There is one case a day per state of the US of A, and European country, of bestiality/zoophilia/zoosadism, though this is believed to be a small fraction compared to the hidden lifestyles of zoosexuals, daily ‘offending’ (if you like to call it that), worldwide. If you come to think of it, that’s an awful lot of zoosexuals, isn’t it? Barely none repeat the ‘offense’, because they all are prevented from owning another animal again, which is the law in most countries; so they are all new.

Most of these so called ‘bestialists’ (which could be ‘bestialist’, ‘zoophilia’, or ‘zoosadist’; the correct term is ‘zoosexuality’ in general), select only one species, because that’s what they’re attracted to / able to access.

To me, this man seems to be a desperate, coercive, and/or opportunist, who has decided to go for multiple species, and rape them (brutally or not), for self-satisfactional purposes, only.

Obviously he likes the feel from horses and dogs, too.

He may have been a plain and simple, fance-hopper (which is classified as bestiality), or he could have shown force/harm/cruelty towards the two different species of animal, he had sex with.

There may have been multiple reasons as to why he chose to have sex with those animals, or any animals at all.

If it was out of desperation or coercion, who’s to say he won’t turn to raping other species, or even humans?

I don’t think his eyes necessarily shone for those two species, selectively, but more to the fact he had an open opportunity to have sex with animals/something. That’s why he resorted to both, rather than a subject he actually ‘fancied’; which means he could always have also resorted to (but not necessarily ‘liked’) humans, whether it be by (brutal) rape or not.

He may have (being so close) had a ‘zoophilic’, yet ‘bestialist’ relationship with ‘next door’s animals’.

He may have just liked dogs and horses, bestialist or not.

Who’s to say the girl wasn’t telling the truth, or not, either?

I think it is quite easy to say, that someone who disgusts you, has had sex with an animal, as a lie to get others to be disgusted about you, isn’t it? Whether that be that be the unlikely case, or not, is a different matter.

Most zoosexuals pick only one species, and concentrate their lives around that.

However, zoophile communities often convince other members to try the other member’s animal.

Because the zoophile communities are full of horse and dog lovers, rather than any other species (perhaps the availability?), they tend to convince each other to experience other species, and this most often or not, results in the ‘dog’ and ‘horse’ bestialist/zoophile/zoosadist.

A true zoophile wouldn’t vary between species or persons (as in the subjected animals, not just humans) at that, because they have an emotional attachment to one, and hence are monozoophiles (however, like in human-human relationships, polygamy does exist (especially in cheating)).

There are a few zoophiles, that are near enough ‘true lovers’, and in a way, ‘are’, but they have two to several lovers. The less mates there are, the more true love exists. That’s why we don’t tend to call ‘polygamous’ ‘zoophilic’ relationships ‘bestialist’, because having more than one, may lead to all for sex, and only some for love, etc, hence ‘bestiality’ make take place, also. In some human traditions, and even in nature, this is considered ‘natural’ and ‘right’.

So for the record, this is what this man is:
“A fence-hopping, polygamous, multi-specific bestialist.”
…To be short.

Thank you for reading my comments.

EWWWWW.

Stories like this are why I never let me dog outside without her leash. It’s enough to give me nightmares.