Man charged with bestiality pleads not guilty

“Peer reviewed, huh? The only people that probably reviewed any of the materials you suggested are other people who think it is okay to have sex with animals. Let’s just ignore all of the opinions expressed over the years by other psychologists and medical professionals who have repeatedly”

Those very same ones back then used to claim being homosexual was a mental illness that required electro-shock treatments and even lobotomy to try and “cure.” But that was back in the days when “colored” people were prohibited by law from using the whites only washrooms and had to give up a seat on the bus for a white.
Maybe you rememebr those days as fondly as you remember those psychiatrists who performed lobotomies on gay people to try and “cure” them of their “mental disorder.”

So you are saying Dr Miletski, Andrea Beetz and her collegue who is head of a veterinary medicine dept at a university, and those on the Dutch ethics committee which also included two involved with veterinary medicine, and all the rest all have sex with animals themselves or something, so that’s why they approve? GET REAL!

“And you also compared a lot of other “civil rights” cases to your case in favor of bestiality. The only problem is, that all of the things you mentioned (interracial marriage, adultery, sodomy, slavery, etc…..) involve HUMAN BEINGS!”

And so your point is what? my point is if someone who is white wants to marry someone who is black (illegal not long ago) it is their civil right to do so, same as if a person owns an animal and they have consentual and private relations with, that is their right to do so just as it would be YOUR right if you owned cattle- to cut their throats and KILL THEM if they cost you too much and you don’t make a profit on them. See how that works now?

“So, let’s take that a step further and separate HUMAN rights from ANIMAL rights. And one of the things that animals have a right to is to not be molested by humans!!!”

But it’s okay in YOUR book to cut a steer’s throat and KILL them as you desire, for any reason, or no reason at all right?! if they have the right to not be “molested” as you claim, then they have the right to not be raised JAMMED into feedlots, jammed into semi’s and then brutally KILLED for your enjoyment! You can’t have it both ways!
”
I, for one, do NOT believe that animals are the equal of humans.”

There we differ, I certainly DO believe dogs, horses and a few other mammals ARE equal to humans in every way but being able to speak, write text, use tools, plan a future etc. Your problem is like that of most due to the bible- you see animals strictly as DISPOSABLE commodities to use, use up and discard, that is why you eat MEAT which you don’t need.

” and that it is okay to raise certain livestock for food, as long as it is done appropriately. Afterall, as you like to point out SO often, humans are also mammals. And mammals kill other mammals for food EVERY SINGLE DAY in the wild. Why should human beings be any different?”

Imagine if an alien race of advanced humanoids from another planet landed here and thought the same of humans and treated humans like hamburgers on the hoof the way we treat animals! But that would be okay because it would be “done right” eh?
Animals- predators kill prey animals every day, true, but the difference is they HAVE TO in order to survive. Lions cant decide to graze grass instead of “Bambi” and predators serve an important purpose in the eco-system. Humans on the other hand are unique in that they HAVE a choice and can grow all their own food- rice, grains, flours, nuts, berries, fruits, vegetables and more. Humans on the other hand DON’T serve an important purpose to the eco-system which existed just fine before we came along and tried to “manage” it.

“I believe that inter-species sex between humans and animals is just plain wrong. It simply makes NO sense as far as procreation goes. Recreational sex? I suppose if you have some paraphilia or fetish.”

You have the right to believe as you wish, as I do, and I believe human overpopulation has become a scourge on this planet and it’s worsened with every new mouth added. Time for ONE child per couple laws or something because this “be fruitful and multiple” scheme has destroyed vast areas of the planet and is only getting worse.
Zoophilia IS a paraphilia, that is what it’s defined as.
With sex, few encounters ever are done these days to strictly produce babies, almost all sex today is done recreationally. If you want to bring up the sex is for procreation angle, then you have to include the elderly, infertile, those past menopause, the impotent and others as doing wrong because like the zoophile with an animal partner- they CANT procreate, therefore they shouldn’t have sex at all, that sound about right?

“But the animal doesn’t really get a say in that and I believe they will only participate if TRAINED to do so!”

The heck they don’t, ever try forcing a dog who doesn’t like what you are doing to keep doing it? how about a 1,000# horse? Have you watched the youtube videos showing horse breeding and how most all of them have at least three handlers wearing hard hats, tall boots, the mare is hobbled with ropes so she can’t kick, she is usally tied to a fence post, and then the stallion is brought out and it takes everything they have to get the act accomplished if the mare doesn’t like the stallion or resists.
I have a dog who HATES nail trimming with a passion, nothing I ever tried worked, not treats or anything. I have to literally hold her down with my body on the floor with a lot of effort and try to trim one or two nails at a time because she is trying to get up, pulls the leg away or dodges me soon as the nail clippers come out. It’s a huge difficult battle. Yup, I can cut her nails by force, but she CLEARLY shows and tells me she hates the whole process and puts up a battle about it every single time.
BODY language is the key my man, and that dog’s body language is crystal clear and easy to read.

