On the Zeta Principles

I want to make something clear as we start this article off. I have nothing against the Zeta Principles. I think they're a fairly effective framework for how to live your life as a moral zoo. If you're a huge fan of them and you live your life by those rules, I don't want to take that from you. I think that's amazing. You're already looking in the right direction. That said, I'm someone that hates tradition. I refuse to accept that something is right because that's the way it is, or the way that it's been. To me, progress can only exist through change, and I think there are places where the Zeta Principles can be modified to make them better. They were written over twenty years ago at this point, and the world we live in, the world zoos find ourselves in, has changed a lot. I am going to be critical of the Zeta Principles in this article. Please know that I am not doing it out of malice or spite. As much as anything, this is a wish to spark a conversation about the role they play in zoo society currently, and how they can be applied to the future of zoos as well. I'm not claiming that this re-imagining will be the utterly perfect new version of the Zeta Principles: this whole article is much more like a starting point than a conclusion. I just want to get the ball rolling! If you read this article all the way through, I would love to know your thoughts. The Zeta Principles act as a guiding light for the community, so far be it from me to talk about it without input from the rest of the community. Let us know where you stand on this topic, and how you feel about what I'm saying. Anyway, with that out of the way, let's dive into it. 

If we're going to talk about the Zeta Principles, we should start from the beginning. While there's some contention as to whether it started off this way, ZETA can actually be read as an acronym, when we're talking about the Zeta Principles. Zoophiles for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The ZETA Principles were created as a set of doctrines zoos should live by to be ethical in their sexuality. The principles were created in the 90's, and posted to a popular online zoo space at the time. The concept spread quickly amongst the zoos who were more invested in signaling to the world that they were into animal welfare. The Zeta Principles served as a banner that people could connect under to start having those conversations. Since then, they've been something carried forward across mediums. Today they're just as prevalent as they've ever been. I would say most zoos that have been in the community for at least a few months know of them. 

Okay, but let's get into the details here. What actually are the Zeta Principles? 


The ZETA principles are:
1) Bestow upon animals the same kindness one would wish bestowed upon oneself.
2) Consider the well being of an animal companion as important as ones own.
3) Place the animal’s will and wellbeing ahead of one’s desires for sexual gratification.
4) Teach those who seek knowledge about zoophilia and bestiality without promoting it.
5) Discourage the practice of bestiality in the presence of fetish seekers.
6) Censure sexual exploitation of animals for the purpose of financial gain.
7) Censure those who practice and promote animal sexual abuse.

Most of these I think are great. Points one, two, three and seven are things that every zoo should be doing for sure. However, I think the other points we could probably make some improvements. I also think there's some room to add in more too.

Let's start with point 4:

"Teach those who seek knowledge about zoophilia and bestiality without promoting it."

My issue with this could be considered pedantic, but when we're talking about a system that exists to guide a community, the wording really does become important. To teach those who seek knowledge about zoophilia and bestiality is great. I would personally change that to zoosexuality but that's small potatoes. My issue is with the last part. "Without promoting it." This phrase could mean a lot of different things, depending on who's reading it and interpreting it.

This magazine teaches people about zoophilia, but we're also very positive and welcoming. Is that us promoting it? If someone says "Hey I've been thinking about maybe tying the knot with my dog, do you have any tips," and you give them tips and then say at the end "Make sure your partner is being considered, but go have fun!" have you just violated the principle by encouraging them? My guess is that the point they're trying to make is to not go out and say "Everyone try sex with animals, it's super fun!" and I can see the rationale in that, but it could certainly be more clear. And, even if that is the point they're making, I take some issue with that too. So long as someone is properly educated and doing it for the right reasons, why not promote it? This situation starts with people seeking knowledge. If they accept that knowledge and really understand it, I think there's no problem promoting it. People should make their own choices, and obviously the animal partner in question needs to be prioritized, but I think people should be able to feel confident giving it a try if they're interested and aren't going to be an idiot about it, and the prioritization of animals is already covered in the principles. To cover it again here is pointless. Nobody who isn't a zoo is going to hear about bestiality and think "Wow I should fuck a horse." It's very similar to a common right wing talking point about how gay representation is going to turn more people gay. While there is definitely an increase in the number of queer people who we can see nowadays, I attribute that more to queer people facing less violence for being out. Similar to zoosexuality, talking about it will probably "make more zoos," but those are people who were zoos anyway that just had their minds opened to the idea. And we want to be able to help those people, which we can only do by "promoting zoophilia." 


