1. Josiah Jeong Josiah Jeong United States says:

    I enjoyed reading this article so much. It is pretty interesting that you veered our fervant attention on 'homosexuality between human beings' to that of between animals.

    I was aware that masturbation among animals is common, but this fresh phenomenon is just astonishing. Homosexuality between animals seems to be humorous, but homosexuality between men and women is not a light issue. I believe that our sex is more than instruments that help us achieve sexual pleasure. If that is the case, it would be pointless to restrict people from bizzare crimes involving our sex.

    • Leigh Sabio Leigh Sabio United States says:

      I'm sorry, Josiah, but that comment came off as a bit homophobic. Not all gays or lesbians use each other just as instruments of sexual pleasure. Many have sex for exactly the same reason that a straight couple with no intention of having kids would have sex: because they're attracted to each other, in love, and want a physical and emotional connection with the one they love.

      There is a world of difference between homosexuality and "weird sex crimes." Namely, that difference is consent. Homosexuality is nothing like bestiality or pedophilia, because an animal or a child cannot give consent, but a person of the same sex as you can.

      • Sarah Northwood Sarah Northwood United States says:

        maybe an example that is more similar would be between a father and a daughter or siblings.  What is it that tells us that something like this is? If there is not a standard of right and wrong, it is left up to each person's judgment. That leads to the breakdown of society.

        • Joyce Harris Joyce Harris United States says:

          This is probably the most appalling thing I've ever read. This is not a good example by human homosexual standards! The best example is by Leigh Sabio above where she emphasizes consent! Taking anyone sexually without consent is just wrong!

        • AF Brown AF Brown Canada says:

          Not. Even. Close.   Incest and child abuse are massive violations of trust.  I’ve yet to see an animal mate with a juvenile of their species!!!!  CONSENT and absence of abuse of power are critical determinants of ethical sexual relations for humans.  That’s why rape and sexual assault (no consent) and sexual harrassment or contact  between authority figures and those over whom they have power, are “not okay”.  Bosses and employees. Doctors and patients.  Counselors and clients. Teachers and students. Jail guards and inmates.  Adults Nd children, etc.  MASSIVE power imbalances.

      • J.R. Sorrow J.R. Sorrow Japan says:

        Homophobic, why when people disagree with homosexual behavior are they deemed homophobic? I am not fearful of homosexual people but if I disagree with that behavior I'm called homphobic. It does not take a rocket scientist to see how men and women are created and it doesn't take a rocket sceintist to see how this thing is supposed to work.

        • Brian Cartwright Brian Cartwright Canada says:

          If I disagree with Jews acting Jewish, am I anti-semitic? Yes. If I want black people to stop acting so black, am I racist? Yes. You don't know what the word phobia means. It's not just "fear". It's also "aversion". Look it up. Jesus.

          • Ed B Ed B Canada says:

            I disagree with homosexual behavior.  I also don't think people should get tattoos. I disagree that people should eat dogs or dolphins.

            Disagreeing with a persons or groups behavior does not constitute a phobia.

            • Sunny McCullough Sunny McCullough United States says:

              Notice, too, the only one resorting to hateful ad-hominem attack is Mr. Cartwright.  :?  Sadly, that is typical.

              • Carol Cumbie Carol Cumbie United States says:

                The same people that gave Obama a Nobel prize are you kidding me. I breed dogs and there are times dogs hump other dogs it is a pecking order. When one wants to declare dominance over the other.I have friends who are homo sexual it was their choice. There may be some that are born that way but not the amount that are out there. They want everyone to make it legal but they should have went for a contract because it will never be a marriage that is between and man and women and with that there would be no children. How homo sexuals were treated was wrong. Now it seem homosexuals are trying to get back at every with the lawsuits.it will only hurt things. If I had a son or daughter if someone made them happy I would be okay with that. I don't believe what they are saying about the animals.

                • Stephanie Kerry Stephanie Kerry United States says:

                  So are you saying that I, a straight woman, should not be allowed to marry my straight male husband because we do not intend to procreate?

                • Ringspider Webb Ringspider Webb United States says:

                  The article definitely uses weasel wording to make the research sound convincing, in order to push an agenda. In this case, I think it is more likely that this area of research is neither taboo or too embarrassing. It wouldn't make the researcher subject to ridicule either. The area of research just isn't that rich. 1500 animal species is about a thousandth of a percent of the total number of animal species not including insects. So the actual numbers suggests a transient trait selection rather than anything significant to speciation.

