User:FT2/term
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Terminology in zoophilia summarizes the various terms used, and their meanings, in the field of zoophilia, zoosexuality, and human-animal orientation.
Terms used have varied according to time, place and perception. As with words used to describe other sexual orientations, such as homosexuality, the concept of sexual identity didn't emerge until the 19th century; before that time terms described practices and not identity.[1] Perhaps because zoosexuality was generally less socially visible than homosexuality in medieval and modern Western history, it has tended to escape the number of alternative words and pejoratives applied to that sexuality.
The most common terms encountered are zoophilia (which confusingly can mean either a general emotional or sexual attraction, or–less commonly–the psychological paraphilia of the same name), zoosexuality (a value-neutral term for the psychological orientation), and bestiality (a generic term for interspecies sexual acts with non-humans). Older or more archaic terms still sometimes seen in a zoosexual context include zooerast and sodomy. A bestialist can be a pejorative epithet coined for someone who has sexual relations with animals in the absence of a loving relationship, implying that the lack of relationship means a lower standard of care and welfare or even animal abuse.
The popular term animal lover is usually used when sex is not implied. It can refer in general to someone with a sexual or non-sexual affinity and affection for animals, or a sexual or non-sexual zoophile, but does not imply any sexual aspect either way unless specifically stated. It usually means someone with a deep liking, fondness or closeness to animals.
Contents |
[edit] History of terminology used in the field
The study of human sexual activity towards animals has evolved through several stages, some of which are documented under historical and cultural perspectives on zoophilia. Miletski, in examining the literature on zoosexual research, summarized the "confusion and conflicting view points" as follows:
- "Throughout the literature review, it is very obvious that authors perceive sexual relations with animals in very different ways. Definitions of various behaviors and attitudes are often conflicting, leaving the reader confused. Terms such as "sodomy," "zoorasty," "zoosexuality,” as well as "bestiality" and "zoophilia" are often used, each having a different meaning depending on the author."
There are three terms most commonly encountered in use: - bestiality, zoosexuality, and zoophilia - and several older or less common terms.
Historically:[2]
- Krafft-Ebing (1894) "defined several different forms of sexual contact with animals in his well-known work Psychopathia Sexualis. There, all non-pathological sexual contacts with animals were subsumed under the term bestiality, the cases that were similar to an animal fetishism were named 'zoophilia erotica', and the pathological cases were referred to as 'zooerasty'. Masters (1962) instead provided a definition of zooerasty that emphasized the lack of an emotional involvement when sexually interacting with an animal. Therefore, he held zooerasty to be comparable to masturbation."
[edit] Overview
Zoophilia, from the Greek Ζωο (zôon, "animal") and φιλία (philia, "friendship" or "love"), is defined as an affinity or sexual attraction by a human to a (non-human) animal. Such individuals are called zoophiles. As a general term, zoophilia was first introduced into the field of research on sexuality by Krafft-Ebing in his book Psychopathia Sexualis (1894). In sexology, psychology and popular use, it has a variety of meanings, revolving around affinity, affection, or erotic attraction between a human being, and a (non-human) animal. Notably, it can refer to either the general emotional-erotic attraction to animals, or (less commonly) to the specific psychological paraphilia of the same name.[3]
Zoophilia and sexual activity are independent; not all sexual acts with animals are performed by zoophiles; and not all zoophiles exercise their philia.
Individuals with a strong affinity for animals but without a sexual interest can be described as "non-sexual" (or "emotional") zoophiles, but may object to the zoophile label. They are commonly called animal lovers instead.
The more recent terms zoosexual and zoosexuality describe the full spectrum of human/animal orientation.
The terms zoosexuality, signifying the entire spectrum of emotional or sexual attraction and/or orientation to animals, and zoosexual (as in, "a zoosexual [person]" or "a zoosexual act"), have been used since the 1980s (cited by Miletski, 1999). Technical discussion of zoosexuality as a sexual orientation in psychology is discussed in that article.
A separate term, bestiality (more common in mainstream usage), refers to human/animal sexual activity.