To change this, I would word it something like this:

"Teach those who seek knowledge about zoosexuality and bestiality before encouraging sexual activity."

I think this better clarifies the point, and is more telling of what it's trying to say.

Anyways, onward to the next, point 5: 

"Discourage the practice of bestiality in the presence of fetish seekers."

I also have some concerns when it comes to this point. Mostly in that "fetish seekers" is a term that is extremely judgemental, and the point as stated labels it as a group that cannot change, rather than people who currently feel a certain way. It turns it into "real zoos" vs "fake zoos," which I find incredibly reductive.

When you picture the kind of person this point is referring to, you're probably picturing a male who just wants to stick his dick in something, and thinks it's kinda cool when that thing has four legs. Or a male who wants to see women degraded by getting with a dirty animal. There are absolutely people like that out there, and those people should absolutely be discouraged from actually doing things that genuinely distress others. But when we look at what the actual term "fetish seeker" means, it gets more complicated.

For instance, are you a fetish seeker if you look at adult zoo content if that's your primary way of expressing your zoosexuality? A lot of people join the community from the porn. In fact, based on a poll ran last year, it's actually the majority form of discovery. It's easy to say based off the wording of this point that all of those people are "fetish seekers." But, not all those people fit the image we described before. In fact, I'd say the vast majority don't. This community is something clear and strong to those of us inside of it, but for someone who's extremely ashamed of their zoosexuality, who gets off to pictures on ZooVille but has never talked to a zoo before, their picture of what being a zoo is will be extremely different than someone who's a regular reader of this magazine. That doesn't make them evil. They're a product of their environment. What if we could take those kinds of people and instead of just saying "no bad," we use it as a chance to teach and educate them, and help them understand zoosexuality past just being a thing that they get off to. I've had zoos ask if they could come over and be with my partner once they learned that he existed. In the context of a human relationship that's a crazy ask. It's easy to take that and say "Oh this guy doesn't care about animal welfare at all, he's just a fetishist." But, after talking to them a bit longer, I came to realize that they just didn't know better. They honestly thought that male dogs just wanted to have sex all the time and didn't care about with who or what. Yes that's a very incorrect thing to think, but how are people supposed to know any better if all they've ever seen is porn? It's easy to label them a creep, but it's much more productive to use that to start a dialogue and actually educate and encourage them.

I think to judge "fetish seekers" so broadly opens up too much room to chastise people in need or education, not scorn.

This one I would change to read:

"Discourage bestiality from those who do not first learn."

This addresses the issue much more clearly. The point is that anyone who isn't willing to put in the legwork to make sure they know what they're doing should be discouraged. Combined with the other tenants I think this is fairly well encompassing without being overly tribalistic. Realistically, I think this could tie into the last point, but I'll leave them separate because that would be too much work.

"Censure sexual exploitation of animals for the purpose of financial gain."

This one is going to be controversial, but still I want to mention it because I think it's a conversation worth having. The charitable read on this point is obvious. Don't force animals to have sex for money. That makes total sense. But, I think the wording here could be more clear. To some people, any form of creating adult content is sexual exploitation. But where does that leave adult zoo content creators like friend of the magazine Veronica Silesto? She's an extremely ethical zoo who creates super high-quality adult material. Everything is done above and beyond the standards that most actors would ever get on set. Her dogs are able to perform as they choose, and she just sets up a scene and goes for it. It's recorded and then put out to the internet for money, but I would argue that that's far from animal exploitation. Just because there happens to be a camera doesn't make it abusive.

That's not to say we don't still need to be cautious when it comes to porn. Yes there is a higher level of diligence necessary when it comes to that kind of thing. But, the rule as written condemns all content regardless of the nature of that content. So, for this point I would just stress a little bit more that we're talking about sexual exploitation as more than just creating content in the first place. 