                • Bob Henderson Bob Henderson United States says:

                  I believe, Carol, that is referred to as "willful ignorance." Denying a scientific study because it conflicts with your bias is such tiresome pattern. Your opinion has nothing to do with fact. If you think something that has been researched is incorrect, I encourage you to do some research of your own. Go do some field work and read some books. If you can disprove what this article says by using the scientific method, your idea will have an inkling of validity. Until then, leave your opinion out of research.

                • R Dawn Bieniek R Dawn Bieniek United States says:

                  Of course you don't. I'm sure that you won't check the sources provided by the article or try to do a little independent research either, because the more factual evidence you find that contradicts what you've already set your mind to believe will only provide you with more facts you'll have to deny. Denying the truth on a full time basis is exhausting, I'm sure. Especially when you still need to find time to condemn people while simultaneously telling everyone how accepting you are.

      • Tama King Tama King New Zealand says:

        Moral of this report? If you want to engage in base animal behaviour such as homosexuality then go and join the pigs.  The whole point of Judeo Christian values of heterosexual love  especially within a marriage is to bring out the best in man and to fulfill our purpose.
        Descending to the basest od animal behaviours is nothing to be proud of. To God it is abominable behaviour. To normal folk it's disgusting and offensive.

        • Juha Räty Juha Räty Finland says:

          Scientific observations are not about moral. Our own morals should absolutely not interfere with scientific observations. What our own moral views do is exactly what this article suspects and what we know for a FACT: that Christian scientists have been time and again so stuck in theit own morality that scientific observations have been brushed aside when they didn't match their own Biblical views. The giraffe example in this article is a textbook case. That is an antithesis of science!

          Science has also been used to corroborate prejudice and racism – we only need to remind us about eugenics.

          In the days of Galileo Galilei, the Church was adamant that the Earth was the center body of the universe, around which all other bodies rotated. If it wasn't for scientific observations, we would still BELIEVE that was the case.

          Your reference to "our purpose" is only our purpose according to Christian scripture. Which should have absolutely no say in scientific context. Nor has any god any place in that context.

          We can discuss wether marriage and heterosexuality has brought out the best in man, in the light of domestic violence; wives set in fire; child negligence, abuse and rape; and the countless who were otherwise traumatised by their childhood.

          Your juxtaposition between homosexuality, pigs and decline into beasts is interesting since ancient Greek valued love between men much higher than love between men and women – for them, love between men was the highes form of love. So is it then, that their culture was a pigsty? Ancient Greece was so advanced in many respects that Christian societies reached about the same level only 2000 years later – in many fields even several hundred years later than that. Greeks founded science as we know it, as well as our aesthetics. Classical Greek art boasts the highest imaginable quality to this day.

          Some beasts, I must say!

          Christian believers, I have observed, seem to have cultivated arrogance to the "highest" form. I thought, though, that arrogance was a sin. Well, Christians never truly worried about sin as far as their interpretation of the Scripture – however twisted – stroked their own ego and bias.

    • Eric Eric United States says:

      The fact that nature partakes in homosexuality is irrevelent to humans partaking in homosexuality. They do not have the same ability to reason as humans do.

      • Erin Petrosky Erin Petrosky United States says:

        Sexuality is not something that involves reasoning. Just as a heterosexual person cannot become gay, a homosexual cannot become straight. Sexuality is innate and something that we are born with. Maybe you should educate yourself before you make any ignorant comments in the future.

        • Raven Johnson Raven Johnson United States says:

          But some heterosexual female humans do become gay...

          • Victoria van Arkel Victoria van Arkel United States says:

            They do not "become" gay. They were already either bi-sexual or lesbian and just hadn't experiemented/realized it yet.

            • ??
              Ed B Ed B Canada says:

              Listen to you making blanket statements. I suppose you're an expert in "Homosexual Reasoning and Genetic Traits"?

