Social Queer Planet: NBC film that looks at LGBTQ animals

[William Huggins]

I'm going to still watch my tranny prawn..... I don't care what you people say!!!!

 

[AngryWeasel]

- Gators, crocodiles. That's is why conservatives dont believe climate change. They want trans animals. On the other hand, leftists are transphobics, and want to combate natural sex-change!

Rising temperatures could force the birth of more female crocodiles and fewer males, an expert said today. The scenario could cause some croc populations to disappear. Crocodile gender is determined by temperature during incubation. Nest temperatures of 89.6 to 91.4 degrees Fahrenheit (32-33 Celsius) result in males.

https://www.livescience.com/1154-global-warming-doom-male-crocodiles.html#:~:text=Rising temperatures could force the,33 Celsius) result in males.

Warming climate could cause a sex imbalance in crocodiles making it more difficult to find mates, according to a south African scientist.

Dr. Alison Leslie, a prefessor at South Africa’s University of Stellenbosch, said that crocodile gender is determined by embryo temperature during incubation and that higher temperatures could skew the sex ratio of populations.

“A difference of 0.5 – 1ºC in incubation temperature results in markedly different sex ratios,” said Leslie, principal investigator of the ‘Crocodiles of the Okavango Delta’ project organized by the Earthwatch Institute, a global volunteer organization that supports scientific field research by offering members of the public opportunities to work alongside leading field scientists and researchers. “Research shows that nest temperatures of about 32-33 degrees Celsius result in males, while temperatures higher and lower result in females. Temperatures within a nest can vary from the top to the bottom of the nest, and can result in mixed-gender hatchlings. ”

“More female hatchlings due to the cooler or hotter incubation temperatures could lead to eventual extirpation of the species from an area,” added Leslie. “Even though crocodilians have been around for millions of years, and as important as these creatures may be in the systems they occupy, they are a much understudied species,”

https://news.mongabay.com/2006/11/climate-change-could-cause-sex-switch-in-crocs/

Global warming may cause sex changes in lizards​

By Rachel Feltman

According to new research, climate change may leave some lizards in a gender lurch. The Australian bearded dragon's sex is determined by both its chromosomes and the environment its egg is incubated in, so warmer temperatures could be skewing wild populations to have more females.

In a study published Wednesday in Nature, researchers report that they've seen evidence of this in wild populations of Pogona vitticeps.

"This is the first time we have proved that sex reversal happens in the wild in any reptile at all," lead study author Clare Holleley of the University of Canberra told the Associated Press. The study, she said, is an example of how climate extremes can put animals at risk on the most basic biological level.

It's normal for some of these lizards to hatch as females when they have the chromosomal makeup of males. That's because the species doesn't rely solely on chromosomes to determine their sex. The lizards are also influenced by the temperature at which their eggs are incubated. Some species use just chromosomes or just egg temperature to determine their sex (and no one is really sure why), but the bearded dragon uses a combination of both.

With temperatures warming, however, this mechanism may end up putting the lizards at a disadvantage.
In the new study, Holleley and her colleagues combined controlled breeding experiments with field data collected from observations of 131 adult lizards.

In warmer areas, 11 of the wild lizards were found to be females with male chromosomes -- indicating that temperature had determined their fate.

Eleven isn't a lot, and the researchers plan on continuing their research with larger sample sizes. But here's the potential problem: When those females reproduced -- which they did at nearly twice the rate of chromosomal females -- their offspring all lacked sex chromosomes, meaning that their sex was determined entirely by temperature.

So in a warming climate, it's possible that the species could see a snowball effect of females primed to produce female offspring, spurring a growing sex imbalance. Sure enough, the researchers saw the percentage of heat-determined females going up each year of their study. Eventually, there could be so few males that the species would lack the genetic diversity needed to stay strong in the face of their warming world.

It wouldn't be impossible for the male sex chromosome to disappear entirely, according to the researchers.
@Zookeeper Gabe
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...bal-warming-may-cause-sex-changes-in-lizards/

Given that crocs have been around since dinosaurs time I'd say they had their share of climate changes and did ok.

