Is gay found in nature?

[LSU]

http://www.livescience.com/animals/080516-gay-animals.html


Same Sex Couples Common in the Wild

By Clara Moskowitz, LiveScience Staff Writer

posted: 16 May 2008 05:10 pm ET

As gay couples celebrate their newfound right to marry in California and opposition groups rally to fight the ruling, many struggle with this question: Is homosexuality natural?

On this issue, Nature has spoken: Same-sex lovin' is common in hundreds of species, scientists say.

Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo, were a couple for about six years, during which they nurtured a fertilized egg together (given to them by a zookeeper) and raised the young chick that hatched.

According to University of Oslo zoologist Petter Böckman, about 1,500 animal species are known to practice same-sex coupling, including bears, gorillas, flamingos, owls, salmon and many others.

If homosexuality is natural in the animal kingdom, then there is the question of why evolution hasn't eliminated this trait from the gene pool, since it doesn’t lead to reproduction.

It may simply be for pleasure.

"Not every sexual act has a reproductive function," said Janet Mann, a biologist at Georgetown University who studies dolphins (homosexual behavior is very common in these marine mammals). "That's true of humans and non-humans."

Some scientists have proposed that being gay may serve its own evolutionary purpose.

"It could be a way that you strengthen bonds — that's one hypothesis," Mann told LiveScience. "Another is that it could be practice for heterosexual sex. Bottlenose dolphin calves mount each other a lot. That might benefit them later on."

Marlene Zuk, a biologist at the University of California, Riverside, suggested that gay individuals contribute to the gene pool of their community by nurturing their relatives’ young without diverting resources by having their own offspring.

One thing that does seem to be exclusive to humans is homophobia.

"It's a very interesting question as to why anybody ever cares," Mann said. "There are different theories about why people find it threatening. Some think it disrupts male bonds, like you're not playing for the right team. The funny thing is that people say homosexuality is unnatural, that non-humans don't engage in homosexual behavior, but that's not true. Then they'll say it's base and animalistic."

Humans' resistance to the idea of homosexuality extends even to research on the behavior in animals. Scientists who study the topic are often accused of trying to forward an agenda, and their work can come under greater scrutiny than that of their colleagues who study other topics, Mann said

"It's kind of a shame because I think that probably is a reason why people don't look at it more," Mann said. "That's probably why we haven't gotten further. You would think we'd know more than we do by now."

[LSU]

I'm not sure any of the "relationships" they describe are actually equal to a homosexual relationship of humans. But it's hard to say for sure. The nature of coupling vs. the nature of poking in the poopshoot.

Is simply coupling homosexual activity, or is the boning that makes it the "unnatural" part?

[KinjaKahn]

A G E N D A, how many of the couplings were exclusively homosexual. How many also moved on to procreate.

[Hotpapa666]

I'm not sure any of the "relationships" they describe are actually equal to a homosexual relationship of humans. But it's hard to say for sure. The nature of coupling vs. the nature of poking in the poopshoot.

Is simply coupling homosexual activity, or is the boning that makes it the "unnatural" part?

If it were only boning, females couldn't be homosexual. Unless, of course, there were a new tool making skill discovered...

I remember 15 years ago when the only homosexual behavior that had been well documented was on Bonobos and a few spiders species, now it's everywhere. Nail in the coffin for the "it's a choice" people, perhaps? Probably not but it should be.

[LSU]

If it were only boning, females couldn't be homosexual. Unless, of course, there were a new tool making skill discovered...

I remember 15 years ago when the only homosexual behavior that had been well documented was on Bonobos and a few spiders species, now it's everywhere. Nail in the coffin for the "it's a choice" people, perhaps? Probably not but it should be.

Well, I meant actual sexual interaction, not just penile penetration. But I think you probably figured that part out.

I know there have been species of monkeys that have some male on male action...but there wasn't any of that listed above. They did mention juvenile dolphins mounting each other, but they didn't mention actual penetration.

My sister's dog (female) used to try to mount my dog (female).

[MTVike]

My question, if it hasn't already been answered, is whether animals would select a homosexual partner when more "suitable" mates are available.

We know homosexual acts happen in prisons, for example, but that doesn't men most of the men are homo by nature.

[Jiddy78]

My question, if it hasn't already been answered, is whether animals would select a homosexual partner when more "suitable" mates are available.

We know homosexual acts happen in prisons, for example, but that doesn't men most of the men are homo by nature.

If you pick another guy's bum over your hand, you don't get a pass from me regarding the distinction...

[LSU]

My question, if it hasn't already been answered, is whether animals would select a homosexual partner when more "suitable" mates are available.

We know homosexual acts happen in prisons, for example, but that doesn't men most of the men are homo by nature.



