• Suddenly unable to log into your ZooVille account? This might be the reason why: CLICK HERE!

Psychology behind Beastiality

SamuraiChef0

SamuraiChef0

Tourist
So, supposedly (and I will explain why its just "supposedly") with the psychology behind beastiality, it says people into beastiality are more likely to beat children and harm them. Along with other ment issues that arise, I find this hard to believe as the two major studies concluded about the thoughts and emotions that come from people into beastiality, have both admitted to testing people who either weren't partaking in courtship with animals, but we're also mentally disturbed from other factors. I just think its interesting that both times this study was done, the subjects weren't people who should've been tested. What do you all think about this?
 
Bias is a thing that even science is not immune to. Who wrote the studies and what motivation did they have?
I am sure you can a lot of groups of people, who are more prone to violence if you are looking for proving that.
An obvious candidate would be military for example.
 
-What is the structure of the study ? All the studies do not have the same "power". Small studies are usefull but you can't draw solid conclusions. I read some written by shrinks finding zoo psychopaths.

To go further with the notion of bias :

-How is defined bestiality ? (inclusion criteria) You'll have a bias if you take people that see animals as a toy more than a life partner.
-How did they find the subjects ? You'll have a bias of selection if you look for them on a forum full of incels or in a hospital full of social issues.
Indeed, as @pes said, I heard the story of a man that loved dogs and became a trainer in the army. It was both hell for the trainer and the dogs. You are in the army because you think violence is inevitable (or running away troubles...). Bias.

When a media (TV, influencer, newspaper...) relate a scientifical fact they fuck up with thoose notions most of the time... and you just find what is the political opinion of the emiter. Always check the source and understand their goals.

You can send a link to thoose two articles. I will try to destroy them.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately as others have mentioned bias is always going to be an issue. To the rest of the world we are perverts and freaks and they will quiz, examine and dissect us as such.

This reminds me of that research questionnaire that went around a few months ago. The questions were so loaded it was actually a joke. "How often do you think about committing suicide?". I doubt we'll ever see substantial research from a truly objective point of view.
 
There is no objective point of view. A point of view is always subjective. Just let the research be done...
ZephyrZoo said:
The questions were so loaded it was actually a joke. "How often do you think about committing suicide?".
Click to expand...
I remember that one. The study was made by someone that did previous research on... incels ... a bias that have to be commented. Don't you have her name ?
You could find the survey on bad porn websites... bias...
I commented those biases in the free section of the survey and said I had faith in Science, if well done ...
ZephyrZoo said:
o the rest of the world we are perverts and freaks and they will quiz, examine and dissect us as such.
Click to expand...
Hani Miletski was a researcher. It was not very good quality report but she said we were not crazy. Thanks.
 
SamuraiChef0 said:
So, supposedly (and I will explain why its just "supposedly") with the psychology behind beastiality, it says people into beastiality are more likely to beat children and harm them. Along with other ment issues that arise, I find this hard to believe as the two major studies concluded about the thoughts and emotions that come from people into beastiality, have both admitted to testing people who either weren't partaking in courtship with animals, but we're also mentally disturbed from other factors. I just think its interesting that both times this study was done, the subjects weren't people who should've been tested. What do you all think about this?
Click to expand...
A lot of that "research" is defective as it is massively selection biased based on the people at the time they where using for research, such as prison

Newer studies done with a more open pool is a bit better but it is still suffers positive selection bias again due to them directly reaching out to zoo zones and those tend to be willing to engage with such tend to be the more activist type.

But if the subject ever gets more open to those that study such things and they get a more general pool that is more neutral you'll start getting more useful data
 
I can imagine this didn't study people into animals seriously but maybe porn watchers. And I think people with impulsivity issues (like ADHD) maybe watch more extreme porn generally and struggle to not react emotion so maybe more likely to harm young people. Also not saying people with ADHD hurt kids because some of my favourite people have ADHD but I just mean the impulsivity could mean someone is more reactive who was inclined to be a horrible person too. If that makes any sense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top