Animal Abuse and Bestiality on FetLife and Other Kink Sites

My response to the thread A suggestion about Animal Abuse and Bestiality in the Fetlife Suggestion Box:

Bestiality is not a damn kink. It’s not a form of BDSM – any more than having sex with a child is. Period. An animal can no more give consent than a child can. Any bottom feeding piece of garbage that tries to fly under the “my kink is not your kink” flag for this issue needs to be prosecuted.

Very well said, @LuciferCat.  And then they ought to be strung up from the nearest tree or at least spend the rest of their lives behind bars where they can’t hurt anyone else, or any other helpless creatures.

Just because someone out there does something and gets off on it does not mean that the activity in question is a legitimate kink.

It is also very well documented that people who abuse animals often tend to go on to abuse people.  It turns out that this link is particularly strong when the animal abuse includes sexual abuse.

While the risk to the animal is most obvious with human males penetrating the animals, the risk from animals being sexual with women is also substantial, although for less obvious reasons.  Anyone who thinks that women having sex with animals is benign also needs to seriously rethink this.  It is clear that at least with dogs, an assortment of negative effects happen to the animals with this as well.

I’m also learning that people use all sorts of tactics to draw attention away from their disgusting habits of having sex with animals.  One of the recent ones I’ve heard is that a written fantasy involving sex with an animal is not the same thing as actual bestiality.  Very true – but when a person also writes that they are “into animals” in a group dedicated to discussing extreme and disgusting sexual preferences, particularly in the same sentence as a list of other sexual behaviors they documentably actually engage in, it is clearly flat out bullshit.  If it were a question of fantasy, or only a thought vs an actual practice, people will state that specifically, or that they are “curious about” it, particularly when they are clearly educated and articulate.

I’ve also seen people who have made such statements then show an interest in animal role play, possibly to distract attention from the issue at hand.  Nice try – but people who are into animal role play do not say that they are “into animals”.  They say they are into “puppy play”, or “human ponies”, or “animal role play” or the like.  The distinctions are obvious and unmistakable.

I’ve also seen people play other semantic games and claim that despite saying that they are “into animals” in a sexual context, that does not mean they are bestialists.  Sorry, but that also doesn’t hold water.  By definition, bestiality involves having sex with animals, or “being into” animals in a sexual manner.

With respect to the argument that eating meat or wearing fur or leather is the same thing as fucking animals, that also does not hold water.  Animals have been part of the human food chain since the beginning of time, and have always provided clothing for people.  That is part of the natural order of things.  If people choose not to eat meat or wear leather, that is their choice – but the evidence is also mounting that those who do not eat meat often end up malnourished because they tend to have difficulty getting enough protein in their diets.  Humans are omnivores.  We need animal protein in our diets.

There are also many, many uses for other parts of cows and other animals that are slaughtered for human food.  A recent article I read listed something like 30 different products that come from them.  I can’t find it at the moment, but will post it when I do, but a few can be found here in the meantime.  There are many, many more, and the products that result are so ubiquitous in our world that it is virtually impossible to avoid them.

Fucking animals – or having them fuck you or otherwise stimulate you sexually – is not the same thing at all.  If we were meant to do so, we would have body parts that match more closely, and we would be able to reproduce with them.  Neither is the case.

Man is the only animal that engages in sexual behavior because it feels good.  The rest do it solely out of instinct, as demonstrations of dominance and pack leadership, and for procreation.  Engaging in these behaviors for one’s own personal sexual gratification takes nonconsensual advantage of the animal and the person’s position of authority over the animal.  It is indeed nonconsensual and exploitative because animals are not capable of meaningful or informed consent – and even if the animal appears to be enjoying it, the animal’s mindset about what is happening is quite different from that of the person.

I don’t think people should tell anyone that their fantasies are wrong, sick or twisted.

There’s nothing wrong with fantasies, @JohnBaku (although I would argue that some indicate very deep mental disturbances, but that is beyond the scope of this post).  No one gets hurt when people fantasize.

