No.136
Since we have a board now, I'm curious to know about you guys. I'm a little apprehensive of asking this, as I am well aware, through firsthand experience, of the emotions this topic is likely to stir up. Defending zoophilia to the public has been hard, and the ridiculous conflation with pedophilia is one of many reasons why.
Since I am both a zoo and a pedo, though, I want to know how many of you share these interests. If you are both, is it because you're simply a hedonist, or does something draw you to these two things specifically? Do the reasons feel similar to you, or do you get something different out of each one?
For myself, I am certainly a libertine, capable of becoming attracted to just about anyone. However, the two interests are definitely quite different. It is very easy for somebody who thinks critically about it to defend an animal's ability to consent, and my emotional love for dogs is so strong and pure that I feel no conflict whatsoever about my desire to have sex with them.
Children are more difficult, and I have had to spend much of my life reexamining my values in that regard. It began as simply the way I expressed myself, normally, to other children. Isolation and trauma turned it into a dangerous addiction, which I had to be broken of on the path to adulthood. The period after this was marked with intense shame, and a zealous belief that I knew better now, and that I'd never do anything like that again, because it was so obviously harmful. As I've grown and observed things, my views have resoftened; sex with children is still too risky in most contexts, but I have examined what made me the way I was, and concluded that with new cultural influences spreading through the internet, limited and cautious guidance-focused sexual contact with one's children may actually be a healthier method of parenting than the traditional one.
So, tell me, /zoo/! What kind of perv are you? :)
No.162
>>136my paraphilia thing is basically just exclusive attraction to drawn people except when some other animal is involved in the sex. however i do occasionally have irl waifus that i focus all of my irl sexuality/romance on.
in case that's what you are asking No.166
I feel like I'm sorta like both of you, I feel exactly like
>>162 for the most part, kind of do agree with op about 3d loli tho, maybe it's the mix of the taboo and the thrill of the hunt trying to find it.
one of my greatest finds was a 9yo sucking a dog i was in heaven. No.177
>>166Dayum son where did you find these?
No.178
>>177I'm not a pedo and even I accidentally saw some on the darknet at some point while looking for gore.
But seriously, don't
No.180
>>177It was only one video, I honestly can't remember where I found it, somewhere on tor. And obviously I can't share it *cough* if I even have it.
Hell I'm scared of getting v& for mentioning it.
No.181
>>180Also that's the only beast cp I saw anyways so yeah…
No.182
>>166I remember "Jenny." Only thing I really miss from those days.
No.189
>>182Yeah if you know that much you've probably already seen the clip I mean.
No.193
I'm both. And it sucks. Because of my fantasies I hate myself which leads that I frequently think about suicide.
No.196
>>193You hate yourself and think about suicide because you need help with your depression. Get it. You deserve it. I know lots of people are anxious about talking to shrinks because of the whole "mandatory reporting" thing, but that only kicks in if they have reason to believe that you pose a real and specific threat in the present. It's very clear that the only threat you might pose is to yourself, so they are actually legally obligated to keep their mouth shut, just like with any other medical matter.
These things are a part of you. You can't and shouldn't try to rip them out. They don't have to mean that you hurt anyone.
No.198
>>196193 here.
I actually don't even try to push it away/ignore it. I'm hating myself for it cause I constantly think that someone nght find it out and ruins my life for good.
Apparently life as a teen is not as easy as some adults think.
No.204
>>198I know that feel.
That's why it's so important to have some people you can talk to about it. And you might never meet anyone who you feel safe making that kind of personal connection with. If you live in a fairly conservative area, there are still people who might accept you, but far more of them who only SEEM like they would. I definitely understand your fear.
I'd stress once again that you should see a therapist. Even if that's the only person you ever get to talk to, it's somebody. Talking about it on the internet, in a place where nobody has names, just isn't good enough in the long run. To begin to feel better about this, you have to accept that it's a part of your life, and that means you have to be YOU while you're saying it, not "anon." This is one of the things a therapist is for.
No.206
>>204I have a friend to whom I came out (we are kinda in a relationship) but we never really talk about it. A big proven for me us, that I live at my parents place (being 17 sucks) and I can't really go and see a therapist without them noticing. Also, I lost trust in them, because they forwarded information to which I did NOT agree. (i was 8 at that time ansd tried suicide because mobbing) so yeah. It's difficult for me.
No.210
>>206Hey, don't give up hope.
I have come out to two people about it, and thus far, both have been pretty accepting of it. I know I've gotten really lucky in the draw, but there is a small glimmer of hope.
God only knows my jaw took about 4 days to come off the floor when my current girlfriend told me she was into it as well. It took MDMA to bring us to that level of closeness, but it's not impossible.
I hope you all find the same luck I have, and get to live your lives how you really want to.
No.217
>>210you are a bastard and i hate you
No.219
>>217206 here. Why do you hate
>>210 No.225
>>217To be fair I had reserved myself to probably never getting to do something like this, and it just dropped out of the blue, but I ca understand the sentiment. i still hope you all have good luck.
No.228
I've been zoo since I was a kid. First sexual encounter was with a dog, MM. Been in a long term committed relationship with my GF (human to be clear) for a very long time, and she knows about it.
No.241
>>136I'm also both. The zoo is just hedonism. I do it because it's something else to blow my load to on occasion. The pedo however, is alot more important to me. I love children, and they are attractive to me. Animals? Not so much, but porn is porn.
No.253
Like OP, I'm both though unlike OP, I can't really think of a reason why, nor do I think I'm in the wrong for liking what I do. I wasn't touched as a child or raped by a dog, haven't come into any sexual contact with either (unless I myself was a child at the time, in which case experimentaion.gif) but I know that given the chance without consequence, in both cases, I would. And I'm okay with that.
I guess I'm a special kind of fucked up in the end.
No.254
>>253OP here. I'd like to clarify that I don't think there's anything wrong about my being a pedo, and I can even imagine circumstances which would allow me to exercise those desires without feeling bad about it or anything bad happening in general. The conflict arises because I did things that most definitely WERE wrong, and the dangerous behavior got mixed in with those desires which are not harmful by themselves. It took me a long time to sort out what was and wasn't the problem.
No.257
I'm both, no one knows about either, not even my mother who loves me unconditionally.