This rule also could apply to anyone trying to run any kind of animal brothel or something of that nature, but I think being against that is comfortably covered in the other rules, and so I want to focus on the part that I think is a bit more nuanced.

For this one, I'd change it to:

"Be cautious of pornography, and ensure any content consumed is ethical. Censure those who create content that is not."

With this, I think both sides are better addressed. We want people to stay critical of porn, but it doesn't necessarily need to be totally seen as evil. 


So those are the ones that currently exist and the issues that I have with them. I also think that there are a few more points that could slot in nicely with the zoo creed. I'm going to spitball a couple of ideas here, but these are just my thoughts. There could almost definitely be improved wording, and maybe some of these are just bad in general. But personally they're things I think are important for anyone to be an "ethical zoo." For starters, I think something about the community would be nice. We face a lot of hatred as zoos, and it would be cool to have something in place to remind us of our shared connection. Something along the lines of:

"Treat other zoosexuals with kindness and understanding until given a reason not to."

I think as the community grows, it's going to be much easier to fall into drama and infighting. It's only natural. But I would hope that by having it in our principles to treat others kindly, that we can limit that somewhat. 

I also want to add one about scope, and the kinds of animals this applies to. I think read generously this list applies to every animal, but as zoos it's very easy to take this as just for companions. I think a good addition would be something like:

"Take steps to limit the suffering of animals both inside and outside the home."

I think if you go out and shoot deer every weekend it should be pretty clear that you are not an "ethical zoo" regardless of how you treat the horse you're in love with. That said, I think this clarifies that point. We should make it a community focus to improve the lives of all animals where we can, not just the ones we like. That said, I also understand that everyone's life is different. That's why I use the term "limit" as opposed to something stronger like "eliminate." Veganism is a good example here. I think it's fair to say everyone knows the animal farming industry is evil. But, it's also very hard to totally cut out animal products for some people. So by limiting, maybe that's going vegetarian, cutting down on the meat you consume, or buying from more ethical sources. If a mosquito lands on me I'm probably going for the slap, I'm not saying we need to be perfect beings. But we should take the animals all around us into account where we can. 

There's one last thing I feel like we can squeeze in here to give us a solid ten:

"Leave the world a better place for zoos and their partners."

I think that as a currently oppressed minority, there's a sense of responsibility that we all have to try and do something about it. Now, maybe that thing isn't starting a podcast or anything like that, maybe it's attending local meets and making sure it's a really welcoming space. Maybe it's helping out a friend who's really stressing about their sexuality. Maybe it's donating to a local animal shelter and encouraging friends to adopt if their situation allows it. This is extremely open-ended because everyone's situation is different. But, I do think it's really important. It can be a hard world out there, and I think all of us should be doing our part to ensure that it's a little less so for our friends, our peers, and for all the zoos to come. This might pass the scope of what the initial Zeta Principles were trying to do, but I really think that part of being an ethical zoo is being aware of the world around you and trying to do something about it. If you live on a farm in the middle of nowhere with your partner and you plug your ears to the outside world and the plight of others that don't have your situation, that doesn't feel very ethical to me. 



All that said, that leaves us with this.

1) Bestow upon animals the same kindness one would wish bestowed upon oneself.
2) Consider the well being of an animal companion as important as ones own.
3) Place the animal’s will and wellbeing ahead of one’s desires for sexual gratification.
4) Teach those who seek knowledge about zoosexuality and bestiality before encouraging sexual activity.
5) Discourage bestiality from those who do not first learn.
6) Be cautious of pornography, and ensure any content consumed is ethical. Censure those who create content that is not.
7) Censure those who practice and promote animal sexual abuse.
8) Treat other zoosexuals with kindness and understanding until given a reason not to.
9) Take steps to limit the suffering of animals both inside and outside the home.
10) Leave the world a better place for zoos and their partners.



So, that's how I would change the Zeta Principles. I'm not saying that these should be adopted by the community, I just wanted to give my two cents on something I feel is really important. I'm sure there are going to be disagreements on everything I've touched here, and that's totally okay. Like I said at the start, if you made it to this part I would love to hear your thoughts, positive or negative! At the end of the day, I think all of us want the same thing. We all want animals to be treated well. And as long as that's something you're focused on, you're doing alright.