosexual or their gender identity from transgender to cisgender using psychological, physical, or spiritual interventions. There is no reliable evidence that such practices can alter sexual orientation or gender identity, and medical institutions warn that conversion therapy is ineffective and potentially harmful. Medical, scientific, and government organizations in the United States and the United Kingdom have expressed concern over the validity, efficacy and ethics of conversion therapy. Various jurisdictions around the world have passed laws against conversion therapy. - wikipedia

The following is the only true in depth look at a bestiality legal case were a book has been about it

UNIQUELY DANGEROUS A TRUE STORY by Carreen Maloney

ABOUT THIS BOOK:

                                         A Work of Investigative Journalism

 

On April 14, 2010, the federal government raided Douglas Spink’s home. At the time, he was living 20 miles from my home in northern Washington State. Mr. Spink’s animals were seized and taken to Whatcom Humane Society, the local agency tasked by the government. I’ve written for—and about—Whatcom Humane Society for more than a decade.

Early on, I wasn’t sure I was going to write anything about Mr. Spink or zoophilia. Frankly, I didn’t know what to write. The story was complex. Shadowy. Characterized by a maze of conflicting so-called facts and perspectives. But when the facts I was digging up didn’t corroborate with what was being presented by the media, I decided to keep investigating anyway, with no idea where it would lead.

Initially, Doug Spink wasn’t optimistic about my interest in his personal story. He told me he didn’t need or want a “Kardashian-style” look at his life. He made it clear he wasn’t willing to be a spokesman for other zoos, either. Mr. Spink’s attorney, Howard Phillips, also wasn’t thrilled by the possibility of this book. When we met in 2010, he told me flat-out he had classified me as “the enemy,” adding that he would be relaying that exact message to his client. The media had already savaged Mr. Spink, and Mr. Phillips was being prudently cautious about publicity.

Still, despite the roadblocks, our communications persisted. At first halting over the prison email system, then eventually by telephone and in-person interviews following Mr. Spink’s release from federal custody. For my part, I didn’t think it was fair to publish a story about Mr. Spink until he was released from prison, at which time he would have the chance to respond fully to the allegations being made. And only then would he have the opportunity to produce documentation to support his statements.

Eight years after the raid, I’ve finally finished writing the story, in the form of a book titled Uniquely Dangerous..

 

A excerpt I can relate to well, cause I can put myself in Stephen Clarke's shoes easily;

" What they saw provided the most scandalous moments in the civil proceeding that would unfold two months later in a Whatcom County courthouse: Stephen Clarke having receptive anal sex with Doug Spink’s dogs. Clarke’s recordings landed the British visitor in handcuffs, and became the key piece of evidence federal prosecutors would later use against Spink.

" Why travel so far to meet Spink? A report of a Whatcom County Sheriff ’s Office interview with Clarke on April 29, 2010, after the raid, provided a glimpse into his mindset: Clarke used to own 2 dogs. (Clarke very emotional discussing topic.) Fight between the dogs broke out in a public place. There were allegations that he used unnecessary force to separate them. The dogs taken away and put down. Clarke could see that Spink managed many dogs without them fighting. Clarke’s goal was to see how this was possible. Spink had some unusual views. Spink believed it was possible for dogs to live together without a hierarchy—no alpha, superiors, inferiors, etc. Spink provided no real explanation on the forum. During the visit, Clarke learned more. Spink’s claim was simplistic, but it did work. Didn’t fully understand dynamics. Clarke had many questions: Did Spink’s dogs—all intact males— get along? Did they ever fight? How did Spink achieve harmony among them?"

excerpt from: Why is bestiality so disgusting?

 

Jonathan Haidt, in his book The Righteous Mind, talks about a phenomenon called “moral dumbfounding”. That is: when something is disgusting, and you want to say that it’s immoral, but you can’t think of a reason why it’s immoral. So you end up simply saying it just is. One example he gives is of a man going to the shops and buying an oven-ready chicken. That evening, before cooking it, he has sex with it. Then he cooks it and eats it. Is that immoral? Apologies if you’re having chicken for dinner, by the way.

When myself and my jack donkey Edward became lovers, in my mind, he was my Man and I was his Girl, once we actually were able to start " making love ", I very my knew once he had impregnated me with his sperm, I knew I only wanted to be his " Girl ".

Unfortunately, soon months after I had started masturbating and ingesting Edward's semen, I was seduced by a fellow student at school who offered to allow me to suck his penis.

After his offering me many times over a course of several weeks, I told him I wanted to suck his penis, he lead me to a safe place in nearby woods where I sucked his penis til he ready to ejaculate, then he told me he wanted me to swallow all his semen, I did.

Once I'd sucked his penis, everyday when seeing him at school, he'd tell me to meet him in the woods, so then I was sucking him pretty much daily, yet at same time I'd go to the stables later and masturbate Edward so he could ejaculate in my mouth so I could ingest.

Before long my boyfriend, told me that he'd been telling a friend of his about me and he'd told him that I was regularly sucking his penis after school.

My boyfriend, then told me that his friend would like me to start sucking his penis as well, my reply was; " I'll meet him, yet can't promise I'll want to"

The next day after school my boyfriend and his friend were waiting for me in the woods,

I liked his friend so I sucked his penis, he was quite few years older yet he was very nice to me so I told him I'd suck his penis when he wished me too.

After a week of sucking them both, my older boyfriend told me he wanted to start using my bottom, so he could fuck me like I was girl, I told him I'd never had that done to me, asked him; " won't that hurt, your penis is so big! ", he then explained to how I had to clean and prepare my bottom using veg. oil and long dildo he'd give me.