I've always been close to animals (even experimented with one but he wasn't into it) but I actively avoid looking at children. I'm paranoid as fuck my life will be ruined by someone finding out.
No.268
I am merely a zoophile, but I don't mind you guys too much. Most of you are as identifiably human and compassionate as any other lot. Public perception ruined by a few shit people as always.
My ultimate okay-ness with your proclivities is uncertain as I do not share them and thus have no first-hand experience to work from. All I can say is my existence as a zoophile has left me with considerable understanding that society's expectations of the human creature are all too often impossible to meet for one reason or many.
So, going to get long winded if I keep on here. Just saying that even those outside your community are not entirely opposed to you. It's just the common demanding cunt at work. Stay true to yourselves as we continue to live in open defiance of his ridiculous and ever-changing set of values.
No.269
>>268I'm more or less with this guy.
I do think advocating any actual contact with minors is something you all need to stay away from. Note it's a fine line between discussion and advocating and I go for free speech every time.
Also if you decide to mix both and cross into underage animals, that's one helluva line to cross (this has happened and there was RL porn of it).
But it's very disappointing browsing zoo places where the mention of an underage reference or discussion of pedophilia gets an instant thread lock, even ban. Zoo and pedo are the same basic type of relationship and similar (closer than zoo and homo, despite what some people want to believe) and it's hard to address one without alluding to the other, no matter where the morality ultimately falls.
The most hilarious is watching a board ban threads on pedophilia meanwhile having whole sections full of My Little Pony rule 34 porn. Pedophiles make zoophiles look bad? Sorry, in this case, zoophiles make zoophiles look bad well enough on their own.
No.270
>>269
>Not admiring the glorious horse pussy in all formsWell, I guess that's the point on which we differ.
No.271
>>270That would be an insult to the glory of real horse pussy.
No.272
>>271Not what I said, certainly. I take your meaning though. I look at it as a tributary that flows into the main river of glorious horse pussy and upon which sails many a previously unenlightened young (wo)man who then bolster the ranks of its worshipers.
No.273
>>272Look… It's not cute, or poetic. You want to fap to squeaky rainbow horses, you're free to do it wherever that belongs. But it's whole-heartedly embarrassing when someone of your group decides to associate your genuine sexual orientation with a children's fad TV show in the most explicit way possible. Remember these are the same people who claim they think their websites represent zoophiles and they have to protect their image, i.e. by banning pedophilia. Utterly mind-boggling.
No.276
>>273I don't remember it, because I admit I have no idea what they claim. Why even bring all of this deeply internalized asspaining from whatever internet hovel you're from over here? 8chins isn't shit, you're free of it. Stop giving a fuck already.
Stop giving a fuck or I SWEAR I'll tarnish your e-image talking shit and rubbing at LEAST one out to MLP r34. Fite me IRL. Oh fuck, you'll be embarrassed then. Won't that have a lasting impact on your psyche.
Actually fuck, it might. You're a princess.
No.277
>>276It was worth remarking this is the only thread I've ever seen anywhere on any zoo site where people were free to admit and discuss being both zoophiles and pedophiles. Normally you can't even complain about the fact and the hypocrisy is too delicious to pass up. tl;dr whatever you people do with 8chan/zoo, just don't become like them.
No.278
I do actually wish the pony shit would go away, just because everywhere is choked with it. I go to look at some furry porn and sometimes literally all I get is ponies, like people forgot how to draw a fox girl with a giant dick.
No.279
>>278It is truly an ancient lost art.
No.389
Did you just say sexual contact with one's children may be healthy? In any way shape or form? I pray that you don't really feel that way or feel a sexual attraction to little kids. And if that is the case please god do not have kids if you can't control yourself that way. It doesn't matter who or why sexual contact of any kind with children is scarring a bad for them both mentally and physically…
No.412
>>389No. This a lie told by people so afraid of their own childhood that they have made themselves forget it.
Is it risky? Very much so. I'm under no delusions that the harm always comes from outside. But most of it usually does. Children don't need to be "sexualized." They're already like that. I know this because I held on to my experiences instead of revising them to fit society's idiotic asexual childhood fantasy like most people do.
No.413
>>412not a pedo, but i can vouch for this. i remember me and my best but rubbing our flaccid little cocks together totally nude when we were like 8 or so. buried that memory pretty deep.
No.419
To be honest, I like dicks, and I like what's attached to dicks as a matter of course. I like dicks of men, which makes me gay; I like dicks of boys, which makes me a pedophile; and I like dicks of dogs, which makes me a zoophile. There is not much more to it than that, and I couldn't explain either of them beyond knowing for sure I felt this way even when I was a little boy, myself. As young as six I was molesting male dogs and boys my own age, and my tastes just never really changed.
I find it very difficult to believe either a boy or a dog could end up emotionally damaged by my giving them many happy orgasms with my mouth and rear-end. I'm not the type of person who is capable of causing pain or suffering to foster my own enjoyment. I gain pleasure from giving pleasure; I like to play with a penis until it jumps and throbs and (if he's old enough) squirts. I understand there is no more simple or greater joy than cumming, so it's important for me to provide that feeling.
I have frequently combined these two desires into one, and had sex with puppies. I don't understand why zoophiles think this is wrong. There's something special and divine about the desperate need a male dog has for sex when he's on the cusp of puberty. He mounts and thrusts with such desire and intensity. Dry orgasm or wet, it doesn't make any difference to him; just the knotting lasts much less time (~10 minutes) and he's ready to go again almost right away. I had a relationship with a dog that lasted for about six years. He had his first orgasm with me when he was still too young to make even a drop of semen and had a cute little knot the size of a golf ball, throbbing in my hand, and he had his last one ever inside me as well, knotted good and making a huge, drippy mess. In between he was a happy, healthy, well-socialized and friendly dog that even once sired a litter of puppies with a bitch that had my hotly-jealous scowl for a while for seducing a dog I called my mate. Neither our relationship, nor his sexual immaturity when we started, did anything to him you could consider damaging.
No.420
No.424
I've given it thought from time to time and I figure my kink as far as anything /zoo/ related goes is the taboo element of it.
I've had fantasies of a woman being taken by a dog ever since I was 4 or 5. I couldn't explain it then but I still remember those fantasies in clear detail.
No.429
>>419No one says you're guaranteed to harm a puppy if you touch his knot once or twice.
