Is homosexuality unnatural?

[mynah]

It would probably be appropriate to refer to animal sexual behaviour as flexible, rather than "natural" or "unnatural". Some of the things my dogs get up to would be regarded as plain perverse if humans indulged in the same. I would, however, not call it unnatural in animals - especially as this behaviour sometimes took place with an intact female present.

[modest]

I thought this was funny,

Some scientists have interpreted same-sex pairing as anything but sex. In a study of giraffes in Africa a researcher registered all cases where a male sniffed a female as “sexual interest” – while anal intercourse with ejaculation between males was registered as a form of ritualised fighting

Against nature? - Naturhistorisk Museum

 

 

-source

 

~modest

[Larv]

I thought this was funny,

Against nature? - Naturhistorisk Museum

 

 

-source

 

~modest

Why do you suppose the male gariffe on the receiving end of anal intercourse stood still for it? Did it relieve his constipation? Or did it just feel good?

[Cedars]

This article seems appropriate.

The Gay Animal Kingdom § SEEDMAGAZINE.COM

 

The article states that over 450 different vertebrate species practice homosexual sex. That sounds pretty natural to me.

 

I share your concern, Cedars, of how this translates to humans, but many cases show that it's not dependent upon bias. It happens in healthy populations in the wild.

 

Searching the internet, I cannot access one original source of Joan Roughgarden. All this is, relates to my original postings about news source headlines vs what the study actually says. I cannot independently confirm or deny the authors interpretation of the source data.

 

Evolution's Rainbow by Joan Roughgarden

 

He says that she says. My investigations into various claims have not produced the evidence of homosexuality that the headlines imply.

 

Heres what a google scholar search on the keywords presented in this article reveal:

"male big horn sheep" and "homosexual societies" - Google Scholar

 

Keyword sentence "Male big horn sheep live in what are often called “homosexual societies.”

 

Define often I guess would be the question to ask next.

 

If you have a link to the actual articles, rather than the interpretation of her articles, I will read them. I have searched for giraffes and lions also and so far, its all a news source says she/he/they say (giraffe references all reflect back to one study in the 50s and another in the 60s, so far, on one or two separate populations of giraffee, one of which I believe was an isolated example (isolated by desert)). Two different sources but again, the actual content is unavailable online as far as I have been able to access. Birds presented the most data and as posted, its reproduction by researchers is caused by sex ratio bias (in gulls/several species) and is also noted in the wild to be present during sex ratio bias periods.

 

Does one of the 450 vertebrate species include the captive penguins? Do you include the captive penguins as practicing homosexual sex? (these particular penguins (chinstrap) are one of the birds which M/F are not easily ID'd in the field).

 

Unnatural conditions create unnatural reactions. Or maybe The natural reaction to this unnatural condition.

[modest]

Why do you suppose the male gariffe on the receiving end of anal intercourse stood still for it? Did it relieve his constipation? Or did it just feel good?

 

I’d love to be able to tell you that the giraffe that was catching was genuinely interested in the giraffe that was pitching—that he was charmed by the pitcher’s foreign accent and attracted to his well-chiseled jaw and dark penetrating eyes. But, we both know that’s not the case. In actual fact, the catcher felt obligated to give it up after the pitcher treated him an expensive steak and lobster dinner at the local watering hole and took him to his favorite meerkat opera. The pitcher did not have a chiseled jaw and his accent was atrocious—sounded something like a water buffalo giving birth crossed with a dying Bobcat (the comedian, not the animal).

 

Yeah... if I had to guess the giraffe’s motivation for receiving anal sex it would probably be pity and a feeling of obligation. But, I guess I wouldn’t rule out your suggestion that he is seeking relief from an awful case of constipation.

 

~modest

[lemit]

And this is a problem across several topics. This is a problem in several arenas. Wilson was rude when he shouted out "you lie" but Carter was wrong to label it 'racism'. I was listening to the same speech and clearly remember the claim of "not raise the deficit" and thinking "thats a lie". I thought "thats a lie" with Bush and his tax cuts to the wealthy being a good thing for me (and my taxes went up when they took away head of household) and I thought "thats a lie" with Clinton and NAFTA. I mean seriously, how many of you are tired of Sharpton or Jackson labeling everything that doesnt meet their agenda as 'racism'.