Bestiality does not by itself imply any given motive or attitude. It signifies just a sexual act. In a non-zoophilic context, words like bestial or bestiality are also used to signify acting or behaving savagely, animal-like, extremely viciously, or lacking in human values.
Amongst zoophiles and some researchers,[4] the term bestialist has acquired a negative connotation implying a lower concern for animal welfare. This usage originated with the desire by some zoophiles to have a way to distinguish zoophilia as a fully relational outlook (sexual or otherwise), from simple "ownership with sex." Others describe themselves as zoophiles and bestialists in accordance with the dictionary definitions of the words.
Finally, zoosadism refers to the torture or pain of animals for sexual pleasure, and also includes willfully abusive zoosexual activity.
[edit] Meanings of terms encountered
[edit] Bestiality
Bestiality means simply, the sexual act of a human having sex with a (non-human) animal. It is a term that does not take into account the nature of the act or motive, beyond whether a sexual act takes place. It is the term most encountered legally and often found in the media.
Initially, several hundred years ago, being considered like homosexuality a religious offence against God (a view still held by many Western religions), it later became viewed as a clinical condition – a fetish, compulsion, disorder, or evidence of some kind of throwback – or "profoundly disturbed behavior"[5]
Due to the oberver bias common in early anthropology, and the relatively early stage of understanding of human psychology and sexology, it was categorized even as late at the 1920s - 1930s as a deficiency of some kind attributable to primitive (ie, non-Western) minds, and described in one of the foremost sexology references of the time[6] as:
- "the sexual perversion of dull, insensitive and unfastidious persons. It flourishes among primitive peoples and among peasants. It is the vice of the clodhopper, unattractive to women..."
Clinicians, unsure what to make of it except for a rare abberation, and lacking modern research methods and knowledge, considered it basically, an abnormal and rare form of abberative sex act, perhaps masturbatory in nature. In general up until the 1940's (the time of the Kinsey Reports), it was reported through rare and occasional sources when it came to clinical, legal, or anthropological attention.
[edit] Zoophilia
In 1894, Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing introduced the term zoophilia in his book Psychopathia Sexualis, and this has remained the favored term in common use outside legislative statute (which focuses on acts not motives), such as culture, subculture, media, and clinical areas. Confusingly, it has acquired multiple very different meanings:
- According to the dictionary, as a general term, it simply denotes an affective bond beyond the norm. Thus, animal lovers are "zoophiles", albeit non-sexually so. Even then, dictionary definitions do not agree whether their definition means an affectionate bond, an enjoyment of company, an erotic bond, or a sexual fixation (fetish):
-
- "Affection or affinity for animals"
- "An erotic fixation on animals that may result in sexual excitement through real or fancied contact".
-
- In psychology, as a specialized term, it refers to the paraphilia of being attracted sexually to animals in a way that causes distress or pain. In this sense, it denotes a specific paraphilic condition.
- In popular use, it has come to indicate a person who has sex with animals (so for example, non-sexual zoophiles tend not to wish to be described as "zoophiles").
- More generally (and especially amongst zoosexuals), it is used to signify someone who has a strong bond to animals that is of a relational (possibly including sexual) nature, as opposed to mere "ownership".[7]
[edit] Zoosexuality
The concept of zoosexuality as a bona fide sexual orientation, as opposed to a fetish, paraphilia or affective bond, can be traced back to research such as Masters in the 1960s. This was around the time (following Kinsey) that minority sexualities and sexual interests began to be seen as other than a sign of mental abnormality, and instead, began to be seen as indication that the range of typical human sexuality was a richer field than had been previously perceived.
The term 'zoosexual' itself was probably coined in the 1980s, being cited by researchers such as Miletski in the 1990s. It was seen as a value-neutral term which would be less susceptible to being "loaded" with emotion or rhetoric (by either 'side' both positive or negative), as many terms are, would not favor one viewpoint over another, and would not incorporate either positive or negative assumptions as to the persons or motivations involved. Usage of the noun form can be applied to both a "zoosexual (person)", and a "zoosexual act".
