How do the fact that there are gay/homosexual animals impact the ia that homosexualy is a s? If animals are sometim homosexual, don’t that mean homosexualy is natural?
Contents:
- HOW DO THE FACT THAT THERE ARE GAY/HOMOSEXUAL ANIMALS IMPACT THE IA THAT HOMOSEXUALY IS A S?
- WHY ARE SOME ANIMALS GAY? ARE THERE ANY THAT DO NOT REPRODUCE DUE TO BEG GAY? WOULDN’T THAT BE AN EVOLUTNARY DISADVANTAGE? IF IT’S JT A SELECTED FEW A GROUP, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IT’S NOT AN ANOMALY?
- WHY SOME ANIMALS (AND PEOPLE) ARE GAY
- CAN ANIMALS BE GAY?
- CAN ANIMALS BE GAY?
HOW DO THE FACT THAT THERE ARE GAY/HOMOSEXUAL ANIMALS IMPACT THE IA THAT HOMOSEXUALY IS A S?
*Note: We tentnally do not e terms such as “heterosexual” or “homosexual” to prevent any nflatn between human sexualy and nonhuman animal sexual behavrs. That’s precisely why the thors chose terms like SSB and DSB stead of “homosexualy” or “heterosexualy” to further prevent nflatn between human cultural bias and non-human animal sexual behavrs. That’s puzzled que a few scientists—those who study greylag gee and also the hundreds of other animal speci which homosexualy is, nfoundgly, found.
It’s certaly not aberrant, though, nsirg s to ame the qutn a b more scientifilly: Is homosexualy, the words of Kurt Kotrschal, a behavral blogist at the Universy of Vienna, “prerved bee there was some stabilizg selectn, or is an unavoidable product of bra velopment? Not even Kotrschal, who has studied greylag gee for s, workg at a rearch statn named for the late, great zoologist Konrad Lorenz, whose most famo studi volved the same himself nsired homosexualy eful.
WHY ARE SOME ANIMALS GAY? ARE THERE ANY THAT DO NOT REPRODUCE DUE TO BEG GAY? WOULDN’T THAT BE AN EVOLUTNARY DISADVANTAGE? IF IT’S JT A SELECTED FEW A GROUP, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IT’S NOT AN ANOMALY?
Other scientists have suggted that homosexual upl might perform some important social duty, such as helpg to raise other upl’ goslgs or guardg loni om predators.
Or, as homosexualy seems to occur more equently speci where parentg duti are ncentrated one sex, maybe homosexualy aris when one sex has more ee time.
WHY SOME ANIMALS (AND PEOPLE) ARE GAY
Their applibily also vari: Homosexualy exists so many far-flung rners of the animal kgdom that likely didn’t origate a sgle mon anctor, but evolved aga and aga.
CAN ANIMALS BE GAY?
)Cldia Wascher, a zoologist at Anglia Rk Universy, adds another nuance: If homosexualy is often adaptive, as she thks, ’s also not gog to be a straightforward tra hered by some fixed percentage of a populatn, wh equenci changg the simple manner of lor patterns or height. Rather, the potential for beg homosexual will vary om dividual to dividual, like cursy or boldns or any other personaly tra, and be shaped by the plex teractn of blogy wh social and environmental sexual proclivi of a speci, then, are nstantly unr evolutnary prsure. Blogists n talk of k selectn and evolutnary strategi, but the birds themselv aren’t likely aware of those dynamics any more than we are choosg our matters for each goose isn’t evolutn but attractn—all the emotns and experienc that feed a special bond are themselv rooted blogil systems shared by heterosexual and homosexual dividuals alike.
Anyone engaged the most elementary animal observatn is forced to nclu that animal “homosexualy, ” “filici” and “nnibalism” are exceptns to normal animal behavr. Although homosexual behavr is very mon the animal world, seems to be very unmon that dividual animals have a long-lastg predisposn to engage such behavr to the excln of heterosexual activi.
CAN ANIMALS BE GAY?
Even blogist Bce Bagemihl, whose book Blogil Exuberance: Animal Homosexualy and Natural Diversy was ced by the Amerin Psychologil Associatn and the Amerin Psychiatric Associatn their amici curiae brief Lawrence v.
He stat: It seems possible that the study of sexual behavr animals, pecially non-human primat, will ntribute to the liberalizatn of relig attus toward homosexual activy and other forms of nonprocreative sex. Specifilly, the studi challenge one particular sense of the dogma that homosexual behavr is “agast nature”: the notn that is unique to those creatur who, by tastg the u of the tree of knowledge, have alone bee morally culpable.
That blueprt, as bethicist Bto Maria Bti not, mt be sought man himself: It is a equent error for people to ntrast human and animal behavrs, as if the two were homogeno.