 

 

If I remember right, Jimmy Carter qualified his comments about Joe Wilson by reminding listeners that he had spent his whole life in the South, had known people like Joe Wilson all his life, and knew that racism was generally a factor in their inability to behave as civilly toward a black person as they would toward a white person. I think I got that right, and I think that shows an expertise I have an infinitesmal portion of from working 30 years in Civil Rights. When a Nobel Peace Prize laureate who is known as one of the great statesmen in the world speaks harshly, we should listen. When that Nobel Laureate speaks from his own experience of more than eighty years, we should listen very carefully. Jimmy Carter does not have a reputation for sudden, off-the-cuff outbursts (as his well-couched remarks have since been characterized). Joe Wilson's outburst was racist. Get used to it and get over it.

 

This is not as off-topic as it seems. The world is changing. Some people will be comfortable with having Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House of Representatives, Charles Rangel as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and Barney Frank as Chairman of the House Banking Committee. Some won't.

 

A woman, a black, and a gay carry concealed weapons into a bar. Sorry, that's another thread.

 

A woman, a black, and a gay are effectively running the House of Representatives. To the people who believe a Congressman should look and sound like that Marlboro Man, John Boehner, the world already has gone to Hell in a handbasket.

 

To have this ongoing conversation about whether the life--not the lifestyle, the life--of the Chairman of the House Banking Committee poses an afront to nature is just plain absurd. But we don't seem to be able to avoid that conversation, because when any of us suggests persons of different sexual orientations are merely following completely natural impulses, we are sure to hear somebody shouting "You lie!"

 

--lemit

[modest]

I cant say the researchers are wrong because most of them are not labeling the behavior as homosexual (though I have not read the Bruce Bagemihl book, the most often quoted reference)...

 

Here's an interesting snippet.

 

Homosexuality is not generally the result of animals being “deprived” of heterosexual mating opportunities—this can be seen quite clearly in the behavior of individuals toward members of the opposite sex in skewed or segregated populations (in both the wild and captivity). Potential heterosexual partners are often ignored or even actively refused in such situations—they are rarely inundated with attentions as would be expected if animals were being excluded from participation in opposite-sex mating. In Giraffe populations with a majority of males, for instance, females are not swamped with heterosexual attentions, and mating opportunities with females are sometimes even bypassed in favor of homosexual mounting and other activities. Female Japanese Macaques and Hanuman Langurs engaging in homosexual activities usually disregard males entirely and may actually threaten or attack them if they make sexual overtures...

 

<snip>

 

...Adult bull Wapiti often show no sexual interest in females they happen to encounter outside the breeding season (even if the females are in heat at the time), while younger bulls do often show such interest. Yet homosexual activity in this species occurs in both age groups outside the breeding season—and therefore in neither case can it be due to a lack of access to females [seasonally homosexual :thumbs_up]...

 

<snip>

 

...Even same-sex activity that does have its genesis in the absence of opposite-sex parners—so-called situational homosexuality—often shows remarkable longevity and durability, rarely conforming to the stereotype of being “fragile” or liable to disintegrate once heterosexual mates are available. Captive animals that bond sexually with one another when opposite-sex partners are completely unavailable often resist later attempts to “convert” them to heterosexuality. They may even exhibit a longer-term “preference” for same-sex mates that outlasts their initial “situational” introduction to homosexuality. A pair of male White-fronted Amazon Parrots, for example, vigorously refused the advances...

 

Biological exuberance: animal homosexuality and natural diversity -- Bruce Bagemihl

 

That's probably about all I should quote for copyright concerns. It looks like there are good references and end notes starting around page 657.

 

~modest

[Cedars]

Here's an interesting snippet.

 

That's probably about all I should quote for copyright concerns. It looks like there are good references and end notes starting around page 657.