And much of the vitriol you'll get from zoos revolves around people trying to penetrate females too early, which is a physical risk.
That said, it's a question of whether it's an acceptable risk, as a general rule. Is it a good idea to encourage sex during a puppy's development? No, he's got enough on his plate to learn behavior-wise without the complications of sex. There's no reason you can't play it safe and wait and enjoy sex with no risk when he's older, provided you're responsible about that too.
It's also in the details. It's extremely unlikely that substituting your hand for a stuffed toy your pup would have humped anyway is going to harm him behavior-wise. Whether that's even wrong becomes harder to justify, compared to human children. But encouraging him into behavior he otherwise wouldn't have done is another story. And then you have to find the line between the two.
No.436
>No, he's got enough on his plate to learn behavior-wise without the complications of sex.
That's laughably ridiculous. This isn't a human child; he doesn't have to learn a damn thing more complex than "don't piss on the carpet" and "don't bite people". Sex isn't complicated at all. It's as instinctive and natural and simple as eating and pooping.
>But encouraging him into behavior he otherwise wouldn't have done is another story.
Even more ridiculous. NO DOG, whether sexually mature or not, is going to mount and fuck a human without being encouraged and possibly even "trained" to do so. They're taught specifically not to jump on people, look at humans as being pack alphas, and have no instinctive sexual attraction to human scent or form.
No.437
>>436>he doesn't have to learn a damn thing more complex than "don't piss on the carpet" and "don't bite people"It doesn't sound like you're much acquainted with the burden of training which leads me to dismiss your n=1 story more as luck with a docile dog than real experience representative of dog behavior.
>Even more ridiculous. NO DOG, whether sexually mature or not, is going to mount and fuck a human without being encouraged and possibly even "trained" to do so. They're taught specifically not to jump on people, look at humans as being pack alphasI think you missed the point somewhat, and besides, that's circular! Encouraging unusual behavior may interfere with the very training you assume them to have while making your first statement.
It's not worth the risk. I'm glad your dog turned out ok, it's not like I don't believe you, but you're extrapolating too much from your experience. Plus, I'm not here to judge but some of what you say leads me to believe you might have gone too far, no matter how it turned out.
People experience behavioral difficulties sometimes even with mature dogs and sex. It would not turn out well if random people started following your example with immature puppies in training. Sometimes zoos moralize too much, but here it's absolutely the right call to tell people to wait until their dog is reaching adulthood.
No.438
>>424If you had those fantasies when you were four, how do you figure it's the taboo? Kids that age generally haven't learned not to talk about things yet.
>>436Paragraph 1: sex is instinctive and natural.
Paragraph 2: but you have to teach them to do it.
FAIL
Furthermore,
>NO DOG would mount a human without encouragementFucking seriously? Most owners have to expend significant effort to get them to
stop.
>pack alphasYeah, okay, let's apply some theories based on the social structures of wolves in the wild, which many modern scientists are questioning the validity of for
them, to a version of the same animal separated by thousands of years of domestication and generally placed in an environment that fosters far better development of social intelligence than the brutality of nature. This makes total sense.
>no attraction to human pheromonesI have never met a dog that would not lick up all the semen you could make for it, straight from the source. They might be there more for the delicious proteins, but they get it.
No.439
>>412No it's not a lie, do you know how many kids have been through shit like that and it has ruined their life, even if they lead successful normal lives those memories always come up and haunt them. I've talked to countless people in person who have had to deal with the memories of people like you who think it's ok for kids to have that kind of experience. Even I myself went through this and it haunts me every day and every time I think about it It makes me depressed that some sick fuck like that guy still exists in this world and there are many who are just ok with it. Like most of the people I have talked to. Not only that but countless studies that have gone into this type of thing and there is plenty of science to support that sexual contact with children will always fuck with them. Many develop problems sleeping many turn into sluts and whores and other fall into a deep depression eventually committing suicide. It is not worth the risk is any way. And lastly willingly rubbing dicks with your friend like the guy below your reply said is far different than being forced to do sexual acts you have no interest in. There is a reason there is over-population and society and continuing to head down a dark pathway because people can't fucking get their morals straight. Fapping to pictures and stories on the internet is one thing, actually going out and doing it as far different.
No.443
>>439Your anecdote doesn't trump everyone else's. Just because you made a conscious CHOICE to refuse to get therapy and/or refuse to let go of the fucking past, doesn't mean everyone else did, too. There are millions, literally MILLIONS, of people who had sexual contact as a child, myself included, who don't let it bother them. I knew a guy who lost his virginity being raped at age 14. Yes, it was terrible, but he got over it.
You can also get over it. You just choose not to.
No.451
>>439
>scienceYou mean all those studies of people who are already in therapy?
Yeah, no chance of selection bias, there. The statistics can't have anything to do with the fact that people with childhood sexual experiences they remember fondly don't want to deal with the social stigma of talking about them.
No.457
Pedos are the most disgusting trash on the planet. I hope you die horribly and soon, OP. If you ever have children they will hate you for what you did to them.
My father loved (raped) me at a young age, and if I ever see him again I will gladly slit his selfish throat.
Pedophiles should not ever have kids. You selfish fucks desperately look for any kind of justification to abuse children to get your kicks. Don't even try to justify it, you know it's wrong. You're too fucking pathetic to admit, I'm sure.
Just kill yourself.
No.481
Every pedophile deserves to die, horrendously. You're all less than human.
No.486
>>481Too many people think pedophile and child molester are the same thing...
No.492
>>486Cause they are, now gtfo you fucking shit.
No.493
>>193Do it you fucking pedo.
No.498
>>486They're not interested in making the distinction.
And although zoophiles are a fringe group with similar problems. they seek real-life contact as being moral for themselves so they're not particularly interested in the distinction either.
Although I'm not sure any of these vocal opponents are zoophiles, correct me if I'm wrong folks.
No.499
No.1689
>>438>Kids that age generally haven't learned not to talk about things yet.Yes they have. They have euphemisms for their genetalia and all.
No.1690
>>439>do you know how many kids have been through shit like thatI have before I was even in double digits.
>and it has ruined their lifeIt hasn't for me. At the time I didn't even know what was going on. When I realized some time later, I wasn't overcome with sleeping problems or depression or suicide attempts.
>even if they lead successful normal lives those memories always come upWell yeah, but due to not internalising it as a negative experience as I didn't feel harmed in any way. Revisiting those memories don't matter to me as much.
