MAP Forum

Wild mules exist as far as I know, so it's likely that mares and asses could be attracted to each other. So if inter-species attraction between close relatives is a thing, why does it seem to be so rare among zoophiles, as far as I know?

While I see the obvious evolutionary reasons why people would have developed a sharp distinction between members of their own and other related species and weakened attraction to similar species, I don't see why human attraction to bonobos and chimpanzees does not seem to remain even as a vestigial trait among humans. Does attraction towards them really make less evolutionary sense than attraction towards other animals? My only guess is that we apparently find less people attracted to these animals simply because they are all wild.

(This is based on some statistics I recall, but I don't remember the source.)

To be honest, I think (without claiming to know) it's because most zoophiles are more turned on by the idea of sex with non-human animals (the novelty, the taboo, the convenience, ) than they are actually physically attracted to them.

Lions and tigers (both panthers) will sometimes mate in captivity but I think their first choice would be someone of their own species and they settle when none are available, I could be wrong (they don't share a natural habitat so it's in captivity that they would typically interact). Lion-tiger unions can at least produce fertile female offspring. Mules are typically infertile with some rare exceptions (I don't know if there are exceptional male ligers/tigons who can father offspring).

Apparently, people of (modern) non-sub-saharan African descent typically inherit around 1-4% of their dna from Neanderthals, I don't know if they were a separate species from us or just a sub-species. Many modern humans also have Denisovan ancestry (particularly Melanesians, Aboriginal Australians and people from some parts of Asia, apparently). On the flip side, even though different species have different 'mechanisms' for avoiding inbreeding (not due to their conscious individual mating preference but selected behaviors that deterred that, like with lions kicking male cubs out of the pride when they become sexually mature), non-human animals generally don't avoid mating with opposite-sex siblings or parents. When inter-species mating occurs with other animals, it seems to always be within the genus (although dogs will sometimes use human legs as masturbatory aids and I vaguely remember a video of a dolphin playfully humping a human). I don't think a non-human animal who seems to _prefer_ individuals outside of their own species has ever been observed.

It might have to do with the uncanny valley effect. Another ape similar to us but with significant differences is liable to trigger the same parts of our brain that creeps people out when they see a human corpse or someone experiencing a deadly pathogenic disease.

Another possibility lies with a hypothesis I've heard mentioned was that at some point there was inter-group conflict between humans and other homo species like neanderthals, and that finding a distinction between our species was important for surviving for a significant enough time period that it could impact this sense of the uncanny as well.

All that being said though, I'm not close with any zoophiles but I do know of people online and among acquaintances who are obsessed with non-human primates the way some closeted zoophiles do for the species they're attracted to, so they're probably out there. Notably as well, when one mad scientist tried to organize an experiment to attempt a human chimpanzee hybrid, he got several human volunteers, although the study was never actually completed (https://interestingengineering.com/cult ... a-humanzee).

Scorchingwilde wrote: Sat May 16, 2026 8:13 pm It might have to do with the uncanny valley effect. Another ape similar to us but with significant differences is liable to trigger the same parts of our brain that creeps people out when they see a human corpse or someone experiencing a deadly pathogenic disease.

Another possibility lies with a hypothesis I've heard mentioned was that at some point there was inter-group conflict between humans and other homo species like neanderthals, and that finding a distinction between our species was important for surviving for a significant enough time period that it could impact this sense of the uncanny as well.

All that being said though, I'm not close with any zoophiles but I do know of people online and among acquaintances who are obsessed with non-human primates the way some closeted zoophiles do for the species they're attracted to, so they're probably out there. Notably as well, when one mad scientist tried to organize an experiment to attempt a human chimpanzee hybrid, he got several human volunteers, although the study was never actually completed (https://interestingengineering.com/cult ... a-humanzee).

That's interesting, I didn't know about the uncanny valley and Ilya Ivanov.

How wide spread are chimpanzees and bonobos? I'd expect more zoophilia if they were everywhere.

I know. It seems so odd. I mean like they are our closest living relatives and we shared a common ancestor with them. Which not only explains our violent side but also our sexual and compassionate side, and undeniably, our pedophiliac/teleiophiliac sides.

I think many people look at the popularized violence of chimps and the sexual/pedophile sexual interaction of bonobos and automatically think "I don't want people thinking I'm like THOSE crazy apes!!"

Maybe there is the uncanny valley element of chimps and other primates looking like slightly "degenerate" humans with underslung facial features, big chins, teeth, etc.

eta - See someone mentioned this, added link.