My friend Irina forwarded me this fascinating link today; you can view the story at
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15750604/.Apparently there is now a gay animal museum that displays 51 examples of animal homosexuality. It has some pretty well known examples of gay animals, including Bonobos and whales. The article also briefs over the multiple reasons members of an animal species might be gay (pleasure, dominance, networking, etc).
The most interesting thing I read though is about gay animal
couples. Because when the issue of homosexual animals (other than humans, that is) comes up, we always hear about the dogs humping and the bonobos rubbing up against each other but less is said about something resembling an actual relationship similar to one that would occur between a male and female couple of the same species. I've read a lot about the bonobos (you can read my blog about them and homosexuality
here) but emphasis is always on the sexual aspect of their homosexual relationships. In this article however, it mentions how some animals actually have gay couples that raise young together! I hadn't really been aware that this happens.
For example. Apparently, almost a QUARTER of black swan families are raised by homosexual couples! Is that not the coolest thing? I always loved black swans as a kid- now I love them even more! It's so cute!
It's sad though that I have to read random articles on the internet to realize this.
"Like most complex issues, animal homosexuality is challenging and poorly understood. Therefore, educators tend to shy away from covering it in their teaching."
Hear, hear. I think this is something high school biology classes should not forget to cover, because it's pretty important, and if kids are taught from an early age that there are multiple reasons animals have sex besides reproduction, a lot of misconceptions will clear the stage.
Here's an additional link to gay black swan info:
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/gayanimals030707-3that link is actually pretty cool because it has multiple examples of homosexuality among animals (including flamingos and the koala!)
an interesting line about the swans there: "These homosexual couples are frequently better-suited to parenting than their heterosexual counterparts -- as two males, they can secure a bigger territory."
oooh. I guess at least in the REST of the animal kingdom, gays aren't necessarily considered to make bad parents. ;3
Comments (113)
@lovechartreuse - ok whatever. i got my opinion and you got yours.
Its amazing how much people don't realize its an intellectual travesty to put their uneducated opinions amongst the merits of scientifically proven facts.
/shakeshead.
@NaitoOfNarnia - I was looking back through comments and saw this;
"God did not create gays. God created people. People chose to be gay."
I thought this was interesting, because I want to know what you think about swans then; do the gay black swans CHOOSE to be gay, or did God make them gay?
I guess I'm just curious because normally (although not always) someone that comes from the same area of beliefs as you doesn't usually consider animals to have a soul/conscious thought/make moral decisions, that sort of thing... but wouldn't making a choice about good or bad, gay or straight (morality) mean that animals do, in fact, act on more than instinct? Or do they not choose, which implies that God actually make gay swans? In which case: why would he not make gay humans?
@lauraloiss - so if two gay guys date, but don't have sex, they're just hanging out? haha. sorry if I have a bit of... skepticism at that claim. Do you only count yourself as dating someone once you've had sex, though?
And at any rate, birds have sex differently than humans... so I'm not sure it's relevant. But I guess they probably do hump each other, if we're going to be nit-picky about it.
@lovechartreuse - You seem to be replying and reading my comments anyway. And I'm still waiting for your proof. And insulting @lauraloiss only goes to show you make judgments too easily. Who says she hasn't done a bit of research herself or read up on the studies others have done. She is free to make an opinion or a hypothesis. Her statment was quite rational. And I also challenge you to PROVE homosexuality is natural. Even the top scientists have yet to prove that.
@NaitoOfNarnia - Thank you! and she needs to chill out.
@ScarletMoth - I do see your point, and I will freely admit I don't have a clear answer. But based on what I do know about God, here's my thinking.
When Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden, that sin didn't just affect their relationship with God or with each other. It affected the entire world. I know that seems like a stretch, but that much is true. While I cannot recall the extact Scripture to reference that point, when we stop to consider how the day of Jesus' death on the Cross affected the very weather (sun went dark, clouds as dark as night, etc, and the whole earth shook), one can reasonably assert that Jesus' victory over sin affected more than just our chances of going to Heaven. If sin lead to the decay of both the living and the non-living, then it would make sense why sin's would once again cause such a huge affect on all of nature.
Now, here is where I make my "educated guess". I do have reasons for this view...it's not a mere flipant "oh, this is just what I believe", but for the life of me, I cannot recall the details that led me to this present conclusion. And I am open to correction given ample proof/evidence (namely that of Scripture since that is where I'm coming from). Adam and Eve live a perfect life prior to sin. Even the animals lived in peace among each other. There was NO death. No evil. From the beginning, God's design was for one male and one female - both for pleasure and for procreation. God has never straryed from His design. We have, though. As a result of our sin, the effects permeated all of creation. No longer did the lions and the lambs hang out in peace. Instead, the lions became carnivors. No longer did humans live moral lives, but instead turned sex - that beautiful gift God gave to husbands and wives - into a means to do all kinds of perverted things contrary to God's design.
So, "in short" (ha! ...read my blog, I'm rarely short on anything), when the we sinned, it affected the natural order of God's design, even to that of how animals lived. God did not create "gay animals". Once again, God does not change, so He will not do anything that is contrary to His will. It was not His will that any should live in sin, but He did create us to have a choice. We made our choice and as a result it affected the world in ways we could not fathom. What those swans and other animals are doing are living lives that have been influence/affected by our own ill choices. No, animals do not have a moral code to live by. But rather, they should be seen as a testimony that something is not right.