>It makes me depressed that some sick fuck like that guy still exists in this world>Being upset that a guy like that exists.In your specific case you may be justified but in general this sounds like Paedophobia.
>and there are many who are just ok with itbecause people have a different perspectives on the matter. Many of whom wouldn't speak out on them outside of an anonymous imageboard due to the above mentioned paedophobia.
>Like most of the people I have talked to.It must be a good feeling being able to voice negative opinions about pedophiles without being treated like one. Not so much the case for those who might voice not-so-negative opinions now is it?
>Not only that but countless studies that have gone into this type of thing and there is plenty of science to support that sexual contact with children will always fuck with them.With only the negative opinions being heard of course things will seem biased.
And doing any research into not so negative effects of pedophilia is pretty much a career death sentence after spending how ever many years trying to get their degree.
>And lastly willingly with your friend... is far different than being forced to do sexual acts you have no interest in.I agree and that is rape whether the person is a child or an adult. pedophile =/= child molester =/= rapist
In later years I willingly agreed to do something sexual with an adult while still a child. The adult was very considerate and while suggesting, didn't force me into anything I didn't want to do. While that adult may be considered a child molester I wouldn't consider them a rapist.
>There is a reason there is over-population.Because with the internet pornography revolution teenagers care a lot more about sex with little regard for marriage and with the topic of sex being taboo when dealing with children means they are left to learn/experiment. without proper precautions, with their peers.
>Fapping to pictures and stories on the internet is one thingIn some cases I think this is far worse considering what some of those pictures depict and the ideas that they can plant. Even regular pornography I think is bad at times.
>actually going out and doing it as far different.If they were thinking of actually doing what is depicted in some of those pictures I'm sure even most rapists would be completely disgusted.
No.1692
>>1690Just kill yourself. Paedophilia isn't defensible in any way, shape, or form. It's sick and damaging.
No.1703
>>1692Say that again. Say it a dozen more times.
Maybe one day, if you say it over and over again enough, it will be true, or at least relevant. Maybe.
No.1713
>>1703Children can't fight back. Animals can. That's the fucking difference.
No.1714
Children are capable of verbal communication. It's a bit more valuable than you might think.
No.1715
>>1714Except when their completely intimidated and they don't say anything.
No.1716
Sorry, us zoos will never accept kiddie diddlers. You already give us a bad name by proxy.
No.1718
It comes down to this: although pedophilia and zoophilia share similarities and run into some of the same hurdles due to falling under the same general type of relationship, and understanding pedophilia definitely helps clarifies the issues in zoophilia, and should be discussed - ultimately the specific implications are not the same, and they are not the same problem.
It's not our fight, proper. It's better to leave final verdicts and approval/disapproval of pedophilia outside of zoo venues because it's so damn loaded and poisons everything it touches.
Some people (die-hard libertarians/US-constitution-wavers) disagree, saying every minority must defend the rights of every other, but that depends on your political framework and ideology, which we don't all share. The only thing we generally agree on is zoophilia can be done ethically.
No.1719
>>136>Defending zoophilia to the publicwhat are you even
No.1721
>>1719Not a coward.
>>1718This is more or less true, yes. I don't pretend there aren't problems with pedophilia. There's serious risk, and it ultimately relies completely on the adult caring about that risk.
Here's what we, as zoos, don't like to talk about; it's the same way for us, just for different reasons that make it easier to defend. Animals can fight back! But you know damn well they won't, unless pressed to the edge. That's pretty much what domestication is. And when they do fight back, they'll probably get the needle.
I just ask that you guys not pretend. Zoophilia and pedophilia are meaningfully different. But the complex sets of ethical questions they raise are related, and if you categorically throw one of them out based on normals' definitions of consent, you'd better stop sucking off dogs, too.
No.1723
>>1721You can't compare the two! Sex with animals and the atrocity you keep trying to equivalent us are completely different. Children are naive and easily coerced.
They're no exceptions to pedophiles. You ARE molesters. No ifs, ands, or buts.
No.1724
>>1723
>Children are naiveA great deal less than you think. When I was eight, I wanted sex. And so did my friends of the same age. The only reason we didn't do it is that the internet wasn't around, so our main source of info was medical diagrams that gave us no clue about how to physically accomplish it. I wasn't molested by an adult, ever, and to the best of my knowledge, neither were any of my peers. Kids aren't asexual.
Now think about how it'll be for kids born after the internet. Porn is EVERYWHERE. Parents can't effectively hide it from them.
The main thing kids are naive about are the social consequences of having sex. Those consequences mainly exist because of historical repression that isn't going to stay the way it is for much longer.
Meanwhile, if you think domesticated animals aren't easily coerced, you have no idea what "domesticated" means. Our main real defense against this is... "Well we don't do that! We're not like those other gross dogfuckers who do!" I know we don't, you know we don't. But how can THEY possibly know? How do they know we didn't just train that dog to fuck us, which would be called grooming if done to a child? It has to come down to personal trust, you can't be absolute about it.
No.1725
>>1724You act like you've never encountered dogs. Males will fuck just about anything and females will try to get anything to fuck them once they hit their heat cycle.
Go to the pedo boards and instigate a mass suicide ceremony with your fellow kidfuckers.
No.1726
>>1724It's also extremely easy to put programs on computers and phones to prevent visitation to adult sites. You're wrong about everything.
No.1727
>>1721>based on normals' definitions of consentConsent is a secondary concern in relationships with an intellectual dependent.
There are other implications in pedophilia - that zoophilia does not have - that make it immoral to act upon. I'm not interested in talking about them further because they are not present in zoophile relationships.
No.1728
>>1725Lots of dogs are like that. Lots of other ones aren't. You're full of shit if you think some people don't apply encouragement.
>>1726Hahaha fucking seriously
You think parental control software works
That's golden
>>1727If you're not going to say what they are, you don't get to claim that they do or don't apply anywhere.
No.1730
>>1728>If you're not going to say what they are, you don't get to claim that they do or don't apply anywhere.That's nice. I don't feel any pressure to care, because most zoophiles don't want to be associated with pedophiles anyway. All's well that ends well.
No.1732
>>1730That's funny, because of all the zoos I've talked to personally, in private, exactly one of them had a problem with pedos, and only one other one was not, in fact, also a pedo.