More ok in fact than 95% of the species

 

[AngryWeasel]

I mean for example at one time it rained for two million years straight. And they had zero umbrellas. Oughta sucked

 

[LeonardoBjj]

- Queer Planet sounds like a Bad-Boy records meeting!

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Saw this and thought posting it would add to the discussion.

 

[Yorick]

I mean for example at one time it rained for two million years straight. And they had zero umbrellas. Oughta sucked

AND it rained cats and dogs so Vets were created to gouge us.

 

[EL CORINTHIAN]

Saw this and thought posting it would add to the discussion.

This is the research @shockaholic12 was talking about.

 

[shockaholic12]

This is the research @shockaholic12 was talking about.

Are you going to start screeching “bu but but guys…that’s basicslly rape!” like a spazz again?

 

[oldshadow]

So is the point since something kind of like the lbgtq of whatever with animals it's just nature and should be viewed as normal.

First it's very different in humans due to our mental capacity.

Rape is natural in animals as is Iinfanticide.

In humans we can say adults have the right to love who they want and be who they want as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others.

In nature the strongest rule on a personal level.

 

[shockaholic12]

So is the point since something kind of like the lbgtq of whatever with animals it's just nature and should be viewed as normal.

First it's very different in humans due to our mental capacity.

Rape is natural in animals as is Iinfanticide.

In humans we can say adults have the right to love who they want and be who they want as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others.

In nature the strongest rule on a personal level.

The point of what? The show? That’s to put out more nature docs which are cheap to make and this is just a topic not covered by mainstream channels yet.

The point of discussing it in here? Some of those who are not supportive of LGBTQ lifestyles have constantly tried to use nature as part of their points against it since forever. Arguing it’s some blight on species survival and a negative, a useless practice, etc. Presenting the reality of gay behavior in nature shows their points are just false assumptions.

As long as they keep their arguments to “it offends my sensibilities” and leave nature out of it there’s not a lot of reasons to focus on it but they usually don’t.

 

[oldshadow]

The point of what? The show? That’s to put out more nature docs which are cheap to make and this is just a topic not covered by mainstream channels yet.

The point of discussing it in here? Some of those who are not supportive of LGBTQ lifestyles have constantly tried to use nature as part of their points against it since forever. Arguing it’s some blight on species survival and a negative, a useless practice, etc. Presenting the reality of gay behavior in nature shows their points are just false assumptions.

As long as they keep their arguments to “it offends my sensibilities” and leave nature out of it there’s not a lot of reasons to focus on it but they usually don’t.

I don't think it was made just because it was a nature thing live all the others.

It had the point to push that we should all just accept this because it's natural.

Which is just a week as those saying it's not natural.

Of course it goes against the survival of a species but if the species is strong enough it over comes that. The same as the males killing the young.

In most cases of sex being males in the wild it is rape and a situation of domination.

As far as sex between females in the wild I didn't watch the documentary so I don't know if the caught females in the act but it would seem to be doubtful.

Animals do have same sex bonds that don't include sex.

I think both sides of it does or doesn't happen in nature are off the mark in comparing that to humans.

 

[shockaholic12]

I don't think it was made just because it was a nature thing live all the others.

It had the point to push that we should all just accept this because it's natural.

Which is just a week as those saying it's not natural.

Of course it goes against the survival of a species but if the species is strong enough it over comes that. The same as the males killing the young.

In most cases of sex being males in the wild it is rape and a situation of domination.

As far as sex between females in the wild I didn't watch the documentary so I don't know if the caught females in the act but it would seem to be doubtful.

Animals do have same sex bonds that don't include sex.

I think both sides of it does or doesn't happen in nature are off the mark in comparing that to humans.

And here are all those false assumptions right on time lol.

Where does in the doc does it transition from documenting behavior in the animal kingdom to telling the audience to just accept it in our society? I haven’t seen it so maybe this happens but I’m guessing you’re jumping to this conclusion on your own.

That would not be as weak as those saying it’s not natural. Because the research shows it is common behavior in nature in thriving intelligent species, so at least one side’s point is reflected by reality and research and the other is making a false statement.