Of course, one would have to believe in God to begin with and see that the Bible IS His written word.
@lauraloiss - You're quite welcome. And I agree.
@NaitoOfNarnia - Speak the truth! gay animals don't make much sence, sure they can hang out and stuff but that dosent mean they're humping eachother. like seriously.
@lauraloiss - Yup, I pretty much agree.
To me, going back to the heart of the matter about homosexuality among humans, it's like this. Jesus died for our sins (see my post here). Our sins are not us. Just like we are not the cancer or the AIDS or the heart attack, but rather we are the ones with the cancern or the AIDS or the heart attack. To say that one is gay - as far as the popular view seems to be - is like saying that one is gay just as much as one is human. This is a falacy. If we will allow the truth of God into the argument (and you don't seem to be someone who is dismissing Him), then we must agree that God never made people to be gay in the same way they are also human. So when Jesus died for our sins, that included the sin of homosexuality.
If we were the sin itself - including homosexuality - then when Jesus died and defeated sin, then we would be no more! Jesus' death on the cross overcame sin, so if we are sin, itself, then we'd all be dead or on our way to Hell anyway and Jesus' death on the cross would be pointless. This is because God views homosexuality as a perversion of His original design and never made anyone to be gay.
Back to the animals, though. It's another falicy for anyone to say that homosexuality among animals is proof that God is okay with it. For one, it goes against His design and, two, animals are not under the same moral code that we are. As I had said (and I hope this doesn't sound like I'm directing this at you...I'm just preaching again lol), the lives animals are living are a testimony to our own depravity. How many times do we watch National Geographic and get torn up inside or angry when a mama leaves its young behind or a papa eats its young JUST to have sex again? If animals, who have no moral code, still incite in us something that seems wrong, then how is it that we can think that what we humans do is any better? Especially when we have a (moral) choice.
@lauraloiss - some gay animals do hump each other though... sorry, just not sure the point you're making in that it "doesn't make sense." So gay animals make sense in the case of dogs or dolphins, in which they do hump? Or you just don't think it makes sense, ever?
@ScarletMoth - Well this makes sence but i dont believe it, and you don't have any proof that they're gay. i've said this before its my opinion and you got yours so yeah.
@lauraloiss - they exhibit the exact same behavior as heterosexual couples do.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Science/story?id=1034434&page=1
swan couples mate for life. normally, a guy and a girl swan, but in this case, 2 girl swans, or 2 guy swans. It's not just "hanging out" as you say, because they go through all the motions of a life mate relationship, even going so far as having eggs. In the case of that article, they had actually assumed one of the swans was male until the eggs continually didn't hatch. Just as with humans there is more to a romantic relationship than just sex, the same is true of swans, anyhow.
and what don't you believe, that dogs have gay humping? Do you really want pictures or something, because that isn't really an issue of... belief, so much.
@ScarletMoth - "Just as with humans there is more to a romantic relationship than just sex, the same is true of swans, anyhow".
This statement is (maybe not intentionally) dripping with biased anthropomorphic features.
My dog was humping my cat today (or at least trying to). Does it follow that my dog is attracted to my cat? Or maybe they would like to rent the movie "Notebook" together (I mean, we really do not know that they don't, right?) They are always wrestling. This could be interpreted as flirting! Maybe they simply wish to be a couple, and our bias of keeping species with their own fuels their passion in ways that Romeo and Juliet could never imagine!
If a male dog was humping my leg, it certainly would not follow that my dog is a homosexual. Part of this reason has to do with the fact that animal behavior is so incredibly hard to interpret. If one cannot interpret a male dog humping my leg as being "gay", how in the world can they conclude, with acceptable accuracy, a male dog humping another male dog? Could it simply be the animal wishing to "release", not "caring" where he is releasing? Think about this: If a (fe)male dog does not "care" that (s)he is humping another entirely different species (in this instance, the "humpage" of my cat), why should one conclude that he/she "cares" about humping the same sex in his/her own species? Does it seriously follow that my dog is attracted to my cat? If not, then why conclude that it must be homosexuality when animals hump the same sex of the same species?
Could the simple answer be that the swans are confused? If they say that swans are difficult to tell apart, maybe there is a glitch in their systems that "allows" them to conclude something that is not. I am certainly not saying that this is probable. I am simply granting another suggestion.
This is what I would conclude:
1.) Animals will hump anything in order to reach climax. This is evidenced by my dog humping my cat, dogs humping legs, etc.
2.) If it does not necessarily follow that dogs hump things simply because they are "attracted" to that particular thing, then it does not follow that dogs who hump male dogs are homosexual. It simply means that they are humping something.
3.) If my female dog was humping my male cat, then to me (unless you wish to argue that my female dog is actually attracted to my male cat, which would then open up a whole can of worms concerning the "natural" acceptability of our species engaging in "other-species" intercourse), it is obvious that my female dog was humping that which was in front of her simply to reach release. It certainly (again) does not necessarily mean that my female dog wants to mate with my male cat.
4.) The difficulty of interpreting animal behavior "correctly" (whatever that means).
If most of these are true, then I believe that one could conclude that the interpretation of homosexuality onto other species may be a fallacious conclusion.
"Joey"