The online zoo community at large is full of people who protest way too fucking much. The anti-pedo stuff is a PR front, and you know it.
No.1733
>>1732You're confused. You're confusing anti-pedos with people who just don't want to be associated publicly with pedos.
8chan/zoo is the zoo board I know of where this discussion is not banned or avoided.
No.1735
No.1736
>>1733And god bless. I had enough of the fakery endemic to online zoo communities years ago. It's always either porn boards full of illiterate shitstains like Beastforum or anti-porn boards full of pretentious romantic moralizing bullshitters like knotty.me. I'm tired of zoos being so far up their own ass about PR.
No.1738
>>1736I'm of the opinion of not giving a shit about public relations per se - I would rather the public see only facts, good or bad - but I did care how the zoo community presents itself to its own members and what it encourages, because new people.
But anyway. You're just not going to get zoo to tolerate pedo the same way you won't get LGBT to tolerate zoo. Everyone's going to defend their own problems, and each is encumbered by the next, very explicitly in media articles. That apparent selfishness ticks off the libertarians even more than it ticks you off, but I don't see any obligation to care in these international groups where we only have one thing in common, I prefer to stick to that thing, just a matter of staying on-topic and not taking on the whole world twice over.
No.1739
>>1738Well, accept more than tolerate.
No.1741
>>1738(well I would prefer the public see as little as possible, really, but I meant insofar as what's unavoidable or what's pushed up people's asses by the 'zoo rights' fiends that I couldn't stop)
No.1742
I don't want to fuck a kid but when I was a kid I wanted to be fucked so badly that it angered me to the point where as an adult I refuse to fuck other people out of spite. Animals are way more interesting anyway.
No.1771
>>1742>I don't want to fuck a kid but when I was a kid I wanted to be fucked so badly that it angered me to the point where as an adult I refuse to fuck other people out of spite.5 star post. Best reason for staying a virgin (with humans) I ever heard.
No.1868
So I'm 17 and I'm a zoo. My gf is 11. Everything is consensual. So I guess I fall into both categories.
No.1871
I'm a pedophile and zoophile. I find the concept of other beings getting pleasured attractive. A child and an animal don't have the social inhibitions that adults do. They don't hide their stomachs or worry about pleasing you. They just like to get off purely, simply. I also find them to be beautiful looking, not just sexually.
I don't look at CP or would ever touch a kid, though. I realize that a child will eventually come to be influenced by society's morals. I don't want to support or cause mental scarring in a being for any reason.
Animals, however, literally can't comprehend the shame associated with sex, ownership, the act of taking advantage, etc. I'm fine with supporting proper zoophilia for this reason.
No.1886
>>1868>So I'm 17 and I'm a zoo. My gf is 11.Dude...
No.1887
>>1868>Everything is consensualI don't think you understand that concept.
No.1888
>>1887About as well as the concept of a soul.
No.1901
>>1871Not sure I follow all those reasons but sounds you got the ends right.
No.2070
Why do you pedos think zoo's want to be associated with you? I, for one, want nothing to do with you guys. Go and do your own thing away from me and the zoo cause and in turn I'll leave you alone.
No.2401
No.2463
No.2464
>>136
probably because i was an outcast as a child. i was mistreated by many kids, particularly girls. and i had a few traumatic experiences with girls before i hit HS. i was always very close with nature and animals though. so i suppose theres always a feeling that animals "understand me", and "i understand them".
the reason for my social distress was because i had (not fully diagnosed, but the symptoms were obvious) ahzbergers, and had to learn how to socialize properly with folks. i can talk and live just fine with people normally now, but it was a long and difficult road for me. and animals were always there to be kind to me, and never judged me for having difficulty.
also dolphin pussy. need i explain more?
No.2499
>>2495
You deserve an ass kicking.
No.2500
>>2495
other anon. i know what you mean im 19 and i like older women 30s-40s but the more time flies by, the opportunity for the "perfect window" fades away
No.2503
>>2495
>showing your face on a zoophile site
shiggiest diggy
also reported for underage.
No.2504
>>2495
>showing your face on a zoophile imageboard
fucking retard
>>2503
It's not against the rules to be underaged on 8chan, not even on porn boards.
Not sure how hotwheels is getting away with that legally.
No.3981
>>177
Is It a joke? How new are you?
No.4067
>>3981
>quoting a 9 months old post
No.4135
God these arguments are always so pathetic.
>"children are easy to manipulate!"
>"animals cannot consent!"
>"pedos go kill yourselves!"
>"Muh morals!"
Seriously can you all just get a fucking grip?
These arguments get us nowhere. Every time they happen, we just get at each others throats and use our personal morals to back popular opinion, rather than looking up real facts and statistics.
Experience is always key in these situations, so if you've been a kid and been involved in a sexual situation you weren't fully aware of at that time, you have real facts to base your opinions off of.
Otherwise you look for the real facts, like these:
http://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-abuse-and-neglect/child-sexual-abuse/what-is-csa/
And as for zoo's, and the whole "animals can't consent" thing, have you ever actually owned a dog? They get frisky all the god damn time. Especially in heat season.
Many animals are like that when they need to fuck something/be fucked, they will show signs and get a little frisky if necessary. Animals don't enjoy sex like we do, it's like an extremely bad itch that only sex can scratch, and they'll fuck anything to get rid of that itch. At any other time that sex might occur outside of a heat, it can just be considered a small pleasure or an annoyance in the case of horny male animals being dicks to female animals.
No.4139
>>4135
>Animals don't enjoy sex like we do
I don't know about others, but dogs certainly do. Prepubescent or neutered male dogs can get just as much out of knotting with your butt as can a hormonal intact male.
No.4147
>>4135
>Animals don't enjoy sex like we do, it's like an extremely bad itch that only sex can scratch, and they'll fuck anything to get rid of that itch.
Sounds pretty fucking similar to me. The problem with the human exceptionalist view of sexuality isn't that animals are capable of incredibly deep emotional nuance like we are; they are more complex than most people know, but nothing like the mystical, romanticized stuff the hippy-dippy nutbars on most non-anon zoo forums talk about.
