Christian Zoophile

The title pretty much sums it up: I'm a Christian with zoophilic tendencies. I don't really know where to start, so I guess I'll just talk. My attraction to animals began when I was ten, and has progressed since that point until now (I'm 19). I've kept things pretty solidly under wraps, seeing as zoophilia isn't exactly cool with people in general, let alone other Christians. However, things are starting to get pretty difficult. I've started looking at zoophilic porn, and I've had some "encounters" with my pets (no sex, but they were close). Honestly, I'm not sure what to do. I've gone to a therapist a few times, but since I'm away at college I don't have anyone local to turn to anymore. I've tried looking up local therapists online, but it's impossible to tell whether any of them would deal with this kind of problem, or how they'd deal with it. I've thought about talking to a pastor or something, but again, I don't know what they'd do.

Basically, I guess I'd like to know if there's any resources for this type of thing that anyone with experience can recommend. Or just any input in general. I don't really expect much, because this is pretty obscure. At least being here keeps me away from "other websites," I guess.

Hi BlessingsofBabylon,

Welcome to the forums.

Post here any time, or just lurk. If it will help keep you away from triggers, that's a great thing.

Try talking to InnerGold. He is a member of this site and he can probably help you out. He works for a counselor who specializes in pornography and sexual addiction and also does webcam counseling. I don't personally have any experience with the therapist he works for, but you can watch some of the Q&A videos and see if you like the guy. He's got a treatment system that is written from a Christian perspective and also has a non-scriptural version.

Here's the site:
http://www.innergold.com/
There are some free downloads there to get you started.

InnerGold (the poster) is an awesome guy. Latter-Day Saint. He and I butted heads initially--and man, I don't think I'd ever been that happy about being wrong before!

I'm wondering if this paraphilia stems from an impression that animals are emotionally safe and won't hurt you. Maybe it's just an exploration of a taboo. Also, animals can't reject you. I'm wondering if these things have anything to do with your attraction to them.

Feel free to talk/post anytime. You can also look over the rest of the forum and see if there's something that might be an underlying cause of the attraction. Be careful not to diagnose yourself, though. Most people have traits of the issues that are discussed on these boards.

Once again, welcome.

--Frayed

Regardless of how others feel about the topic in general (or how Christians feel) in looking at the collection of religions altogether they are based on the New Testmant guy Jesus who I think still promoted Old Testament beliefs except where he contradicted them (like the whole 'don't stone each other' thing, sounds sensible).

I do recall there are some old testament stuff forbidding 'encounters' and so forth. Some of these I do think would be modified (like the whole 'put the animal/person to death' stuff since Jesus seems to have ruled out the whole violent punishments aspect of the OT) but they may serve as moral guidelines.

Exodus 22:19 wrote:Anyone who has sexual relations with an animal must be put to death.

This for example, I would guess be disregarded in the religion (and something I personally find to be a ridiculous punishment, I value human life)

Leviticus 18:23 wrote:Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.

Now I would assume here that in the bible humans aren't considered a class of animal as they are in the biological science, in that regard it would be to a non-human animal. I am not totally sure what a 'perversion' is nowadays. Certainly there is no biological reproduction imperative to copulate with something you can't create offspring with, be it something of an incompatible species, same sex, eunichs, infertiles, prepubescent or postmenopausal/too old, etc. Those who advocate interest should only be motivated by multiplying (which does seem to be a biblical importance) would disregard anything of a sexual nature deviating from this (differing) to be 'perverted' I suppose.

I think there may be other uses to sexuality, personally, in a sublimated form. Like sometimes I wonder are platonic (non-expressed) sexual urges perhaps responsible to the various other kinds of social bonding we have? Is repressed homosexuality an aspect of homosocial friendships men share with other men, or women with women? Behind how we care for our pets and livestock, parents for their children, children for their parents, siblings for each other, students and teachers? Regardless, the healthy norm widely accepted is that people don't do this (homosexuality excepted in significant parts of more well-developed nations) and that, aside from being perceived as a perversion of the expected sexual attraction one has for a healthy fertile member of the opposite sex for genetically programmed reproductive purposes of the species, it can also be perceived as a perversion of what people think should be a purely platonic love. In common use the word platonic implies a level of asexuality but based on Plato's writings to me it seems more like a redirected/suppressed sexuality. Perhaps some people have realized this and consciously redirect it whereas others do not need to consciously make that choice since they are unaware of their doing so automatically.

