\nChristianity
\n<\/strong>In ancient texts, zoosexuality is referred to by means of periphrases. In Latin texts, for example, we find: \u201cfornicationem contra naturam\u201d (fornication against nature), \u201ccum animalibus coires\u201d (copulating with animals) or \u201ccum quadrupedus peccat\u201d (sinning with quadrupeds), and so on.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n It would appear that no word for zoosexuality existed until the 12th century, when the word sodomite came into widespread use. The latter refers to the Sodomites, inhabitants of the city of Sodom (Genesis 10:19). It is therefore an antonomasia (a proper noun turned into a common noun). According to the biblical account, an inhabitant of Sodom named Lot grants hospitality to two angels sent by God. All the men of Sodom then surrounded his house and asked Lot to bring out these strangers the people of the town thought were men, in order to \u201cknow\u201d them (Genesis 19:05). To know in the biblical sense means to have a carnal relationships. Lot refuses and offers them two of his virgin daughters in exchange. The Sodomites decline, and God destroys the city with \u201ca rain of sulfur and fire\u201d (Genesis 19:24). Although there is some doubt as to the interpretation of the refusal of hospitality, biblically, the Sodomites are clearly male homosexuals. By extension, sodomy designates any type of sexual practice (hyperonym) said to be unnatural (non-procreative), a fortiori including zoosexuality.<\/p>\n There\u2019s still the word bugger, a synonym for sodomite tinged with heresy. This word refers to the Bulgarian priest Bogomil, founder of Bogomilism. In the 13th century, under the influence of inquisitorial propaganda directed against the Bogomil heresy, buggers (Bulgarians) were branded sodomites. This appellation of \u201cbugger\u201d was purely due to infamy, since the Bogomils practiced asceticism (including sexual abstinence).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Speciesism The word bestiality acquired a second, sexual meaning in the 16th century.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n This \u201csexual bestiality\u201d is a metaphorical figurative derived from the original meaning of the word; zoosexuality would be regressive, because it is directed towards the animal. Bestiality is therefore speciesism, including sexual speciesism.<\/p>\n Dilemma: between an unbalanced human and a willing animal, which sexual partner would you choose? When our contemporary sexologists speak of bestiality, they are referring directly to this brutal, stupid and primitive zoosexuality; to put it simply, this zoosexuality without love.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Animal Protection <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n A breeder is zoophilic if he takes care of his animals by applying, for example, this \u201czoophilic ointment\u201d then on sale in the shops.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Little by little, zoophiles were ridiculed for their excessive love of animals. Zoophilia thus took on a negative connotation. This shift is potentially misogynistic, since as F\u00e9r\u00e9 notes, zoophilia is mainly found in women (1897, Zoophilie et zoophobie, Charles F\u00e9r\u00e9). Whereas typically bestiality is mainly found in men.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0Psychiatry![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.zeta-verein.de\/wpcontent\/uploads\/01_Worms.png\")
<\/a>(Figure 1:\u00a0Decretum<\/i><\/span>\u00a0by Burchard of Worms, 1051,\u00a0Pecudibus fornicantur<\/i><\/span>\u00a0\/\u00a0Quadrupedus fornicatoribus<\/i><\/span>)<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>The word bestiality first appeared in the 14th century. It comes from the Latin \u201cbestia\u201d and refers to any behavior that likens man to a beast. This definition begs the question: how is a beast supposed to behave? For humans, a beast is a primitive being essentially characterized by its ferocity (bestiality) and stupidity (beastliness). And indeed, in its natural habitat, a hungry wild beast won\u2019t say hello to you before trying to eat you. But are they any more ferocious than man? The beast is thus a referent of human imbalance; bestial has come to designate the criminal, the madman or the torturer.<\/p>\n<\/a>(Figure 2: 1525, Notable rulings by the parliament of Toulouse, \u201cAs a crime of abominable lust called bestiality[\u2026]\u201d.)<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>The 19th century saw the birth of the word zoophilia. Its meaning at the time was simply that of its etymology: an affection (philia) for living things (zoo). The first French occurrences of the word coincided with article 453 of the Napoleonic Penal Code of 1810. But the word didn\u2019t really spread until the 1820s. It can be linked to the creation of the London Zoo in 1828, or to Martin\u2019s Act of 1822, an Anglo-Saxon law now considered the first animal protection law in the West. After Martin\u2019s Act, French newspapers spoke of the \u201czoophilia of the English.\u201d Obviously, a zoophile was seen as someone who condemned animal abuse. An animal protection society is called a \u201czoophilia society\u201d or a \u201czoophile club\u201d!<\/p>\n<\/a>(Figure 3: Newspaper article \u201cThe great week of zoophiles \/ For animals, please.\u201d from Botrot, 1926)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/a>(Figure 4:Celnart\u2019s book \u201cZoophile manual\u201d, 1827.)<\/p>\n<\/a>(Figure 5:Advertising for a \u201cZoophilic ointment\u201d from Peyrat firm, 1868.)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/a>(Figure 6:The zoophile mockery, 1935, “Do not excite the animal \/ A zoophile \/ In this cold weather, you should wipe it off when it (she) comes out of the water.”)<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>The word \u201czoophilia\u201d is said to have first appeared in a protosexual sense in the 8th edition of 1893: \u201cFollowing on from material fetishism, we still have to think of certain cases where animals have an aphrodisiac effect on humans. One could speak here of erotic zoophilia.\u201d<\/p>\n