Keep up to date with every new upload!

Join free & follow Chewing the Fat Podcast
Share
Episode 45 - Steve Lebrasky - Zoophile/Bestiality Practitioner (ZETA Germany)

Episode 45 - Steve Lebrasky - Zoophile/Bestiality Practitioner (ZETA Germany)

STEVE LEBRASKY is a zoophile, engages in bestiality, and is a researcher for ZETA, in Germany. He has been in relationships with dogs and horses.

MIKE talks to Steve about how he came to be a zoophile, ownership of "partners", monogamy and jealousy in zoophile relationships, social/ethical implications, consent, whether he's a vegan or vegetarian, how common bestiality is, and other stuff..

*This show does not go into graphic detail.

Comments

MollyJaneZeta

Thank you for this interesting and enlightening episode of Chewing the Fat. I am always looking to hear more about the daily lives of zoos, especially from such an organized and cohesive group as Germany's own Zeta... I understand that this podcast is several years old and it really is eye-opening to see how originally zoosexual individuals were being granted their rights in Deutschland only to lose them all over again in recent years when Europe as a whole began moving toward more bigoted and antiquated laws in regards to interspecies relationships.

In regards to the comments made below, the 'collective revulsion' of society was once believed to outweigh the rights of gays and lesbians to seek out and form relationships with the partners they are attracted to, yet as society becomes more secularized we were originally moving away from the old 'no non-reproductive sex' laws. Sadly, in this modern era, it seems the conservative fundamentalist ways are being reinstated in many places.

They say that what goes up must come down and indeed the tides of society often swing in opposing directions at different times. Personally I would not be surprised if zoosexual relationships were repeatedly legalized, criminalized, and re-legalized over the course of the next century or so.

Chewing the Fat Podcast

Hi FoxMcCloud,

Thanks for commenting.

I guess the question is, who or what determines the value of interest from one thing over another?

If the interest is abstract (love, emotional hurt etc.), how can we say it has more or less intense interest than something else?

Does the collective revulsion of a majority of society for zoophilia outweigh the love one person has for a dog?

An interesting question..! Would love you thoughts!

FoxMcCloud

Hi there.

I am the ethics teacher that Steve was talking about. The Idea which was expressed was the equality idea of Peter Singer. The language barrier was a bit of a problem there.

Essentially the idea is, if there is an interest, it doesn't matter who has this interest, if it's a human, black, white, female, male or if it's an animal. It just matters how intense the interest is.

So for example: Eating meat is a luxury for us humans. We don't need it. The animals on the other hand are suffering and being killed. The interests of the animals have much more weight and they suffer more. So on a weight scale these interest would weigh much heavier. So they're interests are much more important and should be met, they should not die for our luxury. It doesn't matter that they're not humans. Their need is greater than ours. So their needs should be met, not ours. Our luxury doesn't outweigh their suffering and pain and death.

Just wanted to clear that up. :)