 

~modest

 

OK. Now I have seen snippets of Bagemihl's work and again, its someone reporting their interpretation of others work. It would be nice if (as I have pointed out) direct links to the research quoted were included. Bagemihl's interpretation of 'often' may not be accurate. This book is not peer reviewed as I understand it. I found his descriptions of these behaviors to be vague. For example, the wart hogs listed typical group sizes, but Bagemihls description did not include "out of 15 groups observed x amount of females or males displayed mounting".

 

For example, the oxfordjournal link earlier, it its conclusion (and using many examples including bagemihls) offers this statement:

 

"We have demonstrated in this study that, although same-sex courtship and mounting behavior appears to be uncommon in birds, enough variation is present to permit examination of same-sex sexual behavior in relation to mating system and developmental state at hatching and to document social conditions under which it is more likely to occur for both males and females."

 

The one thing about the oxford listing is the amount of data searching they did, and they did not include captive birds as a part of their journal article. They list 80 species in this document.

 

In the limited access to Bagemihls work, he uses birds and either 130 or 140 species as exhibiting ss behaviors. There are between 9 and 10 K bird species.

[Larv]

To have this ongoing conversation about whether the life--not the lifestyle, the life--of the Chairman of the House Banking Committee [barney Frank] poses an afront to nature is just plain absurd.

Who ever said that?

 

But we don't seem to be able to avoid that conversation, because when any of us suggests persons of different sexual orientations are merely following completely natural impulses, we are sure to hear somebody shouting "You lie!"

It’s best to avoid sweeping allegations like this. Following natural impulses is not what I want from a congressperson. I want rational and relevant deliberations, tempered by civility and acuity of judgment. When you call for natural impulses you open the door to all sorts of weirdoes, like Joe Wilson, who may have natural impulses to blurt out their opinions inappropriately.

 

And then there are the natural impulses of capitalists, power mongers, spouse beaters, gamblers, alcoholics, pedophiles, polygamists, necrophiliacs…

[lemit]

It’s best to avoid sweeping allegations . . . . Following natural impulses is not what I want from a congressperson. I want rational and relevant deliberations, tempered by civility and acuity of judgment. When you call for natural impulses you open the door to all sorts of weirdoes, like Joe Wilson, who may have natural impulses to blurt out their opinions inappropriately.

 

And then there are the natural impulses of capitalists, power mongers, spouse beaters, gamblers, alcoholics, pedophiles, polygamists, necrophiliacs…

 

Sorry. I may have got carried away. I of course wasn't suggesting that "the love that dares not speak its name" could be practiced on the floor of the House, or in the cloak rooms. (A men's room at the Minneapolis airport would be much more appropriate.)

 

What I was trying to suggest is that the world might be changing a little more rapidly than some people would like. Their leadership models are no longer evident, so they feel they have the right to behave in inappropriate ways because they believe their leaders are also inappropriate. I don't know that's happening, but I think if it were, it would look like what we're seeing now.

 

It's interesting that in your catalogue of unacceptable behaviors--"capitalists, power mongers, spouse beaters, gamblers, alcoholics, pedophiles, polygamists, necrophiliacs"--roughly speaking, the ones that cause us the most concern, and I include "sexual inversion," are the ones that least compromise one's judgment and ability to lead.

 

To understand that sentence, if such is possible, you must remember that money is the root of all politics.

 

--lemit

[buddyzen]

I still don't understand this countrys thinking we have a half black president with most states that are against gay rights.... :phones:

[Cedars]

If I remember right, Jimmy Carter qualified his comments about Joe Wilson by reminding listeners that he had spent his whole life in the South, had known people like Joe Wilson all his life, and knew that racism was generally a factor in their inability to behave as civilly toward a black person as they would toward a white person. I think I got that right, and I think that shows an expertise I have an infinitesmal portion of from working 30 years in Civil Rights. When a Nobel Peace Prize laureate who is known as one of the great statesmen in the world speaks harshly, we should listen. When that Nobel Laureate speaks from his own experience of more than eighty years, we should listen very carefully. Jimmy Carter does not have a reputation for sudden, off-the-cuff outbursts (as his well-couched remarks have since been characterized). Joe Wilson's outburst was racist. Get used to it and get over it.