It does not “go against the survival of species”. Find any research that shows that. Or a species who died off because it was having too much gay sex. You can’t. If that was true these highly intelligent social species who engage in it the most wouldn’t thrive as they are. Research finds it’s a neutral trait or one that has benefits in social species like sex for social interaction bonding, exchange for significant materials, affection, mentorship pairings, sexual enjoyment, or as demonstration of social rank, decreasing intrasex violence, etc.

You haven’t shown any evidence a majority of this behavior is “rape” so that’s a throwaway sentence.

A majority of sex acts performed by female bonobos are with other females. I don’t think you’ve really ingested any reading or documentaries on any of this. This all reads as a dude who hasn’t looked at any of the science on a complicated subject making assumptions based on his feelings.

we are part of nature. We possess strikingly similar genetic make-ups to these species. It’d be dumb to not at times compare us to other highly intelligent social species.

 

[Poatan Power]

And here are all those false assumptions right on time lol.

Where does in the doc does it transition from documenting behavior in the animal kingdom to telling the audience to just accept it in our society? I haven’t seen it so maybe this happens but I’m guessing you’re jumping to this conclusion on your own.

Brother, now you're just being contrarian. At best the documentary leaves you to draw your own conclusion while providing ample information to show LGBTQ etc is "natural" in the animal kingdom in which we reside.

If I said to you that African American's make up 13% of the population and commit 51% of all murders, I'm just giving you information, right? I didn't tell you to draw a racist conclusion, did I?

That would not be as weak as those saying it’s not natural. Because the research shows it is common behavior in nature in thriving intelligent species, so at least one side’s point is reflected by reality and research and the other is making a false statement.

It does not “go against the survival of species”. Find any research that shows that. Or a species who died off because it was having too much gay sex. You can’t. If that was true these highly intelligent social species who engage in it the most wouldn’t thrive as they are. Research finds it’s a neutral trait or one that has benefits in social species like sex for social interaction bonding, exchange for significant materials, affection, mentorship pairings, sexual enjoyment, or as demonstration of social rank, decreasing intrasex violence, etc.

You haven’t shown any evidence a majority of this behavior is “rape” so that’s a throwaway sentence.

A majority of sex acts performed by female bonobos are with other females. I don’t think you’ve really ingested any reading or documentaries on any of this. This all reads as a dude who hasn’t looked at any of the science on a complicated subject making assumptions based on his feelings.

we are part of nature. We possess strikingly similar genetic make-ups to these species. It’d be dumb to not at times compare us to other highly intelligent social species.

To be fair, because you're not being fair/neutral, while feigning that you are (I think), if a bird tosses its smallest/weakest offspring from the nest and it increases the survival rate of its remaining offspring in the nest, are we to justify similar behavior in humans...? I think that's a relatively benign point to make -- that animal behaviors do not justify human behavior, even if we are the coolest animals in the kingdom. We have a set of ethics and principles that justify human behavior independent of what a dolphin does to another dolphin behind closed plankton. FWIW I totally support LGTQ equality and have no ethical qualm with their sexual identities. I do have issue with the recent wave of over representation in media and their evolution into a protected class socially -- as if they're feeble or adolescent.

(That doesn't mean we should give hormones and chop of pensies of transgender 12 year olds)

Anyway, just some thoughts, semi-out of context to what you were replying to.

 

[shockaholic12]

Brother, now you're just being contrarian. At best the documentary leaves you to draw your own conclusion while providing ample information to show LGBTQ etc is "natural" in the animal kingdom in which we reside.

If I said to you that African American's make up 13% of the population and commit 51% of all murders, I'm just giving you information, right? I didn't tell you to draw a racist conclusion, did I?



To be fair, because you're not being fair/neutral, while feigning that you are (I think), if a bird tosses its smallest/weakest offspring from the nest and it increases the survival rate of its remaining offspring in the nest, are we to justify similar behavior in humans...? I think that's a relatively benign point to make -- that animal behaviors do not justify human behavior, even if we are the coolest animals in the kingdom. We have a set of ethics and principles that justify human behavior independent of what a dolphin does to another dolphin behind closed plankton. FWIW I totally support LGTQ equality and have no ethical qualm with their sexual identities. I do have issue with the recent wave of over representation in media and their evolution into a protected class socially -- as if they're feeble or adolescent.