What’s wrong is actually playing them out with creatures who are not capable of consent.  The moment people start talking about actually executing those fantasies, or discussing actually having acted on them, that is a whole different kettle of fish.  That’s when people (or animals) actually do get hurt.  And that is not OK in this universe or any other.

Especially people from this community… you know how it feels to be judged and fuck does it not feel good… so why judge others and make them feel like shit.

I’m so tired of this argument as a justification for every kind of sick behavior on the planet.  First of all, not all of us do have that experience of being judged negatively for our sexuality.

Second, and most importantly, just because most of us do have less mainstream tastes does not mean we no longer have morality or the ability to tell right from wrong, or to determine what is harmful to others.  Sane people do not check those values at the door to the dungeon – and they can tell the difference between what is exploitative and what is not.

Unfortunately, the whole “your kink is OK” thing has been taken to an extreme that people use to justify all kinds of horrific behaviors in the name of kink.  This really needs to come to an end, IMO.  Some things just are not OK, and I think it’s irresponsible to always turn a blind eye and the other cheek to people doing such abusive and exploitative things such as engaging in sexual activity with animals and children.

All of you have pictured yourself killing someone at some point or another. Road-rage, a teacher, a boss, someone who posted something online that really got your blood to boil, etc. And none of you went to jail for it… the day you do we are all fucked.

Again, there is a huge difference between fantasy and actually doing what we may “picture” ourselves doing.

Discussing bestiality in the abstract as we are doing here is not a crime, nor should it be.  People who talk about why and how they get off on engaging in sexual behavior with animals, and who use public fora to seek others who want to actually engage in these behaviors is in fact a serious problem, and should be prohibited.

More importantly, everyone here knows the difference between play & fantasy and crossing the line into reality. If that was not the case, I would close FetLife’s doors.. and NOW.

That is so patently untrue as to be laughable, @JohnBaku.  Apparently you don’t follow any of the threads or groups about abuse in the kink community.  That’s a whole topic unto itself – and the problem is clearly growing.  A great deal of the problem stems precisely from the fact that there are legions of people who don’t have the first clue about the difference between fantasy and reality, and who use BDSM as an excuse to perpetrate nonconsensual behavior on others.  I do hope you will not close Fetlife’s doors now that you’ve been brought up to date about reality in this regard.

my very first flag is why would a person obviously opposed to an activity enter into a group and read through threads knowing they were going to be offended.

Sarafina_MM, the threads in question were in groups that are dedicated to legitimate discussions of animals as pets.  Finding the discussions turning to bestiality and people discussing how-tos and posting personal ads looking for animals to abuse in this manner, and other bestialists to be part of their games was not expected there at all.  I saw the links before they were deleted.

There is nothing wrong with being a pedophile, so long as everything will and will always remain within the boundary of the mind or of a fantasy with a consenting adult.

Well, then, that is not pedophilia, @good_kitty.  It’s a fantasy, or role playing.  The dictionary is your friend.  It is when things cross the line from being in the mind of the person to engaging in actual behavior (including seeking out, saving, and/or disseminating related images) that the problem exists.

Or at least it’s not acting on pedophilic impulses, and it’s the taking things from fantasy to any form of actual action that is the problem.

Why do you believe that animals can’t give consent?

AeonMalleus, can animals hold a conversation?  Show that they understand what the person wants to do to them?  Agree – explicitly?  In so many words?  About every detail?

I mean, really, come on.

Why would you think a baby or child can’t give consent?  First, it’s obvious that they don’t have the same powers of communications or understanding as an adult.  Second, absent those abilities, people in authority are bound to protect them from harm.  Both animals and children must trust the people in authority over them, as we hold the power of life and death over them.

This is an adult site…there should be no children here…what would pedophiles want here? …If they are not here then why would it need addressed?

Serafina_MM, no, there aren’t likely any children here – but pedophiles are here not just because that may not be their only sexual interest, but because they troll for other members who have children or younger siblings of the ages in which they have an interest.  I’ve seen it happen.  If you know who some of these people are, you can watch them “make nice” to people who have the ability to put them in proximity to their desired victims.  But that is not an issue specific to Fetlife.

Wow! A bunch of folks who engage in practices deemed aberrant by 99.8% of the balance of the planet being all judgmental about other folks they label perverts!

Actually, @Sir_JMark, there is evidence that at least 40% of the population engages in or has an interest in some form of kink.  The difference is that not all of them identify it in so many words.  At the end of the day, what they are condemning stems more from their misunderstandings of what we do (and not recognizing their own proclivities by the same verbiage) than anything else.

Rebecca, it will be a tragedy if you leave and let dog fuckers win.

I totally agree.  We need people like Becca here.

I can attest to the fact that the caretakers don’t always do shit when photos and threads that violate the TOU in this respect are reported.  I’ve reported a number myself – and they are still visible on people’s profiles.  That doesn’t mean we should stop reporting them.

I also agree with those who question why to bother even having TOU or indeed, even the caretakers themselves, if enforcement is erratic, and is going to be this arbitrary.

I for one, refuse to be shamed about how I feel or what makes me wet.

NudeGirl, I don’t care what makes people wet to think about.  I do care when they act on those  attractions when doing so is exploitative of others and nonconsensual.

So, why do you (whoever you are) think that animals can’t consent? They consent to walks and wrestling and we know that by how they act.

By that argument, @AeonMalleus, people who are raped must consent to the rape oif they don’t fight back. Even children.  Which is total and complete bullshit.  In any event, walks and wrestling are part of normal behaviour with pets.  They need both walks and play.  Both are part of their natural repertoire – and neither one involves exploiting them in harmful ways for our own pleasure.

Where is the Fetlife server located again?

I’ve heard that they are actually in Dallas – which means that the laws of the US apply, and specifically Texas.  I can’t confirm that information about their location, though.

For those of you who advocate just turning a blind eye to bestiality and other forms of abuse, on the premise that it is not your business, I’d ask you to reconsider your stance.  If we are not our brothers’ keepers to the extent indicated by keeping people from harming others wherever possible, or at least speaking out openly against practices that we believe to be harmful and/or exploitative, then we have lost all sense of morality and human decency.

Hillel said it best: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, who am I? If not now, when?” (Ethics of the Fathers, 1:14).  We must all be our brothers’ keepers to some extent.

Animal Abuser Registry Proposed in CA

http://www.exposeanimalabusers.org/article.php?id=1274

This legislation would create a registry much like the Megan’s Law registries for people who abuse animals in any way, including sexually.  The url above includes many links to other sites addressing the issue.

Unfortunately, this particular bill failed to advance, but hopefully new legislation will be reintroduced this year and pass.  I’m generally not a big fan of governmental intervention in our lives, but given the harm that results to both people and animals from animal abuse (and sexual abuse in particular), I think legislation of this sort is critical.  Other posts and links on this blog address the nature of that harm and its repercussions.

We don’t tolerate sexual predators who prey on humans in our midst without a registry; we should not tolerate animal abusers, either, including bestialists, without exposing them for who they are, and ensuring that they are brought to justice.

I will be monitoring this issue and will post updates here on the blog as I become aware of them.  Please contact your legislators and voice your support for such a bill.  Believe me, they do actually listen when their constituents take the time to do so.  It is amazing how few people it really takes to get them to support bills that people support, especially when logical arguments, and factual data are included. A number of states already have such registries, and more are being put in place as time goes by.

We need to get people who abuse animals – including sexually – off the streets and put away where they belong, and a means of notifying everyone else about the nature of their crimes put into place.

I’ve included a number of links on this website to what research on the subject I am aware of, and will also continue to update that as I learn more.

If you don’t live in CA, please support bills of this nature in your own home state, and if none are in process, please approach your legislators and ask them to sponsor one.