 

--lemit

 

Jimmy Carter and this "appeal to authority".

 

These guys making the claims have been around anti-semitics too (link below). Lifetime of experience:

 

Deborah Lipstadt - Jimmy Carter's Jewish Problem - washingtonpost.com

 

Quote from article:

"Perhaps unused to being criticized, Carter reflexively fell back on this kind of innuendo about Jewish control of the media and government. Even if unconscious, such stereotyping from a man of his stature is noteworthy. When David Duke spouts it, I yawn. When Jimmy Carter does, I shudder."

[lemit]

I apologize for my part in getting this thread off-topic. The topic itself has enough controversy; it doesn't need all the troubles of the Middle East added.

 

Again, sorry.

 

--lemit

[Cedars]

I apologize for my part in getting this thread off-topic. The topic itself has enough controversy; it doesn't need all the troubles of the Middle East added.

 

Again, sorry.

 

--lemit

 

You really dont need to apologize. It's part of the thought flowage. It is kinda related to the thread and being as you brought it up, I offered a retort. It really couldnt be allowed to hang out there as the last word. After all, you were calling Joe Wilson a racist based on Carter's assessment of the words he spoke, which were simply "you lie".

 

Were I on a jury deciding a hate crime, I would vote to acquit if thats all the prosecution had to offer.

[REASON]

Jimmy Carter and this "appeal to authority".

 

These guys making the claims have been around anti-semitics too (link below). Lifetime of experience:

 

Deborah Lipstadt - Jimmy Carter's Jewish Problem - washingtonpost.com

 

Quote from article:

"Perhaps unused to being criticized, Carter reflexively fell back on this kind of innuendo about Jewish control of the media and government. Even if unconscious, such stereotyping from a man of his stature is noteworthy. When David Duke spouts it, I yawn. When Jimmy Carter does, I shudder."

 

With regrets for keeping this thread off topic, I would like to respond to this post in the tradition of Ms. Lipstadt's article by pointing out that she is wrong in her condemnation of Jimmy Carter and his book. She has made factual errors, is attempting to re-write history, thinks the Holocaust provides and excuse for the abhorrent treatment of other peoples, wants to denegrate the reputation of a known statesman, and is ready to shout "anti-semitism" at the first hint of criticism of Israeli foreign policy.....

 

.....and I don't have to provide a single example or a shread of evidence to support my contentions or insinuations about her. :doh:

 

 

Sorry for continuing the diversion, so I will answer the thread topic as follows:

 

No. Considering that homosexuality has been a fixture within humanity throughout recorded history, I would suggest that it is safe to say that it is entirely natural, if not typical as a percentage of the population.

[Cedars]

With regrets for keeping this thread off topic, I would like to respond to this post in the tradition of Ms. Lipstadt's article by pointing out that she is wrong in her condemnation of Jimmy Carter and his book. She has made factual errors, is attempting to re-write history, thinks the Holocaust provides and excuse for the abhorrent treatment of other peoples, wants to denegrate the reputation of a known statesman, and is ready to shout "anti-semitism" at the first hint of criticism of Israeli foreign policy.....

 

.....and I don't have to provide a single example or a shread of evidence to support my contentions or insinuations about her. :doh:

Direct your comment elsewhere. It was not I who called Joe Wilson a racist without a shred of evidence.

 

Nor do I believe Jimmy Carter is anti-semitic.

[REASON]

Direct your comment elsewhere. It was not I who called Joe Wilson a racist without a shred of evidence.

 

Nor do I believe Jimmy Carter is anti-semitic.

 

My comments weren't directed at you. They were directed at the source you used to support your point that an appeal to Jimmy Carter is invalid because he is a hypocrite.

 

I didn't think Ms. Lipstadt was very convincing in her article.