“Look, I respect your rights to believe what you want to believe, Zoo. And I am a proponent of gay rights, civil unions and gay marriage.”

Same here.

“I fully support consensual sexual activity between CONSENTING ADULT HUMAN BEINGS. I just can’t see that sex between humans and animals is normal.”

My love for my dog is strong enough that I would NEVER do anything like that to her.”

What is “normal” is not set in stone, it varies by culture, geography and time, in India they worship cows as sacred animals, it’s normal there, here we KILL them. In N Korea and other places they raise dogs for MEAT, it’s normal, here were horrified at that.
150 years ago slavery was normal here, everyone with money had slaves and domestic servants, that all changed rapidly.

You are mistaking zoophilia as an act of force or violence or whatever, you just don’t GET what it is and you are assuming with that last line about your love for your dog- that having sex is NOT about love, when in fact with real, GENUINE ethical zoophilia (not talking about the propane man here) the love and relationship is so deep it’s like a marriage partnership, and one which can include sex as an EXTENSION of that.

“Again, you are entitled to your opinions and I respect that. But the rest of us are entitled to ours, too. And simply having a different opinion than you does not make ours any less valid.”

I’d like to say I agree with your last line there about validity, but you see, opinions don’t make facts. I know the facts about zoophilia, inside and out, I’ve studied and researched it extensively from every angle for over fourty years, I own all of the books on the subject in print, including R.E.L Master’s 1966 work on human sexuality which devoted the entire first chapter to this matter, even he back then did not really condemn it at all (surprising for the era.)

When you are faced with all of this, countered by the fact that you have not studied this matter at all, except recently and very superficially due to this arrest, what you are trying to tell me about this matter and laying claim to validity of your opionions on this, would be like my trying to tell a surgeon I know- how to do heart transplants. You simply are not qualified to speak on this issue as a researcher, devotee, or professor of sexuality would be, that doesn’t mean you are stupid, it just means you are looking at the matter through a heavy curtain and can’t see clearly because you don’t have the time, inclination or resources to thoroughly investigate and research this as might a medical researcher, or book author would do.

Bestiality section excerpted from:
FORBIDDEN SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR and MORALITY
by R. E. L. MASTERS
(c) The Julian Press (1st edition 1966)

The question of whether bestial relations are physically painful to the animal has already been discussed, and need to be touched upon only casually here. It is desirable to investigate more thoroughly, however, the question of the psychological and emotional effects of such intercourse upon animals.

The psychophysiological responses of the animal to sexual contacts with human’s are largely, though it would not do to say entirely, dependent upon the methods of approach and consummation, both physical and psychological employed by the human party to the sexual act. Thus, most obviously, the human may largely preclude the possibility of physical suffering on the part of the beast by taking commonsense precautions against inflicting such suffering.

Generally speaking, it is only through sadism or brutal negligence that the animal is made to suffer in these contacts. It is evident also that a gentle manner will suffice to alleviate much of the psychological discomfort – anxiety, terror, panic, etc. – which the animal might otherwise experience in a situation both strange and sometimes seemingly menacing. It is well known that most or many animals appear to respond in kind to the mental states of human’s with whom they come in contact.

Anxiety and tranquility are engendered in the beast by way of the human, particularly so once the animal and man are familiar to one another and elementary rapport has been established. Even very large and sometimes ferocious animals – the gorilla and the lion, for example – have often been noted to be psychically susceptible to the mental and emotional states of human’s. In unaccustomed, close physical contact with men and women, particularly where, as is often the case in bestiality, the human is in a state of unusual excitation, this excitation and contact, especially if the latter consists of partly restraint of the animal, are likely to generate in the animal feelings of anxiety which in some cases may reach the proportions of terror and even panic.

On the other hand, it is reported in some cases that sexual excitation and desire for physical contact are responded to in kind. In yet other instances, doubtless the great majority, the psychical and emotional states of the animal are not spectacular and probably blend elements of both anxiety and erotic arousal. It is particularly worth noting that the animal’s response is far more likely to be an erotic one if, as is the case with human females, it has been subjected to a lengthy period of caresses and what may be called “love play,” leading through fondling to the masturbation of the animal and, in some instances, the repeated apposition of the genitalia of the animal to the part of the body of the human with which contact is to be had.