The Abuse of Animals and Domestic Violence

From a major national study undertaken to more fully assess the already known relationship between animal abuse (including bestiality) and domestic violence.  Please read the full article as well as the excerpts below.

“Although an age-old issue, the relation between the abuse and maltreatment of nonhuman animals and human interpersonal violence is receiving renewed attention from the scientific community. Two recent reviews of literature (Arkow, 1996; Ascione, 1993) highlight the potential confluence of child maltreatment, domestic violence, and animal maltreatment as shown in the diagram in Figure I which illustrates how each form of abuse can occur independently or in combination with other forms of violence.”

…

“An earlier paper (Ascione, 1993) outlined a series of issues that pertain to the development of cruelty toward animals in childhood and adolescence, using the following definition of cruelty: “…socially unacceptable behavior that intentionally causes unnecessary pain, suffering, or distress to and/or death of an animal…” (p. 228). Case examples from the early psychoanalytic literature were reviewed as well as primarily retrospective research from forensic psychiatry and sociology linking childhood histories of animal abuse with contemporary patterns of criminal violence. One of the watershed events for research in this area was the inclusion of “cruelty to animals” among the symptoms of Conduct Disorder in children and adolescents in major psychiatric diagnostic manuals (American Psychiatric Association, 1987; 1994). Conduct Disorder represents a pattern of antisocial behavior that can persist into adulthood.

“Research examples included the association of animal maltreatment with cases of child physical abuse, the sexual abuse of children, and partner battering or domestic violence.”

…

“…we also know that animals have been abused by perpetrators to frighten their partners, as a threat of potential interpersonal attacks, as a form of retaliation or punishment, and abuse has been implicated in forced bestiality.”

…

“Arkow (1996) cited two studies, one of which was conducted at the Center for Prevention of Domestic Violence in Colorado Springs, Colorado and found that 24% of women (N=122) seeking safehouse refuge reported that their abusers had abused animals in the women’s presence. The other study was conducted by the La Crosse, Wisconsin Community Coalition against Violence with 72 women using domestic violence prevention services. Eighty-six percent of these women reported having pets and, of these women, 80% had experienced their partners’ maltreatment of pets.”

…

“Ascione (in press), in collaboration with a shelter in northern Utah for women who are battered, surveyed 38 women entering the shelter for in-house services. Using a form of the Battered Partner Shelter Survey (BPSS) – Pet Maltreatment Assessment (Ascione & Weber, 1995), he found that 74% of the women reported having a pet currently or in the past twelve months. Of these women, 71% indicated that their boyfriend or husband had either threatened harm to their animals or had engaged in actual maltreatment and/or killing of an animal. The prevalence of pet abuse by children in these families was also disturbingly common. Thirty-two percent of the 22 women with children gave examples of children hurting or killing animals. This level of cruelty is comparable to what has been found in samples of mental health clinic child clients (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1981; Achenbach, Howell, Quay, & Conners, 1991) and in a sample of sexually abused children (William Friedrich, April, 1992, personal communication). In this sample of women with pets, nearly one in five (18%) reported that they had delayed entering the shelter because of concerns about their pets’ safety.”

…

“The overwhelming majority of shelters we surveyed indicated that women seeking shelter mention experiences of pet abuse. A smaller but still substantial majority also reported that children have shared instances when pets have been abused in their homes. If in fact, shelters reporting that children talked about pet abuse always reported that women discussed pet abuse as well.”

…

“We know that cruelty to animals may be a battering partner’s attempt at control, coercion, intimidation, retaliation, and an element of forced bestiality.”

================

all quotes from:

“The Abuse of Animals and Domestic Violence: A National Survey of Shelters for Women Who Are Battered”

By Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D, Claudia V. Weber, M.S., and David S. Wood,
Utah State University, Logan, Utah
Originally published in Society and Animals, 1997, 5(3)

in The Zero – The Official Website of Andrew Vachss

Sex With Horse Results in Man’s Death

Jan 18: Sex with horse results in man’s death.

