| Revision as of 19:56, 11 May 2006 editTBP (talk | contribs)188 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:58, 11 May 2006 edit undoTBP (talk | contribs)188 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Hani Miletski''' (] - ) is a ], and ] living in ] ] ]. She specializes as a trainer and supervisor in the field, addiction, and also works within the ] system. | '''Hani Miletski''' (] - ) is a ], and ] living in ] ] ]. She specializes as a trainer and supervisor in the field, addiction, and also works within the ] system. | ||
| She is notable for her "monumental"<ref>Beetz (2002) section 5.2.25: "One of the most monumental and recent studies on human-animal sexual contact was conducted by Miletski in 1999"</ref> and "pioneering"<ref>Book review, ''Journal of Sex Research,'' May 2003. ().</ref>1999 study into the field of ], a comprehensive reference work and analysis combined with further research, which formally established whether a genuine ] might exist (as opposed to a mere ]), and whether previous research in the field had erred in not fully recognizing this. Prior to her studies, the field was highly fragmented and reliable information for psychological purposes unclear.<ref name="cite1">Miletski states (p.1) that there was information was sparse, often contradictory and not easily located, and no solid body of research or consensus of opinion in psychology, when she looked for information regarding a patient of hers who reported zoophilic interest. She described how: "Throughout the literature review, it is very obvious that authors perceive sexual relations with animals in very different ways. Definitions of various behaviors and attitudes are often conflicting, leaving the reader confused. Terms such as 'sodomy,' 'zoorasty,' 'zoosexuality,' as well as 'bestiality' and 'zoophilia' are often used, each having a different meaning depending on the author." A states that "It seems clear from Miletski's summary of the existing literature that very little is actually known about bestiality and there is not anything approaching a consensus as to why animal-human sexual contacts occur... many of the existing reports and studies should be classified more as pseudo-science than serious research."</ref> Her findings were later supported by several others in the field. | She is notable for her "monumental"<ref>Beetz (2002) section 5.2.25: "One of the most monumental and recent studies on human-animal sexual contact was conducted by Miletski in 1999"</ref> and "pioneering"<ref>Book review, ''Journal of Sex Research,'' May 2003. (): "In sum, this study is a path-breaking one and gives us a better understanding of the topic. Much work still needs to be done, but Miletski should be complimented for her pioneering efforts..."</ref>1999 study into the field of ], a comprehensive reference work and analysis combined with further research, which formally established whether a genuine ] might exist (as opposed to a mere ]), and whether previous research in the field had erred in not fully recognizing this. Prior to her studies, the field was highly fragmented and reliable information for psychological purposes unclear.<ref name="cite1">Miletski states (p.1) that there was information was sparse, often contradictory and not easily located, and no solid body of research or consensus of opinion in psychology, when she looked for information regarding a patient of hers who reported zoophilic interest. She described how: "Throughout the literature review, it is very obvious that authors perceive sexual relations with animals in very different ways. Definitions of various behaviors and attitudes are often conflicting, leaving the reader confused. Terms such as 'sodomy,' 'zoorasty,' 'zoosexuality,' as well as 'bestiality' and 'zoophilia' are often used, each having a different meaning depending on the author." A states that "It seems clear from Miletski's summary of the existing literature that very little is actually known about bestiality and there is not anything approaching a consensus as to why animal-human sexual contacts occur... many of the existing reports and studies should be classified more as pseudo-science than serious research."</ref> Her findings were later supported by several others in the field. | ||
Revision as of 19:58, 11 May 2006
Hani Miletski (1962 - ) is a sexologist, and sex therapist living in Bethesda maryland USA. She specializes as a trainer and supervisor in the field, addiction, and also works within the criminal justice system.
She is notable for her "monumental" and "pioneering"1999 study into the field of zoosexuality, a comprehensive reference work and analysis combined with further research, which formally established whether a genuine orientation might exist (as opposed to a mere sexual fetish), and whether previous research in the field had erred in not fully recognizing this. Prior to her studies, the field was highly fragmented and reliable information for psychological purposes unclear. Her findings were later supported by several others in the field.
Miletski was born in Israel, and according to her website, moved to the United States as part of the Israeli embassy staff as Assistant Senior Representative of the Defense Mission to the U.S. for Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) Programs. She studied at the Catholic University of America and gained her doctorate at the Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality California and worked within the Fogel Foundation from 1994 until 2003 before leaving to focus on her own private practice.
Books
- Understanding Bestiality and Zoophilia (pub. 2002) ISBN 0-9716917-0-3 (book review)
- Mother-Son Incest: The Unthinkable Broken Taboo (a brief overview of findings, pub. 1999) ISBN 1884444318
References
- Beetz (2002) section 5.2.25: "One of the most monumental and recent studies on human-animal sexual contact was conducted by Miletski in 1999"
- Book review, Journal of Sex Research, May 2003. (Online version): "In sum, this study is a path-breaking one and gives us a better understanding of the topic. Much work still needs to be done, but Miletski should be complimented for her pioneering efforts..."
- Miletski states (p.1) that there was information was sparse, often contradictory and not easily located, and no solid body of research or consensus of opinion in psychology, when she looked for information regarding a patient of hers who reported zoophilic interest. She described how: "Throughout the literature review, it is very obvious that authors perceive sexual relations with animals in very different ways. Definitions of various behaviors and attitudes are often conflicting, leaving the reader confused. Terms such as 'sodomy,' 'zoorasty,' 'zoosexuality,' as well as 'bestiality' and 'zoophilia' are often used, each having a different meaning depending on the author." A review states that "It seems clear from Miletski's summary of the existing literature that very little is actually known about bestiality and there is not anything approaching a consensus as to why animal-human sexual contacts occur... many of the existing reports and studies should be classified more as pseudo-science than serious research."