Its earliest archived use in online newgroups is in March 1994, by which time (judging by the post in question) it was already a well established term needing no explanation.
[edit] Other terms
The ambiguous terms sodomy, usually referring to non-procreative sex[8] or other unnatural sex act, and buggery, usually referring to anal penetrative sex, are sometimes used in legal contexts to include zoosexual as well as homosexual acts. Writings by Puritan authors such as Cotton Mather refer to "buggery" when talking about bestiality among their congregations. In modern terms these terms would only imply zoosexual activity when specifically indicated, in a legal or religious context. Outside these spheres, they are an archaic term no longer in use in the field or in popular culture.
Zooerasty is an older term, not in common use, for sex with animals in an objectified masturbatory manner. It was counterpointed with zoophilia in the writings of Masters and other earlier studies. A term bestiosexuality, roughly equivalent to zooerasty, was proposed by Allen (1979) but failed to become established.
In pornography, human–animal sex is occasionally described as farmsex, dogsex, or animal sex; these terms are often used regardless of the context or species involved.
[edit] Glossary of established subculture terms
As with most subcultures, the zoophile subculture has evolved its own terminology.
- Common terms
- Fencehopping (sometimes hyphenated) - the practice of trespassing on anothers property for the purposes of sex with their animals.
- Tie (vb) and knot (noun) - terminology related to the juncture between male canids and their partners, in which the bulbus glandis expands to 'tie' the two together. (See: Canine reproduction.) Between canids the tie is usually established for the duration of copulation; with a receptive human partner the tie can often be broken at will by either, although injury or pain may result in some cases for the human if unprepared or unadapted (See: Zoophilia and health).
- Other slang and less common terms
- Dildogging - a portemanteau pejorative term for sexual activity (especially in pornography) in which a male dog is showing total boredom or disinterest, the human star trying to give the impression of passionate activity by using the penis to masturbate or thrust on in the manner of a dildo.
- Docking - penetrative sex by a human male of a male dog's genital sheath. (Made possible on some animals since the genital skin is both loose and capable of stretching, since it must be able to accomodate the animal's own erection girth and–for canids–the bulbus glandis.)
[edit] References
- ^ According to poststructuralist theorist Michel Foucault.
- ^ Beetz 2002, section 5.2.3.
- ^ Beetz (2002) section 5.2.7: "It has to be noted here, that not only in older literature, but also in new books and articles the information on zoophilia/bestiality that is available today is often neglected. Authors write about zoophilia, and though they do not explicitly define it, it must be assumed that they at least do not include all persons who have sex with animals, but rather restrict their comments to a real, permanent, exclusive, fixated zoophilia as defined in the DSM-IV."
- ^ Masters (1962) uses the term "Bestialist" specifically in his discussion of Zoosadism, in the section "related perversions". Elsewhere he tends to use other terms. Likewise Dr. LaFarge, an assistant professor of Psychiatry at the New Jersey Medical School, who is the Director of Counseling at the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and works with the New York correctional system, is quoted as commenting that: "it's important to make the distinction between bestialists and zoophiles, because zoophiles try not to hurt their animals, whereas bestialists do" [1]
- ^ UK Home Office "Review of sexual offences" 2002
- ^ Havelock Ellis' 7 volume work, Studies in the psychology of sex (1927)
- ^ In this sense, described further in the article "Zoophilia", the term 'zoophile' is often contrasted to the negatively-connoted term "bestialist", which signifies a person who has sex with animals with no such relational interest or care.
- ^ Lawrence v. Texas ruling - "Early American sodomy laws were not directed at homosexuals as such, but instead sought to prohibit nonprocreative sexual activity more generally". Sodomy includes anal sex between heterosexual as well as homosexual couples, and oral sex as well as bestiality.
[edit] See also
- Terminology of homosexuality
- Zoosexuality
- Zoophilia
- Pejorative term
- Sexual words
- Hallowzoo
category:Zoosexuality category:Sociolinguistics category:Sexual terms