The bestialist no less than the human lover must, in other words, and bizarre as it may sound, “woo” the chosen sex-object, in order to allay anxieties, and in order to bring that object to a pitch of erotic arousal similar to his own (animals responding to rape even less satisfactorily, and often with more vigorous resistance, I am told,{17} than women). Where this (arousal process) has been artfully managed and fully accomplished there is not, of course, any longer a question of psychical suffering on the part of the beast.

It is further reported by initiates that animals, again like women, respond to competent erotic training, by becoming conditioned eventually to an increasingly swift response to the needs of the sex partner, so that “love play” need not be so prolonged as when the animal was still a novice to the zoophilic relationship. Perhaps the best evidence that an animal need not suffer either physically or psychologically as the result of human-animal sex contacts is the already discussed observation that animals often tend to become very devoted to the human’s with whom they have such contacts, and thereafter may shun intercourse with their own species.

While this is, of course, speculation, it seems necessary to assume (on the basis of eliminated alternatives) that the greater pleasure derived by the animal – and it must be greater to induce the animal to forsake sexual relations with its own kind – is largely the product of the psychical and emotional climate of bestiality, to which the beast responds pleasurably. That is to say, it is not at all likely that the superiority of the experience for the animal resides solely or even mainly in the physical aspects of the coition, which may be surely more satisfactorily enjoyed on a purely biological plane with another animal of its own species and opposite sex.

Rather, one seems forced to conclude, the animal derives a considerable psychical and/or emotional pleasure from sexual contact with a being of a higher nervous, emotional, and intellectual organization, who is somehow able to provide the animal with non-material rewards which another animal is not able to offer. We are speaking, of course, probably in the great majority of instances, of male animals, which either perform coitus with women, commit sodomy on members of either sex, or which are masturbated (or occasionally fellated) by either men or women. It is these male animals which, by almost all reports, become especially attached to their human lovers, and which may consequently abandon other methods of sexual expression.

“Jeez, Zoo! Are you still at it on here? Wow! You just won’t let this topic die, will you?!”

When someone posts, everyone gets a notice of a new post, and when I get a new post response I read it.

“I have to admit, that I took your advice and actually visited your favorite website that you mentioned in one of your previous posts.”

Assuming the wikipedia article, it is far from my favorite, but I refer to it because it offers BOTH sides of the argument. I do not know what “training manuals” you are referring to, I have no control over what people put on the web, animals are not “trained” for sex, the only “training” that I’m aware of is teaching the animal to calm down- you don’t want an excited 1500# stallion flaying his hooves at you and trying to suddenly MOUNT you- this can cause injury. Same thing with a dog, you don’t want an excited large dog clawing and scratching at your skin with his nails trying to mount and hump you.

The “training” would be similar to teaching a dog to not jump up on people and that sort of thing.
A virgin dog also wouldn’t have a clue WHICH end to mount on another dog or a person, so any “training” there would involve guiding him to the correct position.
Whatever other “training manuals” you found were not put out by TRUE zoophiles, they along with all of the commercial porn, the operators of the various bestiality trading forums etc are bestialists at best, NOT zoophiles!
The only other “training” I know about, or approve of, is that which instructs the PERSON on what to do or NOT to do, and how to treat the animal. I think many of those manuals you found probably fall under that, or their original goal was but they failed to convey that intent.

” In many cases, the humans were asking for advice on how to train or coerce the animal to do what the HUMAN wanted to, including graphics descriptions on where to apply certain things like peanut butter on your body to get the animal to “lick” where you wanted it to”

Well I can assure you that THOSE persons are newbies who probably read or saw some porn and want to dabble in it and try it, the peanut butter remark proves that to me. NO ONE who has experience with animals ever uses stupid things like peanut butter, dog food or vaseline, those are idiots without a clue who are wannabe bestialists.
With someone like that, real zoophiles only have a couple of options- try to DISCOURAGE them as I do, or try to provide medical and other information as I do, so that if they are going to try it anyway despite it all, they will not injure the animal or themselves from a lack of knowlege.
We all know people are going to do what they want no matter what anyone tells them, all I can do is hope to DISCOURAGE these kinds of curious kinks who want to “try” an animal, but if they are going to do it anyway what can I do about it!

A real zoophile doesn’t just wake up when they are 30 or 40 or 50 and suddenly become a zoo- the ones who do are bestialists/curious kinks as described above.
REAL zoophiles know very early on in their lives they have a very strong sexual attraction to animals, typically BEFORE puberty, or during puberty. They may not know what to do with this attraction and feelings, but almost universally it starts very young, not when someone is in their 30s or 40s.