              • Juha Räty Juha Räty Finland says:

                There's enough science to corroborate that sexual behaviour does not necessarily reflect the person's true sexuality due to social norms and conformative pressure. In societies where sexuality is strictly controlled and narrowly specified, deviates are strictly punished either socially or by the law, or both, in quite a few countries even with death penalty. We don't need to go searching for societies where (heterosexual) marriage is inescapable, no matter what your true orientation was, they are so plenty.

                Likewise: many gay porn actors are actually straight for the simple reason that they earn more "becoming gay". You cannot tell their true sexual orientation observing their sexual behaviour.

          • Jessica Pruyn Jessica Pruyn United States says:

            I have been gay all my life I've dated a few males but prefer females. My soon to be wife dated man before she dated me and thought she was straight after we became more intimate she told me she had had lots of crushes on other females most gay or lesbian people I have met that come out later come out later because they felt society would not accept them

        • J.R. Sorrow J.R. Sorrow Japan says:

          Erin we must all humble ourselves to your great and high level of education and expertise

        • Chuck Hackworth Chuck Hackworth United States says:

          Sexuality doesn't involve reasoning?  So what stops a father from sleeping with his daughter?  What stops a person from rape, sex with kids?  The only way reasoning would not not factor is if a person had no morals or self restraint.

          • Alyssa Evers Alyssa Evers United States says:

            Apparrantely you have trouble distinguishing between sexuality and the act of sex.

          • Crissy Bene Crissy Bene United States says:

            it depends on the intelligence level of the animal I'd think.  Think about how some animals mate for life while others do not - or how - mammals were mainly mentioned. I don't know about the invertebrates but I'm assuming some of these mammals are reasoning just not as long-term as we do then again octopus are very very smart and invertebrates so it really could even be down to the species sometimes.. they don't get married etc. their lives are beautiful but they have to think about survival much more frequently and solving disputes in their own way.

          • Crissy Bene Crissy Bene United States says:

            OH, I love animals, but behaviors I discover can make me grossed .. the children joining in? Wow man. And i've also heard about how elephants sometimes rape rhinos.

          • Phil Karn Phil Karn United States says:

            Incest is so taboo not because of human reason but instinct. It's called the Westermarck Effect. Being around a young child immunizes you to sexual attraction to that person when they mature. The same thing seems to happen in many animal species; e.g., orcas stay with their families their entire lives, with the males helping protect the young, but they'll always venture off to other pods to mate.

        • kevin peterson kevin peterson United States says:

          You might want to educate yourself a bit. Many animals reason all the time. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't happening. Reasoning is how species survive. Animals reason to determine how and when they should hunt, build their shelters and they know what plants are safe to eat. But hey, maybe you think they're just dumb animals.

        • Hijas Labt Hijas Labt United Kingdom says:

          Being born isn't the start of life. If you believe people were born gay it still doesn't account for what happened during pregnancy. You just full of it. You have absolutely no proof of your claims. You can speak for yourself only, unless you have done successful experiments on people.

        • Shawn McIntyre Shawn McIntyre Trinidad and Tobago says:

          Well, If you believe that you're just an evolved animal, I think i can understand how you conclude statement is correct

          • Juha Räty Juha Räty Finland says:

            Well, if you think you're NOT anything but an evolved animal, I don't know what you make of the fact that we share 98.8 percent of our DNA with chimpanzees. Human species is so full of itself!

            The more we learn about ethology, the less remarkable our own "uncomparable" characteristics delude. Only six decacdes ago it was a revelation to discover that chimps made and used tools – something that we thought was exclusively a human capability. Now we know that even crows are at least as clever with tools than chimps ever were – and that a crow beats a 9 year old human in problem solving skills. We also learned that animals do have emotions, social structures and skills – even language; ability to prepare for the future; make plans and strategize; and even fish are able to create complex and aesthetic "works of art". Math is neither our exclusive creation: even ants do it on an impressing level. Even educated fleas might do it, for all we know. www.bbc.com/.../20121128-animals-that-can-count#:~:text=But%20the%20real%20maths%20wizards,parts%20of%20their%20mathematical%20toolkit.

            So what is it exactly that makes us more than an evolved animal? The history of science has shown time and again that our exceptionalism is nothing more than the less we know, the more we think we know.

    • Nate Nate United States says:

      I am afraid that it is becoming the case that anyone who disagrees in any measure with homosexual practice is labelled an intolerant bigot/homophobe.  The gay lobby has been incredibly effective in bringing this about as they seem to be incredibly motivated in doing so.  