I know they said the two penguins were in a zoo, but I would imagine there would be more than 2 penguins there, and if they did only have 2 penguins, I'd have a hard time believing they wouldn't try to have 1 male, 1 female. But it is New York, so...

I'm not sure about the other observations, if they're observed in nature or in zoo/aquarium animals.

[ryr8828]

I guess this might prove something if we were penguins, or a dog humping someone's leg.
The media and some scientists will go to extraordinary lengths to prove normalcy in deviate behavior which they endorse.

[Reagan Smash]

My question, if it hasn't already been answered, is whether animals would select a homosexual partner when more "suitable" mates are available.

We know homosexual acts happen in prisons, for example, but that doesn't men most of the men are homo by nature.


So your saying we need a combination of Animal Planet and OZ?

[ryr8828]

Other things found in nature:

Murder and eating of your own.
Murder of spouse.
Adultery.

This doesn't apply really since I believe us to be one step up from animals, but it's something to think about for those who don't think we are.

Like the author of this article.

[LSU]

Other things found in nature:

Murder and eating of your own.
Murder of spouse.
Adultery.

This doesn't apply really since I believe us to be one step up from animals, but it's something to think about for those who don't think we are.

Like the author of this article.



I don't think that's the parallel being drawn.

That humans = animals.

When some argue against homosexuality, they argue that it's not "natural" because it's not found in nature (other organisms).

I think that argument is what this article is in regards to.

[MTVike]

I don't think that's the parallel being drawn.

That humans = animals.

When some argue against homosexuality, they argue that it's not "natural" because it's not found in nature (other organisms).

I think that argument is what this article is in regards to.

Maybe the proliferation of homosexuality in a species foretells its extinction, evolutionarliy speaking.

[LSU]

Maybe the proliferation of homosexuality in a species foretells its extinction, evolutionarliy speaking.



I don't think so. Perhaps. The reason I don't think so is because homos aren't unable to reproduce. If it came down to it, to save the species, a fairy might put his finger in the dyke to save the species.

[MTVike]

I don't think so. Perhaps. The reason I don't think so is because homos aren't unable to reproduce. If it came down to it, to save the species, a fairy might put his finger in the dyke to save the species.

A finger?

The end of a culture then? The Roman Empire, Jiddy's Babylonians...

Had it too good too long and got fat and lazy.

[LSU]

A finger?

The end of a culture then? The Roman Empire, Jiddy's Babylonians...

Had it too good too long and got fat and lazy.



Well, he's gotta start somewhere.


as for the rest... 2012.

How'd you like snatch and lock stock?

[MTVike]

Well, he's gotta start somewhere.


as for the rest... 2012.

How'd you like snatch and lock stock?


I really did like them, but probably missed a lot of the dialogue due to the heavy British accents.

And here I thought Guy Ritchie was just Madonna's hack husband. He may have more talent than she does.

If it wasn't for the "Like a Virgin" video, I don't know where she'd be.

[LSU]

I really did like them, but probably missed a lot of the dialogue due to the heavy British accents.

And here I thought Guy Ritchie was just Madonna's hack husband. He may have more talent than she does.

If it wasn't for the "Like a Virgin" video, I don't know where she'd be.


Yeah, the accents are tough, but if you watch them a few more times, you pick up on it, and it's even better because you hear so much more of the smart ass comments.

[MTVike]

Yeah, the accents are tough, but if you watch them a few more times, you pick up on it, and it's even better because you hear so much more of the smart ass comments.


I did wonder where the Brit characters got all of their guns. After all, it's not a Die Hard movie, where in American there are pieces laying around everywhere...

[LSU]

I did wonder where the Brit characters got all of their guns. After all, it's not a Die Hard movie, where in American there are pieces laying around everywhere...

Bullet Tooth Tony: So, you are obviously the big dick. The men on the side of ya are your balls. There are two types of balls. There are big brave balls, and there are little mincey faggot balls.
Vinny: These are your last words, so make them a prayer.
Bullet Tooth Tony: Now, dicks have drive and clarity of vision, but they are not clever. They smell pussy and they want a piece of the action. And you thought you smelled some good old pussy, and have brought your two small mincey faggot balls along for a good old time. But you've got your parties mangled up. There's no pussy here, just a dose that'll make you wish you were born a woman. Like a prick, you are having second thoughts. You are shrinking, and your two little balls are shrinking with you. And the fact that you've got "Replica" written down the side of your gun...
[Zoom in on the side of Sol's gun, which indeed has "REPLICA" etched on the side; zoom out, as they sneak peeks at the sides of their guns]
Bullet Tooth Tony: And the fact that I've got "Desert Eagle point five O"...
[Withdraws his gun and puts it on the table]
Bullet Tooth Tony: Written down the side of mine...
[They look, zoom in on the side of his gun, which indeed has "DESERT EAGLE .50" etched on the side]
Bullet Tooth Tony: Should precipitate your balls into shrinking, along with your presence. Now... Fuck off!

