On the question of the definition of zoophilia, there are two slightly different answers: first, the science and the public in general. And on the other the zoophiles itself.
In science zoophilia is commonly defined as sexual attraction for animals. That is, Affected animals feel (or one or more specific species) as sexually attractive, as “normal” people are just basically to persons of the opposite or the same sex (or both sexes) are drawn. Conversely, this of course does not mean that zoophilia automatically find each animal attractive that comes to them under the eyes. As with hetero- and homosexuality countless factors also play a role here, for example, Gender, appearance and character.
Zoophilia does not necessarily involve sexual acts, but the desire to do so is usually pronounced, so that the Auslebung this tendency is obvious.
There are Zoophile that can fall in love animals and this view and treat them as life companions. In other countries, sexuality in the foreground and less emotional attachment. And for still others, the general proximity to animals merely a preference, the only secondary or even unconsciously acts of sexual satisfaction.
Under the zoophiles itself , the situation is much more complicated. The term meaning is clearly narrower usually because here is an intra-group value system is based. However, even under zoophiles itself is disagreement over the exact definition.
Basically, two different trends can be distinguished:
One group to seize the term zoophilia very closely and set example. A close emotional bond to the animal ahead to legitimize sex between humans and animals. These people are trying to treat animals as equal as possible partner and therefore not reduce it to mere sex objects. Also, they often result in the Zeta-principles on as a kind of policy or even code of honor.
Some other grasp the concept a wneig on and see everyone as zoophiles at which accepts the zeta principles and followed. In both cases, trying to distinguish themselves from the so-called Beastys and lays the term zoophilia ultimately always like that one, even just acquired it. The definition of Beastys is pretty vague, but there is general agreement about the fact that Beastys not fall in love animals and they do not see as equal partners, which is why they are not particularly good reputation among the “zoo-ish”.
In summary, the evaluative categories zoophilia and bestiality under the neutral preamble Zoosexualität, which is identical in principle with the scientific definition of zoophilia. In parallel to two categories, the category of Fencehopper is (literally fence Springer), the search without the knowledge of such animals sexual contact with other animals or have. After understanding the zoophiles community both Zoophile and Beastys Fencehopping can operate, but Fencehoppern is often met with considerable contempt.
And finally, another group rejects the distinction between “good” and “bad” Zoosexuellen on principle, since it is well to judgmental. These people often argue that they also do not distinguish between “good homosexuals” (those who have a homosexual relationship) and “bad homosexuals” (those who spend their weekends in dark rooms) is different, but all these people considered to be equivalent homosexuals ,
A significant commonality However, as different as they to the quite complex field of zoophilia may be these two definitions in their approach as well: In both cases, an explicit definition instead of people having their sexual pleasure from the cruelty to animals draw (Zoosadismus).
