I can state without reservation or hesitation that such brothels do exist, however, there are two groups of people who are attracted to animals this way, one is known as "bestialists" and the other as "zoophiles" and while both groups do have relations with animals there is a wall of difference between the two.
The bestialists are akin to rapists, they use an animal and don't care one bit about them, much like meat eaters and livestock ranchers, this is the type who would go to such an animal brothel.
The zoophile considers animals their equal partner, not a subservient, not a slave, not a "pet" but more like a spouse in a marriage.
The ones who make the news after being arrested for sneaking into a barn at 3 AM and injuring horses during sex are
not zoophiles they are bestialists and zoophiles disdain this kind of person and their activities.
Totally false, but before I explain further I'll put this out: What activities do humans ever do to animals where humans sought out or obtained consent from the animal in the first place?
Do dairy cattle "consent" to being jammed into stalls, force bred with artificial insemination to keep them pregnant all year so they produce milk the owner sells?
Do sows consent to being jammed into gestation crates they can't turn around in? Has any rancher, farmer, livestock dealer, slaughterhouse, meat packing plant, race track etc ever asked any animal for permission and consent to do anything to them, including
killing them?
The answer of course is No, yet, amazingly people seem to live in this fantasy world of hypocracy where somehow sex is
different and therefore mysteriously humans need
consent from that cow!
On the other hand, when faced with the rebuttal about cows, pigs, sheep, goats etc v/s horses and dogs, the same people scream "but thats different, we raise those animals to eat them!
Yeah, real
different tell that to the cow getting her throat cut and then think about how "different" that is from sex when killing the cow is legal but sex isn't,
yet the meat packing plant always results in death!
Anyone who has ever seen pictures or videos of stallion breeding, quickly figures out the stallion's member is about the size and length of an adult man's-
arm and that veterinarians and breeders routinely insert their gloved arm into mares for obtaining culture samples, palpating, and for breeding with A.I. yet amazingly you will have us believe a man's puny six incher is somehow going to "injure" "tear" or "abuse" her when she is built to take something the size of a man's arm and would barely even notice the man's puny member at all.
Now mind you, there are sadistic bestialists who injure mares on purpose, they are called zoosadists, they actually
enjoy hurting the animal, that does not meet the definition of what a zoophile is or what the word zoo (animal) phile (lover) means or stands for. The zoosadist is the one who injures horses in a barn and is often arrested and winds up in the news arrested for "bestiality"
Defenseless animals? have you ever tried to do something to a 1500 pound horse who doesn't like what you are doing? every year scores of people are injured and even killed by horses (as well as dogs) one kick by a horse can shatter a man's leg like glass and for the most part standing behind a horse is the most dangerous place to be yet I don't know of and never heard of any zoophiles (real ones) who have been injured by their horse.
Consider horses, dogs, or other domesticated animals. Especially consider horses or dogs, both are comparatively intelligent animals, both most certainly can complain; and both can harm a human if they want to. Especially a horse.
If you kick a dog, I assure you they will let you know they did not like it. With vocalizations such as growling or whining, by running away or going into a defensive posture. If a horse doesn't really like what you're doing they will let you know as well. When people brand animals they tie them up, even when you see breedings of mares on youtube you'll notice everyone has hardhats on usually, tall boots, and you'll see almost always at least three idiots with ropes, and a mare whose back legs are tied with rope so she can't kick the stallion, and even then they are clearly forcing her to be raped by the stallion.
How is it then, a zoophile can approach her sexually, no ropes, no restraints, alone, and engage in sex! must be she is CONSENTING to that
Every pet owner on the planet will testify to communication with their pets, especially with the intelligent well adapted ones like horses or dogs. They will report far more complex communications than yes or no.
So in conclusion animals are hardly defenseless, in actuality owners simply know how to avoid offending their animals to such a degree that they start to use force; and yet still you can find plenty of examples each year of people pushing an animal too far and getting injured or killed for it despite knowing the animal for a long time.
Zoophiles for the most part (I mean vast majority) do not use nor need physical force. There are no ropes, no muzzles, etc... the animals involved for some reason are cooperating. The breeding industries especially for horses do use restraints.
Physical force is only possible for interactions in which the aggressor merely wants unobstructed access to the body of the victim, it is not sufficient in any case where the 'victim' is required to do something as is the case for many confirmed interactions involving both males and females but mostly males.
Second, unfortunately this is a much harder issue to tackle.. why? Because we happen to call this training and it is used all the time for trivial things like where to relieve oneself or what furniture not to climb on. People think nothing of it because they are convinced they are not harming the animal. They probably also figure that if not climbing on the red couch or rolling over was a issue of psychological damage the animal would be much more reluctant.
I cannot tell you that all animals zoophiles keep are not trained to engage in sex. I can tell you that most zoophiles insist on using only positive reinforcement, i.e. reward but no punishment. In that case we are really talking about the motivations of the animal and not really brain washing or force. Is the animal cooperating for a treat or because the act itself is pleasurable? I suppose it matters, but not in the context of animal abuse. If sex was so terrible as anti-zoophile elements claim, a treat would hardly do to overcome the profound hurt the animal would feel. Finally with pretty high certainty we can say that animals will cooperate just for the pleasure, which they undoubtedly feel because they will seek another interaction after the first one. If a dog is scratching at the door, or a horse is pulling at the halter, do you wonder if opening the door or taking off the halter is abuse or forcing the animal to go outside or run around the pasture? All that's left for the brainwashing case is the idea that loyalty to the master would induce the animal to do anything they want without complaint regardless of their own feelings, this simply cannot be reconciled with the rest of their behavior.
Bottom line being that animals will tolerate and volunteer for sexual relations with a human being in the absence of anything that can be construed as force, almost certainly because they are seeking their own pleasure, medical science has proven that all female mammals have a clitorus, just like women do, they also have the same biology with a uterus, ovaries, ability to orgasm etc., just like women. The same goes for male animals in regards to men.
In wrapping this post up I'll say a couple of things on "bestiality laws" the first is creating a climate where now due to a law it will cause more animal injury and death as a result, how? well think about it because obviously the legislators don't: you are the owner of a female animal, one day she develops a uterine infection or discharge which is fairly common normally with no sex involved at all, now faced with the real possibility your vet could make a mistake and call in a report that they suspect "bestiality" caused this, now you have the police involved, the media gets in on it and even if you are found totally innocent of any wrong doing it's leaked out to the media which then goes around the globe on facebook, twitter, blogs, forums etc that so and so was questioned by police over allegations of "bestiality"
Now with that in mind, how likely do you think someone, especially a man is going to even risk that possibility by taking any female animal in for an exam for anything related to vaginal discharge etc? They will be far more likely to let it go, dump her, or kill her.
Lastly, no matter what the law is, there is no crime committed behind closed and locked doors when there's no witnesses, pictures, videos and the other participant can't speak the human language. Bestiality once carried the death penalty and that didn't stop it, threats of a fine or a short stay in jail
if caught sure won't.
No, it will continue on as it always has, laws or no laws.
For more on this topic see "zoophilia" on wikipedia.org
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