No, the problem with it is believing that humans are special. All our "emotional nuance," especially with regard to sexuality, is just knots of social anxiety, made possible by language that is sophisticated enough to communicate abstracts but not sophisticated enough to do it with any clarity whatsoever, layered on top of exactly the same hormonal, horny hump-drive. Which is pretty much never at zero under normal circumstances, in any species, it just ebbs and flows. Our culture's approach to sexuality is better proof than anything else that the difference between "mental illness" and "emotional nuance" is largely how many people are affected by it.
Your assertion that there aren't any female animals that enjoy sex outside of heat or estrus or whatever it's called in their species is also totally bogus. I have personally met some bitches who were absolute sluts. I'm not even interested in bitches and generally don't fool with them, this was just her observed behavior with other dogs.
Finally, that article is... really silly. If you take the way it defines child sexual abuse at face value, it's outright admitting that not all adult-child sexual contact is abusive, which I FUCKING GUARANTEE they would try to get you investigated for if you even ASKED them about it directly. Everything written there starts with the axiom that absolutely no prepubescent or pubescent children want or are even curious about sex, and would absolutely never enjoy it. I know just from remembering my own childhood that that is horseshit.
No.6679
>>269
confusing mlp yiff (furry) with zoophilia.
so it'd be certain furs making zoos look bad.
No.6790
>>136
so what exactly are you?
zoophile (animals)
pedophile (human children / minors)
pedozoopile (immature animals)
do you have a zoopedophilia fetish (watching human children having SWA)?
No.6798
Alright, maybe I can help separate pedophilia from zoophilia.
Imagine a human, at a very young age, a child, normal child. A trusting child, who looks up to adults, because they don't know any better.
Now have that adult "encourage" sex, when the child is not mentally or physically ready.
Pedophilia.
Now imagine another human, graduated school, maybe college, but cannot speak, has never spoken a word of any verbal language, and perhaps that is because they are entirely deaf. Just work with me on this one.
So, a deaf human, who cannot speak, cannot verbally communicate. Now, introduce another human, who is perfectly normal. For whatever reason, these two people grow close, but they cannot very well communicate. It's an incredibly basic dialog between them.
The speaking human who knows verbal language perfectly, is eventually interested in sex with the fully mature, but non-speaking human.
The speaking human, suddenly very brave, strips naked, and using the limited gestures of dialog, encourages the non-speaking human to engage in sex.
How is this different from stripping down and offering yourself to a dog to mount?
In neither situation, non-speaking human, or dog, can the two parties verbally communicate.
No.6800
>>6798
graduating school requires reading comprehension and writing skills. so while verbal consent isn't an option, written consent certainly is.
a better example would be an explorer meeting with uncontacted people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples)
or someone whose verbal/written language is not your own. making body language the only option of communication.
of course people would look weird at a "civilized" person who goes and "marries down" a "primitive" human.
but hey, its still a human. and though not civilized, its still less "degrading" than marrying a (non-human) animal.
thats what society would say anyways.
No.6801
>>278
There's an easy solution to that:
https://e621.net/post/index/1/feral%20gay%20-mlp
if it weren't for that -mlp I would probably never browse (doesn't help 99% of furry is unusable to begin with, but you get the idea)
>>6679
I don't think you understand
No.6802
>>6798
thats not what i was asking. i know the difference between zoo and pedo.
i was wondering if OP (or anyone else who is both zoo and pedo) was only a
zoophile (human with animal) and
pedopile (human with human child)
or whether they were in addition to that also into
pedozoo (human with foals/cubs/pups/calfs) or
zoopedo (underage human with animals)
or all of the above
No.6805
>>6802
It looked to me like some people can't nail down the difference between the two. So that isn't actually intended for you, assuming you do know the difference.
>>6800
oh. I forgot about writing. But, the idea is still there, anyways.
No.6808
>>6798
>>6805
i agree. but people don't see it that way.
you need to come up with a better way to illustrate the differences because
animals can't give verbal or written consent unlike human children.
children are perfectly capable of written / verbal consent.
No.6848
>>6808
>you need to come up with a better way to illustrate the differences because
im not >>6798
someone (human or nonhuman) who is not sexually mature, can't have a properly developed sexual drive.
therefore "using" human children is abuse, since they can't fully comprehend the world of sexuality.
written or verbal consent is irrelevant. what is relevant is that the "partner" in question is mature and thus has a properly developed sexual drive.
No.6887
Thanks fuckers for attracting pedospamming cunts. Go kill yourselves.
No.8096
>>6887
We are all a mix of a little bit of everything. The percent of the mixture of what the individual is into like varies from person to person.
No.8112
>>6848
Being unable to comprehend the world of sexuality would disqualify all of us, myself included.
It's just unkind to use a child sexually. What about simply considering the rights of the person involved? Such consideration would cause me to wait until they're well into their 20s.
No.8115
>>8112
There's nothing to suggest children don't enjoy sex, aren't sexual, or don't experience sexual desires. Quite the opposite, actually.
No.8121
>>8115
For my own part, I can actually say with a fair amount of certainty that my emotional development was harmed by a lack of sexual expression. I wanted it, more than anything, and it wouldn't happen because I was too young for everyone around me to consider it socially acceptable.
No.8125
>>136
I'm mostly attracted to adult animals,
attracted to some young animals,
attracted to a very few types of adult humans,
not attracted to human children at all.
No.8130
>>8121
Depends on your definition of the word "child." I agree with you about that. I was harmed using my expressions of sexuality as an excuse.
No.8132
>>8096
>The percent of the mixture of what the individual is into like varies from person to person.
you did not answer the question. this guy >>8125 did. try again?
No.8142
>>8112
>Being unable to comprehend the world of sexuality would disqualify all of us
i wasnt talking about understanding the biological processes that happen during attraction, lust, love, sex, fertilization, gestation, birth, etc.
i was talking about an instinctive and emotional understanding of love (and lust). and that can occur only after puberty (sexual maturity)
is reached and only after a matured person actually falls in love and begins to experience what that feels like. explaining what love/lust is to
someone who has never experienced that, would be like explaining color to a blind man.
>It's just unkind to use a child sexually.
agreed. yet people make the same arguments regarding zoosexuality. and >>269 even says that
>it's hard to address one without alluding to the other
i disagree.
>What about simply considering the rights of the person involved?
because rights are arbitrary, and the second people lower the age of consent, said child is not longer protected by said rights.
would pedophilia then become magically moral? no. so rights are a secondary issue here.