“that animals are almost exclusively trained to have sex with humans and not because they possess an innate sexual attraction to humans.”

Not exactly true, animals DO have a large, sex drive, and in the case of an animal never allowed to mate with another of their species, they have the urge and drive and don’t know what to DO with it, that’s when you see male dogs humping the sofa, the cat, a guest’s leg, the pillow, the goat in the back yard, or they start peeing and marking indoors and tearing things up and masturbating.

Once shown what to DO with those urges and that drive, and that humping a guest’s leg will earn punishment and banishment, but doing that with a zoophile owner doesnt, then they redirect those urges towards the PERSON providing the pleasure.
Easy concept to understand, if you want to call that “training” then so be it, but everything humans do with animals involves training of some sort, especially dogs.

“In some cases, people specifically wrote about aggression they experienced from their pets when they tried to approach them sexually. That is NOT NORMAL! ”

I don’t know what “site” you read that on, but again as I said- I dont have control over what idiots post on a web site, and those words are NOT those os real zoophile, they are words of a wanna-be curious kink bestialist who wants to “try out” a dog like test driving a new car.
REAL zoos find that dismaying and offensive, it shows a total lack of empathy or respect for the animal.
The lack of respect is why I don’t approve of porn, real zoophiles dont take photos and post them for all th gawk at as stroke material any more that your husband would post nude photos of you and post them on a public web site.

“And it is funny how you don’t want people to compare bestiality with other paraphilias, such as pedophilia and necrophilia. But you still want to compare people who are against bestiality with people who persecuted blacks and gays YEARS ago. Those days are long gone.”

Why do you find that funny? pedophilia and necrophila have as much to do with zoophilia as
audiophile has to do with zoophile- other than the “phile” extension they are not even remotely the same, and are as different as heterosexual sex in a marriage and the rape of a 5 year old- both involving vaginal sex, but worlds of differences!

I drew attention to the blacks and gays in the context of showing how social things and laws CHANGE rapidly, and also touching on the civil rights issues and laws.

“This isn’t about Judeo-Christian values versus pagan beliefs, either. I can’t think of one post where I or anyone else even mentioned a single Bible verse, let alone quoted any.”

Actually, it’s origins ARE, because if you go back into history pre christian era, you’ll find all sorts of things done, including bestiality as well as various pagan rituals that INVOLVED sex with an animal. Even the Greeks were so fascinated by it their art and mythology included numerous tales and references as well as depictions of humans copulating with gods who came to earth in ANIMAL FORM to do it- Leda and the Swan, Pan and the goat (Pan was half human half goat)
Minotaurs and centaurs- half human half horse, where do you think all that came from?

It wasn’t till the church and christianity infiltrated everything, that things changed, adultry became a crime punished by death as did bestiality, blasphemy and working on Sunday became crimes punishable by torture and even death. It brought in the witch trials and executions as well.
It you had a copy of Joyce Rutledge’s book “Animals in the middle ages” you would read just how the church, religion and christianity infiltrated every aspect of society from the position we EAT at (a table with chairs), to the position we have sex in- the “missionary position” is not named that by coincidence!

All along the Western religion, church and Christianity CONDEMNED ALL non-procreative sex, including masturbation, adultry and wasting of “seed.” In the 1500’s it made sense to build up population, it became the culture and the LAW in every way.
Bestiality was largely condemned because of the bible, and becausew of unfounded irrational fears that some half human monster or demon would result from such a union, that was why the church killed the person AND all of the animals involved, and burned the bodies.
Even that of a 16 year old child named Thomas Grainger in New England.

All of that has been handed down since, including the taboos against incest, poligamy, bestiality, and sex topics in general have long been very uptight, censored and brushed aside in the media and social circles, and peopel embarassed to discuss sex because of it.

“So, if people are appalled by the concept of bestiality, it is because they are appalled by bestiality itself.”

Most would have learned the disgust from their PARENTS early on too, kids watch and follow their parent’s leads a lot, a parent goes “EWWW that’s disgusting” or “those blacks are sub human” and the kid follows along on that for the most part.
The kids learn bigotry against blacks, gays and more from their parents. You find a gay hating teen chances are you’ll find DAD hates gays too and negatively comments about them regularly.

Everyone has their disgust level and choices, personally, I find other human bodies disgusting, unattractive.

“OK, thanks Peter,I’d say anyone who thinks its OK to hump their hound is out of touch with reality and is probably the troll.”

Ok John, no, it is you who are out of touch with reality, the only real objection to bestiality are religious based, the same ones that said masturbation was a sin, killing babies, and evil.
Go read the wikipedia article and learn something.