[fahvra]

arguments over whether this is a choice or not is what makes me not want to be associated with the religious 'types' and has moved me from 'wanting to be believe' to not giving a fuck.

[LSU]

Maybe the proliferation of homosexuality in a species foretells its extinction, evolutionarliy speaking.


Just thought about this.

I didn't think about it long, though, so it's likely full of holes.


But you mention gay as being some sort of evolutionary trait.

At first, I thought..."nah". Mainly because evolution would be looking for species survival, and a species isn't going to survive if it's members are not interested in procreative sex. But then I thought...well, maybe that is an advantage.

It's a stretch, but it may be something to help keep the human population in check. I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to believe that if we keep reproducing and reproducing, eventually there will be few places to move to or live, or perhaps too few resources.

Gayness will lead to no reproduction by said people, potentially slowing the population increase.


However, the more I think about it, the less that sounds like evolution, or at least the way it's "supposed" to work.

[Hotpapa666]

Just thought about this.

I didn't think about it long, though, so it's likely full of holes.


But you mention gay as being some sort of evolutionary trait.

At first, I thought..."nah". Mainly because evolution would be looking for species survival, and a species isn't going to survive if it's members are not interested in procreative sex. But then I thought...well, maybe that is an advantage.

It's a stretch, but it may be something to help keep the human population in check. I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to believe that if we keep reproducing and reproducing, eventually there will be few places to move to or live, or perhaps too few resources.

Gayness will lead to no reproduction by said people, potentially slowing the population increase.


However, the more I think about it, the less that sounds like evolution, or at least the way it's "supposed" to work.


I think, and there is little to base this on, that homosexuality is a trait that is not beneficial to the species but isn't so damaging to the species that it selected out. I think that is probably due to more than one reason. While I think that the vast majority of homosexuality is biological it is not neccesarily genetic, it could be largely developmental for example. And, as a genetic component, I think it is probably complex, involving many genes which would make it more difficult to select out.

Just some rambling thoughts.

[LSU]

I think, and there is little to base this on, that homosexuality is a trait that is not beneficial to the species but isn't so damaging to the species that it selected out. I think that is probably due to more than one reason. While I think that the vast majority of homosexuality is biological it is not neccesarily genetic, it could be largely developmental for example. And, as a genetic component, I think it is probably complex, involving many genes which would make it more difficult to select out.

Just some rambling thoughts.


I think you're saying what I think is the case, too.

A genetic predisposition is required, but does not always manifest itself. Complex genetic equation needed, and then certain environmental cues or situations. Classic nature and nurture.

[Hotpapa666]

I think you're saying what I think is the case, too.

A genetic predisposition is required, but does not always manifest itself. Complex genetic equation needed, and then certain environmental cues or situations. Classic nature and nurture.

Probably. I would add a degree of devolopemental biology to the equation, hormons in the womb and that jazz. Like the sheep and mice they turn gay with in utero hormone treatment.

[domenick2x]

I think you're saying what I think is the case, too.

A genetic predisposition is required, but does not always manifest itself. Complex genetic equation needed, and then certain environmental cues or situations. Classic nature and nurture.
Wouldn't it naturally select out more quickly without the predisposition of 'society', where members are expected to follow the norm (at least, until recently)?

I'm thinking that if that does prove true, we should (barring cloning and other reproductive tech being applied) see a net reduction in percentage of gays.

[fahvra]

Probably. I would add a degree of devolopemental biology to the equation, hormons in the womb and that jazz. Like the sheep and mice they turn gay with in utero hormone treatment.

I put headphones on my wifes stomach throughout her pregnancy to prevent this.:p

[LSU]

Wouldn't it naturally select out more quickly without the predisposition of 'society', where members are expected to follow the norm (at least, until recently)?

I'm thinking that if that does prove true, we should (barring cloning and other reproductive tech being applied) see a net reduction in percentage of gays.



I don't see why you reach that conclusion.

[domenick2x]

I don't see why you reach that conclusion.
Well, for centuries there's been a societal expectation that men marry women and father children. How many stories have come out about married men admitting to being gay?

With a lessening of that societal pressure, gays will not father children, thus naturally selecting out of the race at a higher rate than previously. Unless the 'gay genes' are so pervasive in society that even YOM has them, we'd see a slow decline in the number of gays, generally speaking.

Of course, there could be offsetting factors...

[Smoke681]

Animals that travel in packs kill their weak links to benefit the pack.

Next time I do this, I'm using this "science" to get me out of jail. The animals do it, so it's natural, officer!

