Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

queerty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 163 posts

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#11

Post by ebg13 »

fenwick67 wrote: post #4

I am always so torn when people make the argument that homosexuality is natural and therefore okay. It relies on the naturalistic fallacy which I don't like, but it also shuts down people who make the argument that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore bad, which I do like. Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they wa…

> Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they want together.

This is so important and so regularly gets ignored by people on all sides. Once, a long time ago, I was talking to a much-smarter-than-me gay friend about the gay marriage debate in the US, and I said that being gay wasn't a choice and that _therefore_ yada yada. He said the only thing that in hindsight ever really matters, though at the time I'd never heard anyone say it before. He said "So what if it were a choice? What exactly does that change? You can't choose who to spend your life with? You can't choose who to share resources with? You can't choose who gets to be your proxy? Why is choice not important?"

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#12

Post by rectangletangle »

4FNET7 wrote: post #3

Technically speaking, the animals he is talking about are bisexual. But this was a truly great article. Please post more like this, queerty.

Exclusive homosexuality is found in nearly 10% of male sheep, as well as a bunch of other species of mammals and birds.

What’s interesting with the giraffes is the really high prevalence (94%), which suggests it’s an adaptation to some form of natural selection. Even the rate of 10% would suggest an adaptive response, but the really high rate emphasizes this.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#13

Post by lisper »

_v7gu wrote: post #8
fenwick67 wrote: post #4

I am always so torn when people make the argument that homosexuality is natural and therefore okay. It relies on the naturalistic fallacy which I don't like, but it also shuts down people who make the argument that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore bad, which I do like. Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they wa…

I think it's bad, as it opens the door for the "valid" retort of ducks being necrophiliac. Is a fallacious argument the hill we want to die on? I'd rather just support the positives of a liberal approach.

It's easy to side-step that. If someone argues that homosexuality is wrong because it's unnatural just incorporate the retort into the counter-argument: there are gay giraffes and necrophiliac ducks, and, while we're at it, lots of species that eat their own young. Do you really think we should be modeling our behavior on what is "natural"?

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#14

Post by dqpb »

fenwick67 wrote: post #4

I am always so torn when people make the argument that homosexuality is natural and therefore okay. It relies on the naturalistic fallacy which I don't like, but it also shuts down people who make the argument that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore bad, which I do like. Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they wa…

> *naturalistic fallacy"

Well, showing that something exists in nature is much more factual and objective than debates will ever be over what people should and shouldn't do

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#15

Post by whatshisface »

ebg13 wrote: post #11
fenwick67 wrote: post #4

I am always so torn when people make the argument that homosexuality is natural and therefore okay. It relies on the naturalistic fallacy which I don't like, but it also shuts down people who make the argument that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore bad, which I do like. Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they wa…

> Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they want together. This is so important and so regularly gets ignored by people on all sides. Once, a long time ago, I was talking to a much-smarter-than-me gay friend about the gay marriage debate in the US, and I said that being gay wasn't a choice and that _therefore_ yada yada.…

The motivation behind the "it's not a choice" argument is that society can't reasonably enforce a rule that people can't follow. For example you and I are against Down's syndrome, but we can't make any progress by telling people to stop having it. Your friend's argument would not work at all against people who are against homosexuality, because their answer to all of those questions would simply be "no." The "it's not a choice" argument only makes sense if you put yourself into the shoes of the other side and ask the question "given the resources I have, how could I conclude that gay marriage was acceptable?"

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#16

Post by ng12 »

MatekCopatek wrote: post #5

My go-to link for countering " is unnatural" was [1], this article seems like a great one to add to the arsenal :). That's not to say I believe human behaviour should somehow be judged by finding equivalents in the animal kingdom (what a silly concept!), it's just fun to point out to someone that even their ridiculous point is technically incorrect. [1] http://web.archive.org/web/20140723175514/http://www.blaghag...

> it's just fun to point out to someone that even their ridiculous point is technically incorrect.

What's ridiculous is looking to the animal kingdom to judicate what's normal for human homosexuality in either direction. Lots of mammals eat their young, I wouldn't use this as evidence to normalize infant cannibalism.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#17

Post by k__ »

lisper wrote: post #13
_v7gu wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's bad, as it opens the door for the "valid" retort of ducks being necrophiliac. Is a fallacious argument the hill we want to die on? I'd rather just support the positives of a liberal approach.

It's easy to side-step that. If someone argues that homosexuality is wrong because it's unnatural just incorporate the retort into the counter-argument: there are gay giraffes and necrophiliac ducks, and, while we're at it, lots of species that eat their own young. Do you really think we should be modeling our behavior on what is "natural"?

I really have to read more about the steelman argument

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#18

Post by blfr »

fenwick67 wrote: post #4

I am always so torn when people make the argument that homosexuality is natural and therefore okay. It relies on the naturalistic fallacy which I don't like, but it also shuts down people who make the argument that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore bad, which I do like. Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they wa…

because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they want together

Why? This strikes me as a very shallow moral principle. As 'presscast notes it completely misses the point of the nature of a life well-lived.

Ironically, in practice it goes against human nature. Atomized society of people passing each other indifferently is certainly freer in some sense but it's also lonely and depressing for many of its members. It goes directly against our most basic needs for social belonging.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#19

Post by chasereed »

fenwick67 wrote: post #4

I am always so torn when people make the argument that homosexuality is natural and therefore okay. It relies on the naturalistic fallacy which I don't like, but it also shuts down people who make the argument that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore bad, which I do like. Ultimately, homosexuality in humans is fine not because it's natural, but because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they wa…

I agree, but as a gay ex-Mormon, I have seen that educating people about the (mostly) biological origin of homosexuality is the most effective way to break through people’s dogmatic shields and make them start empathizing with gay people.
Post reply on HN