Leviticus 20:15-16 wrote:If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal. If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, kill both the woman and the animal. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

The previous Leviticus seemed so sensible! But this is even worse than the Exodus since they also hurt the animal, not to mention, if it's with a woman than she and the animal get killed simply for 'presenting' even if nothing happens! Whereas man and animal only get killed if they actually do it. In either case, I think it's rather barbaric and the sort of thing I hope Jesus, if there's not a record of it, encouraged his apostles/disciples to ignore as outdated. Still, a lot of people are very hateful and take such violent approaches literally so I am afraid of their destructive outlooks.

Deuteronomy 27:21 wrote:Cursed is the man who has sexual relations with any animal.

Not sure what cursed means, presumably some kind of thing god puts on you like those Egyptian plagues? *shrug*

FrayedEndOfSanity wrote:Animals are emotionally safe and won't hurt you. Also, animals can't reject you.

I'm not sure this is totally true. Tamed animals, especially a person's pets, tend to be emotionally safeR but nothing is totally safe or impossible to hurt. Like, take into account short lifespans, one could be emotionally hurt if a pet dies of old age, as they tend to do far in advance of their human owners. Furthermore, animals can clearly reject what humans are doing, I can't tell you how many times I have unknowingly invaded the personal space of my cat as I walk past a table and a paw darts out to snag my sock, or how I try to brush her and she spins around and bites the brush (and sometimes my hand!). I think it would be more accurate to say that pets are often trained and in a situaton where they are not likely to reject masters. Using that trust to do something more motivated out of one's own interest than theirs would be an ABuse of the responsibility a pet owner has.

That's one thing to keep in mind since you can have a mental conversation about what the reasons are behind what we do. In the brushing example, I think brushing is healthy for the skin, causes fewer hairballs to choke on when she's cleaning herself, and keeps her cooler and lighter so that she might be willing to exercise more and not be such a fat cat.

BlessingsofBabylon wrote:I'm a Christian with zoophilic tendencies.

Seems that your problem is that you are a Christian and that God hates zoosexuals (and homosexuals too) Bible says that zoosexuals will never enter heave... since you can't stop being a zoosexual for your God, have you ever consider to change to another religion with a God that is more friendlier?

Or, you can try to accept that you are a zoosexual and also, move to a country (or state) where consensual zoosex is legal. That will take some weight from your back when you have non-abusive sexual activities with your pets.

I was also raised as Christian, though I never believe in that stuff as they didn't provided evidence to support their claims (I'm an agnostic) and I'm also a zoosexual, where I live is not illegal to have consensual sex with an animal. So I don't have much worries when having sex with my K9 boyfriend and since I keep my orientation secret from other non-zoosexuals I don't have to deal with the possible rejection. I only tell other zoosexuals that I'm zoosexual and I try to make friends that are zoosexuals too, so I can be me when I'm around them. Maybe you could try to do all that?

Seems that your problem is that you are a Christian and that God hates zoosexuals (and homosexuals too) Bible says that zoosexuals will never enter heave... since you can't stop being a zoosexual for your God, have you ever consider to change to another religion with a God that is more friendlier?

I love it, how informed you are.

First off, God does not hate anyone. You have a choice, abandon your sin or stay mired in it and accept the consequences and the responsibility. You are correct that Zoosexuals, homosexuals, pedophiles and other sexual perversion practitioners will not enter heaven but those who abandon sexual perversion and follow the laws of God will enter heaven.