      • Raven Johnson Raven Johnson United States says:

        ...uh, no, not homophobe, which is someone who is personally uncomfortable around gay men and has nothing to do with whether or not one supports, opposes, or thinks homosexuality is irrelevant, but bigot, fucking YEAH if you THINK HOMOSEXUALITY IS WRONG that is the DEFINITION of a bigot...    duh...

        And if you think that being black is wrong then you are a racist...

        that's kind-of how that works...

        And if your dad speaks to you and says he does not hate you, but he thinks it is "wrong" for you to be with your girlfriend, then obvioulsy you will not want to speak to him again...

    • Nate Nate United States says:

      I didn't see it as homophobic at all.  That word is banded around to mean anyone who doesn't jump up and down clapping.  You are right when you say sex between humans is never mere recreational fun although it includes that.  If it was then rape would be merely an abusive use of recreational fun when we know it is far more than that.  I resent having to even use the word sex in a homosexual context as it isn't sex at all.  Sex is between a man and a woman, a fact that some people will use any argument, no matter how spurious eg. ducks rubbing beaks haha, to avoid.

    • Dr Milton Dr Milton United States says:

      Despite what gay activists believee including the one that wrote this article, "same-sex interaction" is a weasal term designed to confuse.

      These interactions are anything two indivudals of the same gender do with each other, including standing next to each in interspecies familiarity , and acts of dominance.

      Because all the reference acts have nothing to do with sexual interest, it is not homosexuality
      There are no homosexual animals, no animal for instance allows anything in their anus.

      • R Beale R Beale Netherlands says:

        'Allowing something in your anus' does not define being gay.

      • Raven Johnson Raven Johnson United States says:

        ...And that's why this article specifically mentions giraffes...   having sex...   in the anus...   right?

        And also you apparently have never owned a dog?

        • lol
          Chuck Hackworth Chuck Hackworth United States says:

          I have owned lots of dogs, I've never seen 2 males locked.  And just because they are humping a guys leg does not mean they are gay.  And they stop that activity if they are fixed so its pretty much a hormone thing.

        • Nikola Petrovic Nikola Petrovic Serbia says:

          I also own a dog, and had them before. You really could not say that two male dogs humping are gay, it usualy ends up in a fight, humping is their way of showing who is lower in rank.

          I really have nothing against people being gay, and was very curious about this article, but it seems the writer really confuses terms here, i dont know how could you classify dominant behavior in dogs and lions as homosexual.

          And i am really suprised by the amount of incidious comments here, this article is very speculative so i understand why people are skeptical...

        • Robert Masengale Robert Masengale United States says:

          I have seen homosexual dogs. I think the issue is that when a homosexual dog mounts a heterosexual dog, the heterosexual dog takes offense to it and retaliates. It is much the same as any dog that tries to mount a female dog that does not want to 'breed' with them (whether in season or not). They fight back to say that it is unwanted.

          Dogs do not have the same methods of advanced communication we do. Their method of asking is to simply try to start the process. Their method of refusal is to snap at them for doing it, possibly starting a full-on fight.

          I have had dogs that will ONLY mount male dogs, even around a female in heat (especially around a female in heat). That makes the dog homosexual.

      • Amy Schrecengost Amy Schrecengost United States says:

        There's no way you're a doctor. You barely even have the reading comprehension to understand this article. The article specifically mentions male animals, having sex with each other.

      • Jessica Pruyn Jessica Pruyn United States says:

        And if you did more research you would see that there are tons that have anal intercourse look it up before you spout lies.

        • ??
          Nikola Petrovic Nikola Petrovic Serbia says:

          The writer of this article gave, as the source, a link to a Norwegian university and i dont want to apply for a scholarship.

          i mean writing something doesnt make it true, there should be links to some peer review papers or studdies so we could look it up in more detail.

          And saying :
          "Lions are also homosexual. Male lions often band together with their brothers to lead the pride. To ensure loyalty, they strengthen the bonds by often having sex with each other."

          That could be considered a lie, lions do the same thing as dogs. Males do not have sex. They rub against each other, expresing dominant behaviour , and you could not consider that as sex.

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment