lutraphile
Tourist
Done, hopefully they get some valuable insights!
2022 Sigmund Freud University Vienna Zoophilia Study.
- Thread starter ZTHorse
- Start date
- Status
juan_doe_drei
Citizen of Zooville
juan_doe_drei
Citizen of Zooville
i found the questions like "i am very good at satisying my partner and it is very important to me to do so" annoying because i don't think i'm very good at it, but it IS important to me. so i can't give one answer for the whole thing, it really requires two separate answers for the first and second halves of the question. argh!
also, where it asks at the end about whether you answered based on a current, past or imaginary relationship with a human or an animal ... i really needed an "other" there. i have multiple animal partners, and a human in my life who, although i don't have sex with them, there is some influences in my feelings about sex because of them, so ...... it's really friggin complex. plus, with the multiple animal partners, there were several questions where i would have preferred to be able to answer one way for one partner and another way for the other. i'm far more confident with one of my partners than the other, so .... totally different, but no way to answer properly in a situation like that.
I might have answered some differently for the same reason.
Goattobeloved
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
Actually, this would have been good to know from the start, as some questions got a... balanced answer considering humsn and animal total. Either separated orkniwn from thecstart would gave got more precise answers from me.
As for the semantics, that is probably also intended.
lutraphile
Tourist
I might misremember or maybe I answered unconsciously, but I couldnt see an option for whether one have had sex at all. Like my virgin ass, I am unhappy with my sex life, but that's just because it's a lack of sex life. I'm not unhappy because having sex with animals cause any conflicting emotions and difficult situations for me, but rather that I don't have any. To me the study assumed the respondents had a somewhat active sex life present or past, but that may just be me.
puppyluv98
Lurker
Completed. Hope this will be helpful in future researches
juan_doe_drei
Citizen of Zooville
as i mentioned, at the very end they do have an option for "imaginary relationship with an animal", so i think they would have wanted you to answer as if you were in a relationship and how you think you would feel about some of the questions. still unclear though without hindsight.
I completed it and filled out 90% of it, very thorough.
Interesting thread. My take is this:
1) Liking animals first and foremost is definitely going to be somewhat based on any instincts to attract to anything that looks like a "face". That would be from Evolution to make us like going near other humans, especially the opposite gender. So, with a little fur and such, it will definitely turn some people to attract to them. The human brain marvels at recognizing things even if they are upside down, scribbled on, stretched, lost its colors, etc.
2) It's also based on how frequent you see them. This is how we learn what exists and what may happen. Enough times seen and you may recall it throughout the day every day! You expect it to be seen again. You await.
3) Yes, for various reasons, one may figure a zoo partner may be a better partner. Not saying it's likely, but if someone thinks so then it will be so. Also some forms of, perhaps especially fantasy animals that don't currently exist, would allow endless, fully endulged forms of sex. There is many things humans can not do, or do well, or even experinece.
It's hilarious how many questions they ask, many being so similar too. The whole thing sounds like it has 1 goal and that is specifically to ask you: "ok so hmm you like animals romantically? so how you doin bro...". Afterall, their goals are few, and there is a LOT more questions. If they just were to understand how we work, they would not need ANY of those questions. o_o
Carodenius
Zooville Philanthropist
The following examination will take about 25 minutes
I would recommend doubling or tripling that time if you want to give proper answers for the open questions.
I would recommend doubling or tripling that time if you want to give proper answers for the open questions.
BenTheir
Tourist
Their consent question appeared open to nonverbal communication, which is how I replied.
Self-esteem and disease issues definitely seem of interest to them. Frankly, the entire survey appeared to be assembled by students given the limited range of answers and the "this is just your imagination, right? or did you try it once?" final question. I don't think they were prepared for people like myself who likely experienced zoosexuality before their parents were born.
