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

81–90 of 163 posts

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#81

Post by andrewflnr »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #62
Udik wrote: post #33

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 I understand what you mean, but it doesn't seem to be the case. In regards to sexual preferences, for example, there are some that are, arguably, not a choice either, and still are considered absolutely forbidden. > For example you and I are against Down's syndrome, but we can't make any p…

Having moved on from biblical interpretations, sexual preferences are usually considered absolutely forbidden if participants can't give informed adult consent. So - voyeurism, anything involving children and animals, and so on. There doesn't seem to be much evidence that sexuality can be changed by conscious choice. So if your sexuality runs along those lines you're going to have a bad time, because you'll either ha…

Sex is personal, visceral, and highly emotionally charged, while the other concerns you mentioned can easily stay abstract. There's no mystery there, people are just obsessed with sex. It's another side of the phenomenon by which any idea at all can be made into a sexual innuendo. It's where our mind goes.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#82

Post by [deleted] »

dTal wrote: post #64
kakarot wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't typically have sex with things I'm not attracted to... And even if psychologically my sexual impulse seems different from that of an animal's, it's biologically the same. What purpose does this distinction serve?

Many people do have sex with people they're not attracted to, and many people do not have sex with people they are attracted to. The distinction is useful. Consider: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_who_have_sex_with_men

[deleted]

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#83

Post by andrewflnr »

dqpb wrote: post #14
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

"Fact X exists, therefore it is useful as evidence in debate Y."

"Should" is inherently subjective. There is not, in either principle it practice, any evidence that can answer a "should" question without reference to an established "should" presupposition. Get used to it.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#84

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

nintendo95 wrote: post #79
qwerty456127 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People like sex. They don't accept public obscenity usually due to common sense objective realities, i.e. children being present. So there is this. And there is some more: as a dominant bdsm heterosexual person for some reason I don't feel an urge to present my sexual preference to the whole world all the time and demanding the public to accept it. Or even having it recognized as part of my "identity". Sex is sex, ha…

So I would be sexual minority

Come on, we all know there are right minorities and there are wrong minorities.

But jokes aside, one possible explanation is that despite of all your sexual life, for the outside observer you still look like a "vanilla" couple (sorry, I assumed your gender here). You can show up at your kids school together, you can go to the Christmas party with your colleagues and none will say a word.

I think for gay couples it may be different: from weird looks to outright refusal.

And as for downvotes... Don't let me even start...

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#85

Post by badgerigar »

nintendo95 wrote: post #76

Serious question: does anyone know how are homosexual monkeys treated by their peers? Basically, I was wondering if there is a proof of them being discriminated/treated badly by their peers.

There are no homosexual monkeys. While nearly all mammalian species have homosexual sex, homosexual individuals have only been observed in sheep and humans.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#86

Post by sigmaprimus »

908087 wrote: post #73
sigmaprimus wrote: post #20

Sigh, I clicked on this link and now Google Add Sense or whatever browser tracker is pushing gay dating site banners to my browser...who knew hot young Russian men wanted to meet me!?!

Is not using an ad blocker a conscious decision on your part? I just have trouble coming up with any logical reason for an even remotely technically skilled person to be risking browsing the modern web without one. The only people I know personally who aren't using them end up immediately installing one or asking to have one installed as soon as they find out it's an option. This group typically consists of grandpare…

Ever browsed the Web on an Android tablet? I'm a little concerned with installing apps that require full access to my location, files and everything else that should not be shared. Maybe there is a trustworthy chrome add on that would not require all of these escalated privlages that you could suggest?

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#87

Post by wyxuan »

nintendo95 wrote: post #76

Serious question: does anyone know how are homosexual monkeys treated by their peers? Basically, I was wondering if there is a proof of them being discriminated/treated badly by their peers.

discrimination is a purely human thing. animals see sex and reproduction as a leisure activity, and as a result, don't nearly give it as much though as much as humans do. Plus they don't have the bible, which can be interpreted as not allowing for homosexual relations.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#88

Post by everdev »

nintendo95 wrote: post #76

Serious question: does anyone know how are homosexual monkeys treated by their peers? Basically, I was wondering if there is a proof of them being discriminated/treated badly by their peers.

Unfortunately, I've seen documentaries and been to zoos where the zoo keepers have told us that homosexual moneys are subjected to violence. I think the brunt of it is against male monkeys making sexual advances towards an unwilling male partner.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#89

Post by refurb »

wyxuan wrote: post #87
nintendo95 wrote: post #76

Serious question: does anyone know how are homosexual monkeys treated by their peers? Basically, I was wondering if there is a proof of them being discriminated/treated badly by their peers.

discrimination is a purely human thing. animals see sex and reproduction as a leisure activity, and as a result, don't nearly give it as much though as much as humans do. Plus they don't have the bible, which can be interpreted as not allowing for homosexual relations.

Really? If you took an animal and shaved it, you don’t think it would be ostracized even though nothing is wrong with it and it has no impact on its peers? I’d bet it would.

I’m sure animals do it based on behavior as well. If a peer is acting sick (even if not), I’m sure their behavior changes.

Re: Homosexuality in giraffes and other non-human animals

#90

Post by peteretep »

chess93 wrote: post #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).

> I predict in the future this distinction will be extremely common

It’s very common in sexual health because “men who have sex with other men” is much more useful when reasoning about disease spread than peoples wide gamut of self-reported sexual orientations.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_who_have_sex_with_men

Post reply on HN