A Seattle man died after engaging in anal sex with a horse at a farm suspected of being a gathering place for people seeking to have sex with livestock, police said.

The horse involved in the incident was not harmed, and an autopsy of the unnamed man concluded that “the manner of death was accidental, due to perforation of the colon”, a police spokesperson said.

“The information that we have is that people would find this place via chat rooms on the Web,” said Sergeant John Urquhart of the King County Sheriff’s department.

Although sex with animals is not illegal in Washington state, Urquhart said that investigators were looking into whether the farm, located in Enumclaw, 64km south-east of Seattle, allowed sex with smaller animals that resulted in animal cruelty, which is a crime.

There is no evidence that any money exchanged hands for the sex acts. There are several horses, bulls, dogs and other animals on the farm.

At this point no one has been arrested, but aurhorities are not ruling out the possibility of charges ultimately being filed.

At least one man with convictions for sex crimes is reportedly connected to the events at the farm.

The bizarre death of a man who had sex with a horse made dreadful headlines. But last summer’s infamous Enumclaw animal-intercourse investigation did not turn up a rural crime wave of bestiality, authorities say. State Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, however, plans to continue her push for a law barring such acts, worried the case revealed “an animal sex ring, a magnet for syndication of the sexual abuse of animals. People came from outside this state to engage in this activity because people knew they wouldn’t be arrested.”

Enumclaw Police and King County Sheriff’s investigators ultimately expended little time on the case after determining no felony laws were broken. There was no convincing evidence of animal cruelty, and bestiality is not a crime in Washington. Investigators concluded that only three men were present when a 45-year-old Seattle man was killed while having sex with a horse July 2 at one of two neighboring farms where such acts took place in southeast King County. And only one suspect, James Michael Tait, 54, has been charged with a crime, first-degree trespassing, a misdemeanor.

“The sheriff’s office did not find that any [felony] crimes had been committed,” says sheriff’s Sgt. John Urquhart. Thus, “we didn’t look too deeply into how many people had visited farm No. 1 [Tait’s property] or how big an operation it was.” Says Roach: “Right. What’s the purpose of investigating further if there’s no law against it? We’re one of eight states without one. Animals are left unprotected, and it is abuse of an animal to sexually assault it.” She suspects Internet chat has attracted out-of-state abusers, although all three men in the Enumclaw case were locals. “When you are dealing with the Internet,” Roach says, “you just have to assume it’s gone past state lines.”

Tait, a truck driver who lives near the Southeast 444th Street farm where the death occurred, pleaded not guilty and awaits trial in Burien District Court. The second farm’s owner was unaware the threesome had sneaked into his barn late at night, according to the King County Prosecutor’s Office. Urquhart of the sheriff’s office says that “typically,” men were having sex with a horse on Tait’s property, “but on this particular night it is my understanding that horse wasn’t particularly receptive.”

The man who died during the incident suffered a perforated colon after being penetrated by the neighbor’s horse, investigators say. He also owned a horse of his own, according to the Humane Society, which says it is trying to find a foster home for the animal. “Bestiality,” says local Humane Society director Robert Reder in a statement, “is an unsettling and uncomfortable topic.” Nonetheless, “The people who engage in this behavior are victimizing animals.”

According to charging papers, Tait told a sheriff’s deputy that he and the two other men “came to know each other as a result of their common interest in having sex with horses and other animals.” Tait and the man who later died both had sex with the neighbor’s horse that night, according to the charging papers. The second man died while Tait was videotaping the encounter. The tape was later shown to the couple that owns the barn so they could confirm it was their horse, known as Big Dick. Enumclaw Police turned up as many as 100 VHS videos and DVDs. But with no applicable bestiality or animal abuse laws to enforce, authorities never viewed the tapes, Urquhart says.