Generally the results are subjected to statistical analysis and combined with the text inputs to produce an article for hopeful publication. Assuming time and money exists for improved data collection, many of the comments in this thread could be helpful in structuring further research. Perhaps @ZTHorse could email them a text copy of this thread near the close of their survey window.
ya te veo
Zooville Settler
Yes, I've taken other unrelated surveys of this type, and have seen a lot of these questions before. Certainly, the ones about how you relate to yourself are completely standard. Probably the sexual ones as well. And I don't think they're trying to prove that we have low self-esteem, but rather want to just find out how we feel about ourselves in general, and these questions are just part of the standard way of finding that out.
ohdeerthatslewd
Lurker
I'm surprised at how comprehensive it is without ever touching on furries. Don't get me wrong, I am a furry, but it frustrates me how many people think furry and zoophilia go hand in hand, and I'm glad this survey includes human sexuality and and an overall emotional evaluation to show that we can be healthy and functional people (at least I hope that's what the results will show, please tell me I'm not a unicorn for that lol).
Well, with any luck, the results will come back showing that we're generally okay and not using zoophilia to run from feelings of inadequacy/loneliness as is likely the general population's assumption. It's an uncomfortable line of questioning, but the answer could help clear the air.
HugDoggy
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
Yes, that time estimate was massively out in my case! I spent over two hours, I mean sure being given the opportunity to actually write a response saw me taking full advantage of that fact giving long detailed answers.
But despite the time the ability to actually say something in this study felt so much better than the usual multiple choice for the whole thing. Although as others have said some of the multiple choice/ranking questions were phrased badly where you wanted to answer one way for half the question and a different way for the other half, because of things being grouped that really shouldn't have been in the same question.
HugDoggy
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
I particularly like that they asked about how we recognise consent in our partners, rather than questioning if we believed the animal could consent, in a basic yes or no question as I've seen in the past.
Of course I decided to point out it wasn't a one way street in my answer and talked about how the animal might request consent from their human before answering the question asked. Because it is to me an important thing. Sex with animals is not a one sided thing. It's far from unheard of in a loving zoo relationship for the animals to want sex and approach their human for some special time together. So both parties must agree to things. After all it wouldn't do while your mum is around for a visit, to drop your pants and let a studly chap climb aboard in the kitchen in front of dear old mum.
In the same way, it wouldn't do to be groping things while he is trying to have a snooze and not feeling in the mood.
Of course I decided to point out it wasn't a one way street in my answer and talked about how the animal might request consent from their human before answering the question asked. Because it is to me an important thing. Sex with animals is not a one sided thing. It's far from unheard of in a loving zoo relationship for the animals to want sex and approach their human for some special time together. So both parties must agree to things. After all it wouldn't do while your mum is around for a visit, to drop your pants and let a studly chap climb aboard in the kitchen in front of dear old mum.
In the same way, it wouldn't do to be groping things while he is trying to have a snooze and not feeling in the mood.
Oily
Zooville Settler
I can definitely see that being the case, and I can definitely see the result finding some correlation between the two. The thing to really ponder after that would be whether the unsatisfactory sexual experiences or emotional problems cause one to become a zoo, or the current status quo causes a zoo to experience unsatisfactory sexual experiences and emotional problems.
It's nice there are open-ended questions to fill in though, that leaves a lot of details to fill the gap, but I wonder what they'll do with it.
The real problem is many people don't like it if others get off on or love animal parts in images (or want to do "certain" things with them while petting them is OK in their eyes, humping isn't...), with no animal present - just an image. They call such a bad person, because they are bigots and won't accept other people can like slightly farther things from the human look.
The other more "real" problem that doesn't seem to be the actual held problem for real by many would be stuff like consent, that is actuallyyy the concern here!, and understanding and safety ya. Even for whos and whom cannot do this perfectly, it still does not mean someone is evil - they want to get consent in English if they could, and they can't in such a case where they can't. That's the sad part that will likely happen to some here. Preferably, one seeks full consent. Often, some may not check so hard or won't wait till they are old and slightly educated. IMO if it's a male and female relationship, one may see that as a bit more normal and already knows they may think they are a "girl", and the "boy" probably likes "me". No one wants to see it walk around her, but if it runs up to her and is happy then more people would call that love and cute, compared to a sad, beaten looking stare down lol.