The only troll here is yourself John, Im here to provide the facts free of hysteria and witch hunt, the suppositions based on
imaginations and hear-say.

by prosecute
Zoo
he should get his ass beat.”

So now you are advocating VIOLENCE, and against someone only accused, who has pled not guilty and has not even had a trial yet, boy, you sure have your hangin’ tree ready and rope huh, just like they did to the blacks in the 50s, just string em up, right!

“Why are you defending him soooo much??? Your probably the propane guy that went out their trying to defend yourself.”

I’m not the propane guy, I’m an animal welfare advocate, and I fully support consentual zoophilia as long as the animal belongs to the individual and there is no force, or other abuse. I know the facts about it, animal behavior, and biology extensively.

“but the fact is its disgusting and for you to defend it is disgusting.”

I really don’t care what you personally think is “disgusting,” that is irrelevent.
Back in the last century it was “disgusting” and I might add- illegal, and considered bestiality for inter-racial coupling/marriage to take place.
It didn’t matter then and it doesn’t matter today.

“its not ok whether the animal is for it…ITS AN ANIMAL!!!!”

So what? it’s an animal, you EAT them every day, you eat cheese, milk, butter- all of which come out of a cow’s tits or “teats” if you prefer, and you have no problem KILLING that animal for a hamburger.

“I really dont care what your justifications are for it or the wikipedia on Zoophilia..”

That’s too bad, so you are dismissing peer review-published, licensed psychiatrists, and sexuality experts such as REL Masters, Dr Hani Miletski, Andrea Beetz and Anthony L Podberscek- the latter two’s credentials-

Andrea M. Beetz is at the Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK

co-author Anthony Podberscek is a director at the Centre for Animal Welfare & Anthrozoology Department of Veterinary Medicine University of Cambridge, UK.

So you even have two peer reviewed published authors right there whose studies on zoophilia have been published in the journals, and they authored books as well, and as a bonus they both are staffers of University veterinary medical departments which is significant!

“its not the same as eating meat or whatever your trying to condradict with it but nice try.”

Nice, try but it IS the same thing analogy wise showing the hypocracy when you scream animal *abuse!!* while munching on a hamburger produced from animal *torture* and a brutal *death.*
Every hamburger, or steak is produced by death not sex.

“Not going to change my feelings on it or anyone else’s.”

You’d be surprised how many people with more than half a brain learn the facts, and research the matter they see the hypocracy of claiming consentual acts with an animal not forced in any way, who can simply walk away is not abuse, and agree for the most part zoophilia is not abuse.

They also see that religious views are not applicable, and personal disgust is not sufficient criteria for laws, or in your case- inciting and encouraging violence against someone.

I am certain this case will go by the wayside dropped for lack of proof, or the guy will pay a fine and be done with it. The fact he is fighting the charges is good, instead of laying down and accepting a bs plea deal which is what they want, admit nothing and force the state to *prove* a case they can’t. The bad quality cell picture will be thrown out as it doesn’t include context.
Then it’s the defendant’s word against the complaint.

Publication information on the Beetz-Podberscek book is as follows, it is available on Amazon dot com as well as the publisher’s site-

Bestiality and Zoophilia: Sexual Relations with Animals

Andrea M Beetz,
Anthony L Podberscek

Paperback: 144 pages
Publisher: Purdue University Press (September 1, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1557534128
ISBN-13: 978-1557534125

Product Description:

Bestiality and Zoophilia: Sexual Relations with Animals is a special issue of Anthrozoös, the journal of the International Society for Anthrozoology — a multi-disciplinary journal of the interactions of people and animals.

Review from Amazon:

Possibly the most authorititve study, ever, into this taboo subject. For
those of an inquisitve nature, stumbling on this title, it is not a work of erotica but a worthy collation of the author’s findings and works of other world established authorities.
The author has researched, as far as is possible, those who do, or have indulged, since the dawning of mankind. The book also provides pointers to the publications of others.

REL Masters’s 1966 book devoted the entire first chapter, over 158 pages to this subject in a clear, concise, professional way, and even his words agree with me on the abuse, and consent issues.

Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality: An Objective Re-examination of Perverse Sex Practices in Different Cultures
Robert E. L Masters

Hardcover: 431 pages
Publisher: Matrix House; (1966)
ASIN: B0007DPAD2

Publisher: The Julian Press Inc.; 1St Edition edition (1962)
Language: English
ASIN: B000STCCCM

A Historical Overview of Sex with Animals
by R. E. L. Masters
(c) The Julian Press (1st edition 1966)

Guess these researchers, PhD degree bearing, university veterinary dept researchers,psychiatrists and many others in those fields must all be totally wrong, and little “prosecute” is right!