>Such consideration would cause me to wait until they're well into their 20s.
why? legally speaking this would depend on the country/state of residency. yet ethically there is no way to meet the 20 yo mark.
No.8143
>>8142
Our culture's idea of puberty as some kind of milestone you have to pass before your body and mind start doing the good stuff is broken shit that drastically oversimplifies the actual mechanics of development. Puberty is a process of processes which takes years to fully work itself out. It can begin as young as six or seven and might not end until one's early twenties.
Even before this point, sexual pleasure is possible, and sexual attention may be desired; I know this because that was me. At some point after the process has begun, the desire intensifies, at a different age for each person, to an important emotional need. Discouraging children from expressing that need and seeking its fulfillment in healthy ways is how you wind up with... pretty much everything about how sexuality works in Anglophone culture. It's not healthy, and the only reason handling things differently tends to be damaging is due to social pressure.
No.8146
Zoo has nothing to do with pedo.
So please stop posting.
No.8148
No.8173
>>8115
>There's nothing to suggest children don't enjoy sex,
there's nothing to suggest children don't enjoy cigarettes, alcohol or pulling wings off of flies.
that does not mean its automatically good for the development of a child to practice such things.
>aren't sexual,
maybe. but self exploration is one thing. exploitation is another.
No.8174
>>8121
>my emotional development was harmed by a lack of sexual expression.
no it wasnt.
>I wanted it, more than anything, and it wouldn't happen because I was too young
but thats only natural. children want to be like adults. and children
hate being told "you are too young for that", whether it be driving a car, drinking, internet/tv or sex.
there is a certain age that needs to be reached before someone can safely practice anything, such as driving a car,
or watching an r-rated movie. its hard to draw the line at what point a child is ready for anything,
but fact is, there is a point in life where a child is "too young" to be able to do whatever.
>>8130
>I was harmed using my expressions of sexuality as an excuse.
what does that even mean?
No.8182
>>8173
Alcohol and cigarettes are literal poisons to the body. Sex is not automatically physically harmful. That's a false equivalency. And honestly, many other cultures outside America freely allow children to drink/smoke, so you're wrong either way.
No.8200
>>8174
You can't tell me I wasn't. You didn't live that life.
Having strong sexual desires before most people expressed same contributed to a pervasive feeling of isolation. My peers couldn't relate to me, and adults found me unnerving. I was subjected to constant ridicule and ostracism for developing and expressing a libido too early. Not having any friends for most of my childhood as a result, my social development was delayed. My approach for many years wound up being, basically, "I can't understand these people, and they can't understand me, so fuck it, I'll just act the way it feels natural." Which sounds like a powerful statement of freedom, but when you live in a socially conservative area and you're a shameless hornball, all it means is that you're an insufferable faggot that nobody likes. I never even had a chance to date until I was twenty.
If I'd had somebody to help me understand my desires and how to relate to people, instead of constantly being told "you're too young for that," most of what's wrong with my life probably wouldn't have happened.
No.8201
>>8200
I'd have helped with that back in the day.
No.8205
>>8200
Did I ever live just that kind of life. But I feel like the people who hurt me were broken. I'm the one who said that they used my sexuality as an excuse to hurt me. You just expressed very well exactly what I mean. This behavior is way too common among immature neurotics.
No.8219
>>8205
If I'm an "immature neurotic," it's because of that isolation, because of feeling unwanted for so long. I never had a chance to develop a pre-verbal understanding of most people's model of appropriate intimacy, so I developed in a different way. That way isn't wrong. The way I am is only unhealthy because people don't tolerate it around them. I'm far from the only one like me, there's more of us being created all the time because of the way the internet is encouraging this bizarre mixture of alienation and over sharing. Sometime in the next fifty years there's going to have to be a sea change in the way we handle sexual development. What I am could've been prevented, but our current social structure considers the cure and the disease to be too similar to each other.
To bring this all back to the original topic of the thread, this sort of thing, the desperation some feel during childhood that they don't know how to handle, is more often than not a common thread in both zoo and pedo. We don't like to talk about it, because it's exactly what they accuse us of; "preying" on something that perceive as sexually vulnerable because we "can't get any." Of course, most of us felt a tug in this direction before we knew there were rules against it. But before you know there are rules, you're not going to hide it either, and so your earliest curiosities get rebuked and you learn the rules quickly. For most people, that'd be the end of it. But we wind up doing things differently. We break those rules eventually, because something we need seems more important than they are. It is only desperation that can break a barrier like that. Whether it's because our attraction is too strong or because we have no other comfort, we have a great need.
Recognizing these and other similarities between zoo and pedo is the only way we can coherently talk about their differences. If you want to advocate for either one, you have to know and admit these things. Whenever somebody claims zoo has nothing to do with pedo, or vice versa, (/younglove/ thinks we're disgusting, you know) I scoff. It's nearly as stupid as when people do the same with pedo and incest. No, they aren't the same. They stand next to each other, though. You really can't talk about one without addressing the other. If for no other reason, They won't let you.
No.8226
>>8219
Their perceptions are distorted and what they will "let" people do, well, whatever. I am calling the people who attack zoos "immature neurotics" because they are immature and neurotic. I've seen seriously sick, neurotic, bullying behavior from children at least as young as 7 years old. They treated me that way before I had any idea what sex was.
No.8232
>>8226
Oh, no doubt about that. Literally nobody actually cares about consent when it comes to zoophilia. They just get angry or scared about it because it's icky, and they can't tell the difference between dogs and children, so they think nobody else can. Next time some idiot complains about consent, ask them what they think of police or military working dogs. If we can make them into soldiers against their will, we should be able to make them into hookers, too.
No.8235
>/younglove/ thinks we're disgusting, you know
lol, thats rich...
> Recognizing these and other similarities between zoo and pedo is the only way we can coherently talk about their differences.
there are similarities but it really gets my goat (heh) when pedos automatically assume that everyone else is attracted to children but is just hiding it. Worse is when they think I must like children simply because I'm a zoo and apparently the two are similar.
Honestly I think they're jealous of the fact zoos can have zoo porn and they cant have their porn (well they can but they get vand a lot more than we do).
No.8239
>>8235
>it really gets my goat (heh) when pedos automatically assume that everyone else is attracted to children but is just hiding it
Hah. Zoos project the exact the same way, all the time, much more from what I've seen. It gets old. I end up I can't stand people who think that way. It's borderline religious.