It's a creepy topic really, it's like trying to do something great and it isn't made to do that great, it's faulty. Indeed, it is, and it isn't normal. On the bright side, animals are cute, so it gives rise certainly for example to the "catgirl" craze young boys have these days, look up those by searchnig for "anime catgirl", they are anime looking girls with cat ears and tail, they have a sense of cuteness and softness to them. They don't exist, yet...
The other more "real" problem that doesn't seem to be the actual held problem for real by many would be stuff like consent, that is actuallyyy the concern here!, and understanding and safety ya. Even for whos and whom cannot do this perfectly, it still does not mean someone is evil - they want to get consent in English if they could, and they can't in such a case where they can't. That's the sad part that will likely happen to some here. Preferably, one seeks full consent. Often, some may not check so hard or won't wait till they are old and slightly educated. IMO if it's a male and female relationship, one may see that as a bit more normal and already knows they may think they are a "girl", and the "boy" probably likes "me". No one wants to see it walk around her, but if it runs up to her and is happy then more people would call that love and cute, compared to a sad, beaten looking stare down lol.
It's a creepy topic really, it's like trying to do something great and it isn't made to do that great, it's faulty. Indeed, it is, and it isn't normal. On the bright side, animals are cute, so it gives rise certainly for example to the "catgirl" craze young boys have these days, look up those by searchnig for "anime catgirl", they are anime looking girls with cat ears and tail, they have a sense of cuteness and softness to them. They don't exist, yet...
I'd imagine that once the study is actually released they'll have a section where they'll make a general statement based off of the written answers provided to them.
For example with the consent questions they might state something like this; "Of the self admitted zoophiles that have taken our questionnaire, the majority of them believe they are able to obtain consent for sexual contact with animals by studying how said animals would naturally initiate sex with one another. Many of the participants state that positive sexual body language is vital for initiating sexual contact of any form with non-human animals. Many of the participants also stated that observing whether or not animals are expressing that they are happy (before/during/afterwards) of any given sexual contact was also important. Only a minority of participants stated that body language is not important, is irrelevant, or not reliable. Etc....."
Ignoring the last statement, this is more or less how *I* personally answered the question. However this is merely an assumption of how the majority might have answered the same question. I won't really know until the papers are released, and won't know if they'll even include something like this until the study is released. For all we know they could simply discard the question out of their study entirely.
HugDoggy
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
I would like to believe you are correct that it is how most of us answered that question. The inclusion of the question would be one way to get more zoos on board with the survey so the idea it could have just been a lure or side issue to be left on the cutting room floor, and would never make it into the discussion of the research paper, is not so wonderful a thought. As for a lot of people outside the community it is the idea of animals not being able to consent that is high on the reasons why it should not be done. Thus any light being shone on that aspect would be a good thing, provided they use these answers to lead their conclusions. Rather than cherry picking sections or taking someones words out of context, to come to a desired conclusion; as was so clearly demonstrated by a "Zooey" article analysing a research paper recently. Where the researchers simply ignored or manipulated data that didn't agree with the conclusion they wanted to reach from the start.
Personally I do not think the question related to consent will be included as a core part of the study since it lacks objectivity and does not really offer and quantifiable metric to observe. I think it will more likely be used to prepare future studies on the topics. It may also simply be there as a way to address potential ethical concerns linked to this research.
HugDoggy
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
I don't know that you can ever really get 100% reliable metrics from open ended questions as they require interpretation, which is why multiple choice and ranking questions are usually preferred, as they are easily turned into numbers. But humans are built with emotions and "stuff" so sometimes numbers don't tell the whole story. As the numbers can be misleading, if a statistical collection question is phrased in the wrong way.
Sr_Zetazen
Zooville Settler
Participated in study. Liked writing answers to some of the questions.
They never provided a german link, i believe its english only.
HugDoggy
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
So was it only ZV members that were to be taking part in the research, because I would have thought there might have been other sites around the world that might also be able to contribute that don't have English as their primary language. So it's odd that researches from Germany wouldn't have a german version for their own citizens.
- Status