Perhaps it's this person who has "The Problem"

I believe that some aspects of the Bible as we know it today are archaic in many respects, if not completely irrelevant. Not saying that a person cannot follow a Christian religion and believe in the teachings and readings of any form of the Bible. I'm just stating that if one does, it may be wise to approach the Bible with an open mind regarding that much of what has been written in it was written ages ago when many aspects of psychology were either not then understood or were ignored in the creation of the Bible.

If one is going to value God's judgment, I'd say that God's judgement can be perceived as much different in today's world than what existed for many people years and years ago when the Bible was created, before that time and even centuries after the fact.

First off, I'd recommend exploring your values and beliefs in further detail when it comes to your religion. I have known some people to find exploration to be key in further understanding and uncovering questions they have about their form of God/god/gods and other religion-related issues. Approaching your religion/faith and your sexuality separately may help simplify each and help you to make more progressive discoveries regarding your concerns on these two. It may help to see these two aspects of your identity as parallel things versus heavily intertwined before you start to mesh the two together.

Anyway, I hope someone can offer a more useful, detailed response than mine! It looks like some have already provided some positive input. My sexuality does on some levels currently interfere and cause some problems with my belief/faith system much, so I may have further advice or thoughts on the matter sooner or later.

Welcome to the board!

dan1966 wrote:First off, God does not hate anyone. You have a choice, abandon your sin or stay mired in it and accept the consequences and the responsibility. You are correct that Zoosexuals, homosexuals, pedophiles and other sexual perversion practitioners will not enter heaven but those who abandon sexual perversion and follow the laws of God will enter heaven.

Perhaps it's this person who has "The Problem"

A person is a part of God, since God is omnipresent. If the person has a problem, then God has a problem. I question how imperfection could possibly result from a perfect whole.

dan1966 wrote:First off, God does not hate anyone.

Really? A God that demands that homosexuals and zoosexuals should be killed doesn't sound like a "loving God" to me. Sending me to hell doesn't sound like a "loving god" either. Making me zoosexual instead of heterosexual doesn't sound like a "loving god" either. Pretty sure he hates me, or he doesn't exist and I became zoosexual by random luck.

Strenuous efforts were made over many centuries to reconcile the Old Testament with the New, and by extension to reconcile the conception of the God of the Old Testament (as Dawkins notes with a wealth of adjectives: "jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully") with the all-loving, benign father-figure of the Christian faith. Liberal allegorical readings were required to this end. When presented with this, or when asked tricky questions like 'do you hate homosexuals', most Christians will resort to the default mantra: "love thy neighbour". As if that one principle trumps the rest of their holy book. Does it trump everything else in the Bible? If so, why bother with the rest of it? And if not, why replace the God of the Old Testament with the benign big daddy in the sky who loves us all equally?

-- Thu Jul 28, 2011 2:56 pm --

Divinorum wrote:A person is a part of God, since God is omnipresent. If the person has a problem, then God has a problem. I question how imperfection could possibly result from a perfect whole.

Presumably an advocate of this position would have to reject the idea of humankind as fallen then, which is a pretty fundamental concept in the Judæo-Christian tradition of thought?

The myth of the Fall of Man is prevalent in many cultures and religions. I see it as a telling of our awakening to morality, and our subsequent guilt, and feelings that our suffering on Earth is brought about through our own filthiness.

A young child whose drunken father beats her will truly believe she is the one to blame. At that age, it's hard-wired into the human psyche to place love and trust in authority figures, especially parents, no matter how badly they abuse you. Ruled by emotions and with a primitive idea about right and wrong, sadly, that's what happens to kids everywhere. Similarly, the human race has undergone a process of rationalisation and self-blame before its many fictitious gods, or symbolic parent figures.

There was no "Fall of Man" except our awakening to the suffering we, as animals, naturally cause other living beings. Judeo-Christian culture has imprinted that message deep in our subconscious though and it's hard to deprogram. Certainly there's no great just being in the cosmos, judging our every action... if there was, as you said, it could only be seen as a far worse monstrosity than anything we humans have ever amounted to.