Live data from Hacker News

Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

queerty.com

51–60 of 163 posts

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#51
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

One way in which it could be an adaption that actually helps its bearer's genes would be as an overpopulation safety valve. Instead of the whole group starving (all of them closely related genes), pause breeding for a while? I would expect that most species that have some form of throttling reaction like that would apply the brakes to female fertility because that is also relevant for individual survival, but it shou…

There are a bunch of plausible theories that ethologists have come up with for evolution of homosexuality. This is one of them - and it does show up in other experiments, e.g. with rats: if you make their population denser, a higher proportion exhibits same-sex behavior.

But it's not the only one. Another is that species that employ K strategy (low reproduction rates, high investment into offspring to ensure its survival) and that are social, gradually develop some kind of social safety net mechanisms for offspring, in cases where e.g. the parent dies or is sick and unable to provide proper care. One way to do that is to have some proportion of the population that does not breed on their own, thus ensuring that they are always available to rear others' offspring. Since evolution generally takes the path of least resistance, it's easier to achieve this by redirecting sexual drive than by switching it off entirely. And this can even make sense from a "selfish gene" perspective of one individual, because if you help enough of your close relatives (who share many genes with you) keep their kids alive, it may actually be more effective than betting on a few children of your own surviving to carry more shared genes.

(If this theory is right, that has interesting implications for all those laws restricting adoption by same-sex parents...)

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#52
post #16

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.

I get your point but this seems to also be an argument in bad faith. The point is to show that it is likely that homosexuality is more innate than "a choice" or something you can catch, for the purposes of informing our moral judgements.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#53
Does it have to do anything with nature? For example, having sex is completely natural, but doing so in public is frowned upon. On the other hand, walking on arms upside down is completely unnatural, but perfectly acceptable in the middle of town center.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#54
I saw a dog on heat being followed around by a cluster of dogs. One of them tried to hump her head.

Animals have no idea what they're doing. Calling them 'homosexual' is highly presumptuous. A lot of dogs, for instance, will hump a leg. Is that 'natural'? Nope? Genes for it? Nope? Hormones and lack of opportunity? Yup.

Even teens get crushes on other teens of the same sex, but grow up and they are totally heterosexual and couldn't imagine doing anything with the same sex. It's just mixed up feelings and hormones and confusion.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#55

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."

Including adopting children? I don't think so. I didn't grow up with a mum and I dearly wish I had.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#56

Does it have to do anything with nature? For example, having sex is completely natural, but doing so in public is frowned upon. On the other hand, walking on arms upside down is completely unnatural, but perfectly acceptable in the middle of town center.

It doesn't. Many people just dislike other people having sex (and this probably is natural). They can't say anything against people doing it in accordance with the standard but as soon as something doesn't fit in the puritan template they find an excuse.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#57
What I never understood is why these animals are actually considered "attracted to the same sex" when they really just "have sex with the same sex".

Perhaps this distinction does not seem like it matters but I predict in the future this distinction will be extremely common (in humans at least).

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#58
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 no…

>The motivation behind the "it's not a choice" argument is that society can't reasonably enforce a rule that people can't follow. The motivation is mostly religious. Homosexuality must be a choice, otherwise God created homosexuals as they are, and homosexuality is just another part of Nature. But if that's true, homosexuality can't be a sin, because sin is always a choice. But homosexuality is a sin because the Bibl…

I always thought it went

P: Sex outside of marriage is a sin.

Q: Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Therefore [P and Q] implies that homosexual activity is wrong but the mere act of being attracted to the same sex is not inherently sinful.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#59
post #16

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.

The comment you're replying to literally called it a silly concept. Their point was that, in addition to being silly, it also doesn't even support the position of those who typically invoke it.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#60

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…

> and therefore bad, which I do like

Why? Indeed "unnatural=bad" is pointless, there are just so many "unnatural" things people do that are considered ok (btw the mere fact they do already suggests it's not unnatural, umans are a part of nature to and they are doing something without being forced). Even simple medication or agriculture or exercising can be considered "unnatural". Besides that why can homosexuality be considered bad? I'm straight but take it as a matter of taste, males just don't feel attractive to me. I can see no reason I could take seriously. If a significant percent of homosexual acts between healthy partners would result in serious diseases or trauma I would consider this as a clue but I haven't ever read about any evidence suggesting this.

Post reply on HN