Roach is still drafting the bill to criminalize sex with animals, which she plans to introduce at the legislative session that begins in January. Her e-mail and phone calls are running universally in support of a ban, she says. The bill, as a draft shows, may include felony provisions against videotaping the acts. Though she considered adding an Internet provision, she admits any such ban would be difficult to police-in part because the Internet is already teeming with animal-porn sites, such as Zoo Porn, which offers “zoo dating.” Her draft bill reads: “A person may not knowingly engage in any sexual conduct or sexual contact with an animal,” nor knowingly “organize, promote, conduct, advertise, aid, or abet, participate in as an observer, or perform any service in the furtherance of an act involving sexual conduct or sexual contact with an animal for a commercial or recreational purpose.”

Still taboo, discussion of bestiality has been opened up by the freewheeling Internet, and other media as well. Recently, on the Alan Colmes Show on Fox Radio, the host asked radical antiabortionist Neal Horsley whether it was true he had sex with animals in the past. Horsley replied: “Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule.” If that surprises some people, he added, “Welcome to domestic life on the farm. You experiment with anything that moves when you are growing up sexually.”

Roach thinks animal abusers are often associated with child abuse, as well: “The studies people have sent me show how abusers develop by starting with something helpless, an animal; next is a child. These are patterns that develop.” But her final bill will have to be carefully written, she adds, to exclude some farm-sex acts. “For example, farmers, in a routine way, inseminate animals with sperm they buy from veterinarians,” the senator says. “That’s an act of [animal] husbandry-that’s different.

http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/5034/WA/US/

Bestiality and Lack of Consent

Guess what turns out to be one of the single largest reasons both men and women to engage in bestiality?  Yup, the fact that no negotiation is required.

Translation, folks: no negotiation = no consent.

“Perreti and Rowan (1983) investigated a sample of 27 men and 24 women, aged 17 to 28, who had practiced sexual contact with animals at least twice a month for a minimum of 2 years…

“… For the majority of men (93%) sexual expressiveness was a factor for engaging in sexual contact with animals over this long period of time.  Sexual fantasies were named by 81%, no need for negotiation by 74%, no human social involvements necessary by 63%, economical reasons by 59%, and emotional involvement by 26% of the men.  The most important factors for the women were emotional involvement (88%), no human social involvements necessary (75%), no negotiation (58%), sexual expressiveness (46%), sexual fantasy (38%), and economical reasons (21%).”  [bold emphasis added] (p. 213)

– Andrea M. Beetz in The International Handbook of Animal Abuse and Cruelty: Theory, Research, and Application, ed. Frank R. Ascione, PhD

“The opinion prevails that any form of sexual contact with animals and especially penetrative acts are per se abusive, since it is not possible – as with children or the mentally impaired – to obtain consent to such an act from the animal (Ascione, 1993; Beirne, 2000).  Beirne (2000) provided a thorough and informative discussion of this question of consent and argued for a definition of any kind of sexual contact with animals as interspecies sexual assault…”

– ibid.; p. 210

“Beirne (2000) states that, independent from the kind of force used and the reactions of the animals, all sexual acts between humans and animals are wrong.  One argument he proposed is the potential for coercion that prevails in almost every situation between humans and animals…  Physical, psychological, economic, or emotional coercion is almost always involved in sexual approaches to animals (Adms, 1995, cited by Beirne, 2000), as in the sexual assault of children or women, and therefore consent cannot be given, and the sexual activity is forced (Beirne 2000).  The decisive criterion… is not the imbalance of power, but rather that one of the involved parties cannot consent or communicate such consent to sexual acts.  Both involved parties must be conscious, fully informed, and positive in their desires in order to be able to give genuine consent [emphasis added].

– ibid.; p. 211

Bottom line – if you fuck animals, or engage in any other form of sexual contact with them, you are engaging in nonconsensual behavior with a creature that is unable to consent.  This is not a kink; it’s sexual abuse of a helpless animal, end of story.  It’s a sickness, just the same as sexual abuse of children.  Your kink is not OK; sorry.  End of story.  It’s no more OK than it’s OK to push yourself nonconsensually on another adult, which behaviour we rightly routinely condemn in the BDSM community.

