zoo exclusivity is a social issue to be viewed as unhealthy, not an orientation.
I respect your opinion but wholeheartedly disagree. Zoo exclusive doesn't mean devoid of human relationships, most of us have plenty of non sexual / romantic relationships with humans. Just because we don't need a human partner to be fulfilled doesn't mean that there's something wrong with us.
I would say you are in the minority there. Most people who claim zoo exclusivity tend to have anti social traits. But when I think zoo exclusive, I assume people are talking about only being attracted to animals romantically/sexually
If a zoo exclusive has anti social traits then they are a zoo exclusive who also happens to have anti social traits. The two are not necessarily linked. But yes, I would agree with your definition of zoo exclusive... Why is that bad though?
If that's how you see it, sure, it's a coincidence. But I don't think so.
It's bad because it normalizes anti social traits, celebrates unhealthy mind states. People are social animals and need plenty of other human contact. Instead of adapting to an effortless relationship that a dog provides, people skills need to be maintained and worked upon.
So is an asexual person who isn’t zoo also simply being anti social? No, of course not. There has been plenty of study about asexuality and nobody thinks they’re just afraid of putting in the effort required for a human sexual relationship.
We are no different. We just happen to be asexual with humans while also being zoo.
Well that's just stupid.zoo exclusivity is a social issue to be viewed as unhealthy, not an orientation.
No. Because asexual people still seek out human romantic relationships. I'd argue against asexual being a natural sexual stance as well though ?
No. Because asexual people still seek out human romantic relationships. I'd argue against asexual being a natural sexual stance as well though ?
so.... what, asexual and zoo exclusive people are incapable of having friends? is friendship not a type of relationship that one has to work at?
you misunderstand me. My concerns lie not with people who consider themselves "zoo exclusive" and also maintain healthy human relationships. It's for those who take on an anti social lifestyle, avoiding human relations and consider an animal their only means of possible relationship. that is a toxic lifestyle and I have seen many zoos claim that life
you misunderstand me. My concerns lie not with people who consider themselves "zoo exclusive" and also maintain healthy human relationships. It's for those who take on an anti social lifestyle, avoiding human relations and consider an animal their only means of possible relationship. that is a toxic lifestyle and I have seen many zoos claim that life
do you mean the people who call themselves zoo exclusive, but it's only because they had a shitty relationship and now have sworn off humans? if so, i agree.
I would say you are in the minority there. Most people who claim zoo exclusivity tend to have anti social traits. But when I think zoo exclusive, I assume people are talking about only being attracted to animals romantically/sexually
Me too , at the moment I am happy and do not want to change anything.I'm technically zoo exclusive at the moment since I'm currently not dating or in a relationship. Does that count?
I'm here. I’ve been zoo-exclusive since I was a kid. I only let dogs into my love and sex life.
I have friends, I need them. Since I’m zoo-exclusive (ergo I live alone) I need friends even more, than an average person. I'm really not an antisocial zoo.
This is nonsense.
Zoo-exclusive doesn’t mean you’re antisocial. On the other hand, it is true that there are many antisocials among zoo-exclusive people.
But. In fact. For zoo-exclusive people, their friends are even more important.
Ever since I coming out, I’ve there even more friends, because they accepted. I was brave and crazy. And I was lucky.