So, training. First, let's define it: training is using Pavlovian or operant conditioning to get an animal to have sex with you. That is, rewarding the animal (ie with food) for participating, or punishing them in some way for not. Let me make it clear that, say, showing your dog how it's done, or sort of "warming" your horse up over time is not training. Animals do that to each other. Humans do that to each other. We don't really talk about it, because we don't want sex to seem so mechanical, and we certainly don't want to look like we're 'bad' at it, so we pretend it's an entirely natural thing which we just 'get'.
And we do, to a great extent. So do most if not all sexual animals; certainly all the animals a human could ever have a mutual sexual relationship with, in any case. That's part of the point here: animals do not need specific training to have sex, let alone to enjoy it. If they are not enjoying it, it does not mean you need to train them to enjoy it, it means you are doing something very wrong.
I'll give an example: I read a lot of people talking about putting tasty things on their genitalia so that their animal (usually a dog) will lick them. I don't have an enormous problem with this: particularly compared to other methods of training I read about, it's certainly not harmful. The human is getting a lickjob and the pooch is getting a snack, and that's fine and dandy. The problem comes up when people call this zoophilia. As I noted last month, zoophilia is romantic: there is primary interest in the desires of your partner, and in mutuality. In the case of this training, the mutuality is limited: one is getting sexual pleasure, the other is not; the latter may only be faintly aware that sexual pleasure is at all being had. The use of this method of training, therefore, along with all the others that are more explicit and intensive, are a form of bestiality.
Let's talk more about the peanut butter-licking. The people advising other people on it are doing so as an answer to the question, "How do I get my dog to blow me/eat me out?" What is not acknowledged is that for dogs, even more so than it is for people, licking another's genitalia in a sexual context, usually before or after sex, is entirely natural. It is a response to sexual stimulation, generally olfactory but also tactile. This means that if the individuals in question were simply willing to put in the time to get to know their dog and establish an understanding sexual relationship with them, they would achieve the same result without any smeared substances.
From here, it doesn't take long to look at the other ways people get their unwilling animals to have sex with them. Animals get sex. They probably get it more than a lot of people do, and are more than happy to oblige someone whom they trust and makes them feel good. Why, then, do we have people who will in the same breath talk about how they got their bitch to 'take it' and then call themselves zoophilic? This is sheer bestiality, and is part of the reason zoosexuality is looked down upon so heavily: it's assumed, because these people are too stupid, heartless, or lazy to have a real mutual sexual relationship with an animal, that a real mutual sexual relationship with an animal is not possible.
So how do you do it, then? By utilizing the empathetic skills you must have if you are zoophilic. Know your partner. Understand their body language. When they say, "No," understand that it does in fact mean no, and oblige. Experiment a little, but don't overdo it. Most importantly, love them; if you do that, just like in anthrosexual relationships, everything else will come with time.
Also, in the last couple posts, this blog has doubled its view count. This is in large part on account of Reddit (hello, Redditors!) but also because of a few links here and there that I know of on Facebook, MSN, forums and the like. So a big thank-you to everyone who's helped spread this around!