The section goes on to detail other characteristics of people who engage in sexual abuse of animals.  None of it points to being particularly well-adjusted.  It also delves more deeply into these connections with the known interaction of animal sexual abuse with violence against people and child sexual abuse.

Lecture Addresses Nature of Bestiality and Need for Criminalization Of It

November 13 News: Is Bestiality a Crime?…buggery with a mare, a cow, two goats, divers sheep, two calves and a turkey

Lecture addresses nature of bestiality

The word, even if viewable for only a split second, evokes thoughts and sentiments unlike most of the other words in the English language. The topic, some feel so far removed from, while some dedicate countless hours studying. Bestiality is the subject. The word itself has a strongly negative connotation.

Piers Beirne’s speech entitled, “Is Bestiality a Crime?” nearly filled the Lindsay Young Auditorium in Hodges Library on Monday.

Beirne serves as a professor of criminology at the University of Southern Maine in Portland, Maine. Beirne’s speech detailed his journey in criminology to eventually lead to what he does not call bestiality; rather, he calls such implied actions as “animal sexual abuse.”

He explained his eventual landing in this type of criminology was because of the intellectual outgrowth of his work, his everyday interactions with animals and his teaching. He noted two particular works involving animal sexual abuse: “Of Plymouth Plantation” and “Barnyard Love.”

In the first work mentioned, William Bradford, the governor of Plymouth Plantation in 1642, described the conviction of Thomas Granger for “buggery with a mare, a cow, two goats, divers sheep, two calves and a turkey.” The second work is a German film that displays various sexual acts with human males and females, between cows, horses, dogs, hens and eels.

“The large quadrupeds, such as cows, were seemingly indifferent … while the medium-sized animals, such as dogs, seemed to energetically enjoy the attention given by the human females,” Beirne said.

Beirne then confronted four different questions about bestiality: “What is it? How much of it is there? What are its forms? Is it wrong?”

He explained that, although the actual origins and definitions have varied over the years, bestiality’s contemporary definition “denotes sexual relations between humans and animals — being anal, oral or genital.”

He confronted the problems surrounding young, innocent children and the collection of semen from farm animals for profit.

Beirne explained that knowing the amounts of bestiality is hard to determine, because “one of the partners involved can’t report the abuse.”

Furthermore, he said, as animals have been more removed from rural areas and because pets have been introduced into homes, “most forms of animal sexual abuse are at the home with companion animals, probably.”

As he progressed down the road of this specific type of criminal activity, he created a typology for animal sexual abuse. Beirne’s four forms of animal sexual abuse are: zoophilia, adolescent sexual experimentation, aggravated cruelty and commodification.

He notes that zoophilia is “someone whose preferred partner is an animal.” Adolescent sexual experimentation is defined in its own naming.

Aggravated cruelty to animals typically takes place in the form of genital mutilation and other types of cruel behavior.

Lastly, the commodification of animal sexual abuse is where money is made and paid for people to perform sexual act on animals. Beirne cited Tijuana, Mexico, as a place containing various establishments.

Beirne also presented three ways to take care of the sexual animal abuse problems, but he felt that only one of them would work for contemporary times.

He said that “compulsory humane education starting at kindergarten” would be problematic because the curriculum is often “business based” rather than focusing on humane treatment of animals. Changing this would be hard to do in a society that has a strong focus on finances.

Restorative justice would not work because “nobody would represent the animals” and the animals would have a very hard time testifying against human perpetrators.

Lastly, Beirne said criminalization is the only temporary fix right now. Even though the jails are overcrowded, Beirne said this seems to be the best option.

This topic is not something that is easily talked about, but many UT students found the lecture intriguing.

“I thought it was really interesting, very eye opening and something that needs to be talked about more,” Rhiannon Leebrick, a graduate in sociology, said.

quoted in full from – http://utdailybeacon.com/news/2010/nov/11/lecture-addresses-nature-bestiality/