No.8240
>>8219
>We break those rules eventually, because something we need seems more important than they are
When I was 12, I had a very powerful sexual relationship with a 10-year-old boy. When he one day suddenly refused to do anything else with me (likely due to finding out that what we were doing was "wrong") I nearly raped him in my desperation. But up to that point, he'd been just as desperate to do those things with me, too.
People who think children can't be in love, or be desperately horny, or be rapists, because they're just cute little sexless innocent angels are more naive than actual children.
No.8242
>>8235
Well, the thing is that comes from somewhere. It is obviously not true that everyone wants to fuck kids. It is completely true, however, that the average male is wired to get stiff from neotenous features. The actual incidence of pedophilia has to be way higher than the statistics directly show. If you know that, and you start turning a critical eye towards the way the advertising industry uses this fact, confirmation bias makes pedos magically appear everywhere around you.
No.8247
>>8242
The people who pretend to have the right to run things taught us their idea of sexual morality by seriously injuring, even killing people, so the whole thing is seriously shot to pieces, no good at all.
No.8258
>>8242
In other words, who's going to know what's really right or wrong? I make my mistakes on the side of being kind to children an animals, but an animal who likes sex with humans has a better life because of it. Under 18 humans can catch way too much damage from the people who supposedly care of them, so that's one more reason why I stay away. Besides not having the attraction. I feel for them but I still feel like I just barely crawled out of that shit and haven't found a Silkwood shower yet.
No.8262
>>8258
>an animal who likes sex with humans has a better life because of it
Unless a normie finds out about it.
Guess what else works that way.
No.10012
>>8240
recently read a powerful, sad story with some striking similarities to this.
No.10013
i'm both. zoo and pedo. the zoo i'm ok with. the other's a struggle. but yeah. certain things happened when i was young and well there you have it. and please save yourself the keystrokes telling me to kill myself. that ain't gonna happen.
No.10014
not a pedo but I fap to underage art all the time
No.10031
not a pedo either. I find it disgusting, but sometimes I cant help and wonder if the only reason I find pedo
disgusting is the same reason other people find zoo disgusting. I'm curious, what are some of the most common
arguments made against pedosexuality? And do they all fail like the zoo arguments? I'm curious to know.
I'm not afflicted with pedo so I wont spend my time on such websites to encounter stupid arguments.
But some pedo reading this will have encountered those arguments. Would you be a good sport and post them here?
No.10032
>>10031
Many of the arguments are pretty much the same, yes. Defending it is more difficult; the harm caused by indiscriminate pedophiles is evident, whereas with zoophiles it's largely an imaginary bugbear. Of course, positive adult-child relationships also exist, a fact that is actively suppressed by the current establishment. I don't blame anyone for coming to the conclusion that the risk of harm is too high, especially considering that even children who enjoy the relationships they have with adults may later be harmed by society's negative judgement of same. However, I do believe that our current laws are hamfisted, far too restrictive, and interfere in the business of the home in a completely inappropriate manner.
No.10035
>>10013
>i'm both. zoo and pedo.
what came first?
Are you also into young animals? or only mature animals and young humans?
>certain things happened when i was young
such as? please elaborate just a little.
No.10036
>>10032
so essentially you are saying that the only harm from consensual pedophilia is that society (and not the pedo) will traumatize the child
later in life? traumatized by social standards? Meaning if society did not have a problem with consensual pedophilia then it would be ok?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_maturity
>Sexual maturity is the age or stage when an organism can reproduce.
>It is sometimes considered synonymous with adulthood.
>In humans, the process of sexually maturing is termed puberty.
so technically its only pedophilia if it is a child. a mature teen is not a child. so why then can teens have sex, but if one
is older than the age of consent it is considered (statutory) rape. I don't get it. luckily this does not concern me, but I would
like to understand nonetheless
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult
>Biologically, an adult is a human being or other organism that has reached sexual maturity.
makes sense.
>In human context, the term adult additionally has meanings associated with social and legal concepts.
>In contrast to a "minor", a legal adult is a person who has attained the age of majority and is therefore
>regarded as independent, self-sufficient, and responsible.
so the second you can take care of yourself and be responsible, you are an adult? aha, so a relationship with a childish teen is bad
but one with a teen of the same age that is very mature it is OK? I don't really get that.
I guess that sort of makes sense. The problem is many teens can already take good care of themselves, but are forced by law to remain
under the legal guardianship of their parents until a certain date. so, if moving that date changes what is and isnt pedophilia
or statutory rape, then why 18?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority
age of majority ranges from 15 to 21... so in one place the child was raped and if the couple moves over a stateline or goes on vacation its not rape.
also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent AoC is NOT the same thing as AoM. in many places they overlap though.
dont get me wrong. I am not defending pedophilia (or worse pedosexuality) in any way. I just want to find out why I "feel" that it is wrong and other feel that it isnt.
Are there any particularly good arguments against at least pedosexuality? considering the above (that society wont traumatize the child).
No.10037
>>10032
>the harm caused by bad people
should not influence the rights of the good people and does not tell us why pedo is right or wrong.
>positive adult-child relationships also exist
I'm not convinced. I'll hypothetically believe you, because of the argument "zoophilia is always rape/wrong" isn't true (either?)...
>a fact that is actively suppressed by the current establishment.
that I buy
>the risk of harm is too high
thats the same reason homosexuality was/is considered wrong in the UK, as it is (considered) a potentially harmful form of sex.
as the anus wasn't designed to be penetrated... there is a risk with everything. according to that law,
consensual BDSM is also wrong and extreme-sport should be illegal(ised) because of the risk factor.
>may later be harmed by society's negative judgement of same.
making society the bad guys not the pedos.
No.10047
>>10035
>what came first?
my dad and i took baths together until i was five. it was completely positive, and i would do nothing to dishonor his memory to this day. my first experimentation with anybody else my age was when i was seven. first encounter with a dog was when i was 13. so yeah. i don't really tell anyone about what my dad and i did together though, so as far as most people know it just never happened.
>Are you also into young animals? or only >mature animals and young humans?
mature animals and young humans. i don't have kids and never will. it is an ethical decision on my part to never breed.
>such as? please elaborate just a little.
i think i touched on the main ones here. there's more to it than that but you should be able to get the general gist of it from that.