[domenick2x]

Animals that travel in packs kill their weak links to benefit the pack.

Next time I do this, I'm using this "science" to get me out of jail. The animals do it, so it's natural, officer!
Link?

I'd be surprised to find that pack predators do this.

[LSU]

Well, for centuries there's been a societal expectation that men marry women and father children. How many stories have come out about married men admitting to being gay?

With a lessening of that societal pressure, gays will not father children, thus naturally selecting out of the race at a higher rate than previously. Unless the 'gay genes' are so pervasive in society that even YOM has them, we'd see a slow decline in the number of gays, generally speaking.

Of course, there could be offsetting factors...


I think you make a few assumptions.

First, it may not be "gay genes" in that there's a gene that makes you gay, and if you don't have it, you're not gay.

There are at least 2 copies of every gene. So, there can be dominant/recessive traits. In addition to that, there's differences in ways genes are regulated. And in addition to that, there's differences in ways genes recombine upon sperm fertilizing the egg.

It seems you're making the connection that a father or mother passes a gay gene, but that may not be the case at all. Or, perhaps it's a recessive condition that doesn't manifest itself in all people, but gets passed on nonetheless.

Hell, people with downs don't reproduce that often, but that doesn't eliminate downs from the population.

The righties will now have a field day that I compared gayness to downs.

[LSU]

Animals that travel in packs kill their weak links to benefit the pack.

Next time I do this, I'm using this "science" to get me out of jail. The animals do it, so it's natural, officer!


But you're using bad logic.


A dog is a dog and will act like a dog.

A human is a human and will act like a human.

The potential finding of "gay" in nature isn't to be used as the excuse you use, which would be 'animals do it, why can't I', but like I said earlier, it's a contradictory finding to those say that homosexuality doesn't occur in nature.

[MTVike]

Well, for centuries there's been a societal expectation that men marry women and father children. How many stories have come out about married men admitting to being gay?

With a lessening of that societal pressure, gays will not father children, thus naturally selecting out of the race at a higher rate than previously. Unless the 'gay genes' are so pervasive in society that even YOM has them, we'd see a slow decline in the number of gays, generally speaking.

Of course, there could be offsetting factors...

Interesting points, and also brings in the bi-sexual variable. I've often wondered how an admittedly homosexual man can fool his wife for years and father children, then ultimately come out and announce his "true" orientation.

I can't imagine pretending to be attracted to a man, and certainly not performing with one, even if societal pressure said that's what I must do.

So maybe some gays aren't as hardwired as we think they are?

[domenick2x]

I think you make a few assumptions.

First, it may not be "gay genes" in that there's a gene that makes you gay, and if you don't have it, you're not gay.

There are at least 2 copies of every gene. So, there can be dominant/recessive traits. In addition to that, there's differences in ways genes are regulated. And in addition to that, there's differences in ways genes recombine upon sperm fertilizing the egg.

It seems you're making the connection that a father or mother passes a gay gene, but that may not be the case at all. Or, perhaps it's a recessive condition that doesn't manifest itself in all people, but gets passed on nonetheless.

Hell, people with downs don't reproduce that often, but that doesn't eliminate downs from the population.

The righties will now have a field day that I compared gayness to downs.
I realize all of that, and I admit to simplifying.

But if those in whom the gayness is dominant don't breed, then the recessive traits will become less common - like red hair.

I'm not thinking that it will disappear entirely (although I remember reading something about gingers becoming extinct by 2100), only that the incidence rate of gayness dominants will diminish.

[LSU]

I realize all of that, and I admit to simplifying.

But if those in whom the gayness is dominant don't breed, then the recessive traits will become less common - like red hair.

I'm not thinking that it will disappear entirely (although I remember reading something about gingers becoming extinct by 2100), only that the incidence rate of gayness dominants will diminish.



I don't think that's likely. Redness or gayness. But eukaryotic genetics ain't my bag.

[domenick2x]

I don't think that's likely. Redness or gayness. But eukaryotic genetics ain't my bag.
But you're a Scientist!

[LSU]

But you're a Scientist!


Genetics are genetics when it comes to DNA.


But control and shit is much more complex in euks. I don't profess to be fluent in it.


I'll knock your socks off with bacterial genetics, though.

[fahvra]

Animals that travel in packs kill their weak links to benefit the pack.

Next time I do this, I'm using this "science" to get me out of jail. The animals do it, so it's natural, officer!

LMFAO.

why dont you just kill a homo and tell him "its OK, my 'religious beliefs' tell me its an abomination, so it OK officer".

it would be just as asinine.

[1-20-09]

Murder and eating of your own.
Murder of spouse.
Adultery.



and homosexuality is equal to these?