Bestialist/Zoophile/Zoosexual. An idea.

Well, I already know I'm going to regret the hell out of this, but I have an idea about how to resolve these terms. There's a lot of interest among the zoo community to make "bestialist/bestiality" into bad words, so we can say, "hey, we're not bestialists. Bestialists are abusers and animal rapists." Well, I've looked at several books, and here's what I found:

BESTIALITY:

sexual relations between a person and an animal (1)

sexual relations between a human being and a lower animal (2,3)

sexual congress between humans and animals (4)

sexual relations between a human being and an animal (5)

ZOOERASTIA:

bestiality (3)

ZOOERASTY:

Krafft-Ebing's term for sexual intercourse with an animal. It is usually considered to be synonymous with 'sodomy'; many psychiatrists prefer zooerasty, since etymologically it has a more definite meaning than sodomy. (4)

ZOOLAGNIA:

Sexual attraction toward animals. (4)

ZOOPHILIA:

(also zoophilism) the quality or state of being zoophilic, esp. an erotic fixation on animals that may result in sexual excitement through real or fancied contact; compare zooerastia (3)

Zoophilia, usually accompanied by the adjective 'erotica,' is a term coined by Krafft-Ebing to denote sexual excitement caused by the stroking and fondling of animals. It does not refer to sexual intercourse with animals, for which act Krafft-Ebing reserves the expression 'zooerasty.' (4)

ZOOPHILIC:

(also zoophilous) having an attraction to or preference for animals; especially of an insect: preferring animals to humans as a source of food (2)

Denoting a preference for animals. (5)

ZOOPHILISM:

extreme love for animals; specif., abnormal sexual attraction to animals. also 'zoophilia' or 'zoophily.' --zoophilic, adj. (1)

ZOOPHILISM, EROTIC:

Erotic impulse to pat or stroke animals for sexual pleasure. (4)

ZOOPHILOUS:

having zoophilism (1)

ZOOPHOBIA:

fear of animals (4)

ZOOSADISM:

The act of injuring animals for the morbid (as a rule, ultimately sexual) pleasure derived from it. (4)

REFERENCES:

• (1) Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition
• (2) Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition
• (3) NlightN
• (4) Psychiatric Dictionary, Third Edition
  (Hinsie/Campbell, Oxford University Press, New York, 1960)
• (5) The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary
  (Dox/Mellon/Eisner; Harper Collins, New York, 1993)

I know we'd like to get rid of the words "bestiality" and "bestialist," but like it or not they're here to stay, and the dictionaries aren't going to listen to us. We don't have to say we're bestialists, but the sad fact is, every dictionary I've seen so far says we are _all_ bestialists. We've had sexual contact with animals. Well, that's the dictionary definition. Nothing we can do but deal with it.

There's a lot of talk about "zoophile" vs. "zoosexual," but that's a silly argument: there's room for both words.

The suffix "-phile" means "lover of," which we certainly are. Bibliophile, equiphile, logophile, Francophile, zoophile. No problem there. Yes, there's also "pedophile/pedophilia" and "necrophile/necrophilia," which some people fear we'll be connected with, but let's face it, most Americans are too stupid to know their Latin and Greek etymological roots, so they'll connect on the emotional level rather than a linguistic one. We have sex with animals, therefore we simply _must_ be a threat to the local children. It's not the label on the bottle, it's the booze inside.

The suffix "-sexual" is seen in heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transexual, etc. All of these terms deal with sexual orientation: the sorts of people/things we're sexually attracted to. It seems quite logical to me to use "zoosexual" as an official self-worn label for people who see animals as sexual partners, especially if preferred over humans.

"Zoo," of course, is used by both groups, between which there is of course a significant overlap.

And if we decide to use "bestialist" to refer to the basic act, and kind of sweep that word under the carpet, we can be really blunt about the whackos out there. I think we can all agree that if a person loves animals and is sexually intimate with them, in any way, and cares for their well-being and doesn't hurt them, that person is a "zoo," be it zoosexual, zoophile, or both. And if a person has sex with animals but doesn't respect their wishes, and either forces them into sex and/or hurts them in some way, that person is an animal abuser and/or rapist. Technically, according to the dictionary, he's also a bestialist, but we want it made clear he's an abuser, not a zoo. We can't use the word "bestialist" as a divisive term unless we want to fly in the face of the dictionaries, so it will have to rest on actions and intents rather than terminology.

So here's my proposal -- we standardize our own definitions, using accepted suffixes and structures:

* Bestiality: any sexual contact between a human and a non-human animal
* Bestialist: one who practices bestiality
    (these are in keeping with dictionary and clinical definitions)

* Zoophile: one who is strongly attracted to animals in a spiritual, 
            sexual, or emotional sense

* Zoosexual: one who prefers animals over people as sexual partners

* Zoo: an abbreviation for either or both of the above terms (take your pick)

* Animal rapist and/or abuser: self-explanatory