This will be a bit of a rant here, but the one thing about the whole zoophile community ensuring that they aren't hurting animals when they fuck them, is that these people are genuinely convinced that they are not hurting animals, without any regard for the psychology of it.

And, it gets to me a lot. From the position of upholding something, and treating such a taboo thing as something with pure intentions just makes it all the more deranged from the outside. These are people using the same tactics as pedophiles and rapists-

that would have intercourse with other people who *can* voice back what they feel. But they make the other party feel helpless or forcibly submissive, and usually, they NEVER talk about it.

For now, forget about mental acuity within animals. Do know, humans are apex predators.

We are, by design, the predator of every other animal on earth. If we can't kill it with raw strength, we use other conventions. Guns, traps, you name it.

Other animals are known to have sex with other species, this is how nature works, but almost none of it is willing.

It is simply the over exertion of someone else's predatorial prowess, and rather than kill something, they use it. They put it into an unwillingly submissive position. Animals recognize humans this way. And they either become "acceptingly" submissive-

or never do anything to fight back. By the point they reach sexual maturity, they recognize that their source of safety, food, water, and shelter is all because of their owner's power; the same power that lets you and me be best friends with our dog.

This is seen time and time again. Animals raised to be submissive to their owner, sometimes trained to be this way. This is Pavlovian conditioning. The same psychology that makes your dog stop peeing in the house, and the same that makes them roll over when you train them.

Zoophiles are not "right". They simply learned how to exploit mental conditioning, in animals who can't tell you the reason why they did something, something humans CAN do. Speaking of humans, Pavlovian conditioning works there too. Most notably in children.

Krafft-Ebing had written a piece on the implications of how children would have sexual conditioning during spanking, wherein their penises would rub against the lap of their parents, and further generate sexual deviancy via unintentional positive feedback, in this case, orgasm.

This is barely scratching the surface, but the same thing happens, a predator-prey relationship combined with orgasm as the "reward" during rudimentary Pavlovian condition would create a dog that is "willing" to have sex, not out of consent, but mental conditioning.

Just in the same way an adult figure would be able to pressure a child into "consenting" for a sexual favor, it's through the buildup of trust and Pavlovian conditioning. Except we call this grooming between humans. It is uninformed, and directly manipulated consent.

If you'd like to read some of the scientific basis that I've referred to here, there is a full dive journal on it posted by the UCLA, titled "The Role of Pavlovian Conditioning in Sexual Behavior: A Comparative Analysis of Human and Nonhuman Animals". That's the rant over though.