In a few days he brought me a dildo, told me to try cleaning and prepping my bottom, he told me that he was sure I like being fucked, and was sure once he'd fucked me, and because I was such a femboy type and liked sucking cock so much, I'd really love being fucked and want to be fucked all the time.

 

I very much wanted him to fuck me like girl, I very much was determined to make sure he was able to fuck me.

So that night I was in the bathroom cleaning my bottom, after sliding the dildo up inside my bottom repeatly till I could get nearly all 22 inches of it in me and with it totally clean, I knew I was ready.

When I seen my boyfriend at school, I told him that I had used the oil and dildo as I was told and had got myself completely clean, his reply was; " As soon as school is out run home and prep your bottom, get to woods at 5pm and they'd fuck me"

At 5pm I was in the woods, by 5:10 pm my older boyfriend had me on my knees, and was sliding his big penis slowly up inside my bottom as my other boyfriend came around in front of me and had me suck his penis.

Maybe after 3-4 minutes of sliding his penis in and out of me, he yelled out he was going ejaculate in me, soon he finished impregnating me with his semen, pulled out then my younger boyfriend pulled his penis out of my mouth and quickly got behind me and started fucking me.

My older boyfriend came around in front of me then, with his penis limp he held my head then told me to lick and suck it clean, thus I began doing that, then after he was satisfied that I cleaned his penis clean, he told me he needed to pee, and he wanted to take the head of his penis in my mouth and drink his pee as he emptied into my mouth.

              When they were done fucking me, all I could think about was I wanted

                                               " Edward to do that to me "

                               For me this was Wrong, because I was unfaithful to Edward

In 1986, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Bowers v. Hardwick that a state could criminalize sodomy, but, in 2003, overturned itself in Lawrence v. Texas and thereby legalized homosexual activity throughout the United States of America.

It is only since the 2010s that census forms and political conditions have facilitated the visibility and enumeration of same-sex relationships.[77]

Same-sex marriage in the United States expanded from one state in 2004 to all 50 states in 2015, through various state court rulings, state legislation, direct popular votes (referendums and initiatives), and federal court rulings. - wikipedia

The issue I am trying to convey is:

In 1975 when I started having my sexual relationship with Edward who really knows if it was legal, I know then, whether it was legal was nothing I ever thought of, it was simply a private matter, yet in 1975, for a few months I was having sex with my boyfriends whom were penetrating me anally, sodomizing me, who knows what state had what law?

Web capture_21-5-2022_17590_www.legis.iowa.gov bestiality law.jpg

In both video's below the male dogs were stimulated manually by hand to induce ejaculation.

Hand collecting semen whether it be from a jack donkey or male stud dog is very common.

It is very much legal the "Hand collect" semen from jack donkeys or stud male dogs ?

Web capture_28-5-2022_61731_www.zeta-verein.de.jpeg
Web capture_28-5-2022_61810_www.zeta-verein.de.jpeg
Web capture_28-5-2022_61853_www.zeta-verein.de.jpeg

To make my long story short,

Due to my "Sexual Inversion", by puberty I found myself very attracted to my jack donkey lover Edward whom I befriended in 1973 and then once Edward and I found that I could actually be his female receptive partner, Edward was soon breeding me routinely breeding me just as though I was a female donkey.

Edward and I were together as a couple in a monogamous relationship 1975-1980 other then his occasionally breeding female donkeys (his role when he and I met),
in 1980 I tried being normal and have a relationship with a female yet found that impossible because of my Sexual Inversion".

I simply knew I could only be and wanted to be a female receptive partner for Edward, thus remained his female-roled partner until 1996 when I had to euthanize him due to old age.

Being deeply traumatized by Edward's death,

I remained celibate until after I'd starting to pose nude for life drawing classes in order in part to overcome my being socially isolated in fall of 1997.


Then by chance, (I wasn't looking for a partner) in 1998 I met a black male college art student who took me as his "caged submissive female-roled partner".

 He was soon having me perform for him routinely, he as well began introducing me to other men whom took me as a "caged submissive female-roled partner" as well.

Spring of 2000 I met a Dominate Top man (Steve) who owned Max the great dane, (I wasn't looking to mate with Max), yet one day, by chance while down on my hands and knees for Steve, Max mounted me, I allowed him to continue, he soon was locked to me in a "copulatory tie".

 

The new law prohibiting sexual relationships with animals took effect in 2001, thus I had to decide to break the law and continue my sexual relationship with equine and canine lovers or become celibate, my choice was complete celibacy, I knew I only wanted to be a female receptive partner for either a jack donkey like Edward or a large breed intact male dogs, I'd tried being with humans and I simply am only attracted to a intact male equine or canine partner. 

If one reads how the law is written for  State with I live regarding "Sex Act", it doesn't define that masturbating a animal in order to collect their semen is legal which I did often with both Edward and Max so I could ingest their semen, yet the moment my lips touch their penis it is illegal, or the moment their penis touchs or penetrates my bottom it is illegal.

Web capture_21-5-2022_175952_www.legis.iowa.gov.jpeg

My question has always been;

" how is my need for a jack donkey or male great dane partner to breed me any less important then collecting semen from them as shown below for the purpose of breeding/impregnating mares ? "

The only difference between what is being done here in these " collection " videos and when I masturbated and performed fellatio on my animal lovers is that I'd take their penis into my mouth, thus I was collecting their semen orally for ingesting.

Like in video below, one of my dog lovers on occasion wouldn't get properly knotted up inside me and would pull out of me, thus I get under him with my mouth open so I could collect his semen and ingest it, often my lips never touching his penis.

The only point I trying to make here is my sexual relationship was not animal abuse, maybe morally disgusting to many, yet not harmful to my animal lovers or else they'd never kept breeding me routinely.

-My thought on how to monitor a zoosexual and their aninmal lover-

zoosexual femboy-7.jpg