(That doesn't mean we should give hormones and chop of pensies of transgender 12 year olds)

Anyway, just some thoughts, semi-out of context to what you were replying to.

To draw a conclusion first you need to set up the question. If anywhere in the doc the film asks "is this ok in our society?" while presenting the social behavior of the animal kingdom ok then it does. If not then you are projecting that question onto the film.

People like watching animals behave in somewhat human ways or ways we can relate to. Playing, raising young, their social behaviors, working, building homes, they've made shows about all of it. Now that the gay community is large enough they likely think there's a large enough audience that relates or is familiar with gay culture to be interested in this. I doubt there's motive outside of targeting an audience.

If you gave me information on a specific topic then yes I'm going to assume the conclusion you want me to ponder is directly related tot that. If you give me stats on human behavior I'm not assume you're asking me to think about the behavior of dolphins and chimps. This example you came up with only makes you look wrong.

I wouldn't compare bird behavior to humans because they're vastly different species. Another bad example off the rip. If numerous thriving highly intelligent species with close genetics to ours regularly portray a behavioral trait then I'd argue it's not strange for it to appear in us nor is it unnatural or against survival or evolution.

I never argued anything of this is justifying ethical decisions so I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. I've pointed out like 5 times in this thread that this topic is brought up when the anti-gay crowd decides to pivot from personal beliefs and emotions to reference nature and survival and evolution in it's arguments. I'm not sure why that point is so hard for many of you to grasp.

The "over-representation" is a consequence of centuries of oppression of the culture. They have been and continue to be a demographic that has faced political and social discrimination and violence which is where the protected class stuff comes from.

 

[oldshadow]

And here are all those false assumptions right on time lol.

Where does in the doc does it transition from documenting behavior in the animal kingdom to telling the audience to just accept it in our society? I haven’t seen it so maybe this happens but I’m guessing you’re jumping to this conclusion on your own.

That would not be as weak as those saying it’s not natural. Because the research shows it is common behavior in nature in thriving intelligent species, so at least one side’s point is reflected by reality and research and the other is making a false statement.

It does not “go against the survival of species”. Find any research that shows that. Or a species who died off because it was having too much gay sex. You can’t. If that was true these highly intelligent social species who engage in it the most wouldn’t thrive as they are. Research finds it’s a neutral trait or one that has benefits in social species like sex for social interaction bonding, exchange for significant materials, affection, mentorship pairings, sexual enjoyment, or as demonstration of social rank, decreasing intrasex violence, etc.

You haven’t shown any evidence a majority of this behavior is “rape” so that’s a throwaway sentence.

A majority of sex acts performed by female bonobos are with other females. I don’t think you’ve really ingested any reading or documentaries on any of this. This all reads as a dude who hasn’t looked at any of the science on a complicated subject making assumptions based on his feelings.

we are part of nature. We possess strikingly similar genetic make-ups to these species. It’d be dumb to not at times compare us to other highly intelligent social species.

So only actions in nature you think supports your views is relevant.

Not the other things.

You are no different then the people trying to use the it's not natural arguments.

 

[shockaholic12]

So only actions in nature you think supports your views is relevant.

Not the other things.

You are no different then the people trying to use the it's not natural arguments.

This is a vague random thing to blurt out that has nothing to be with the post you quoted. I not even talking about my personal views.

Which I’ll take to mean you couldn’t find any evidence of gay behavior going against any species survival and are just deflecting.

 

[oldshadow]

This is a vague random thing to blurt out that has nothing to be with the post you quoted. I not even talking about my personal views.

Which I’ll take to mean you couldn’t find any evidence of gay behavior going against any species survival and are just deflecting.

In my post first answering you I said although it would negatively affect the species that effect would be minimal to almost no effect if the species has healthy numbers. Say like the human population can overcome any negative effect population wise.

 

[shockaholic12]

In my post first answering you I said although it would negatively affect the species that effect would be minimal to almost no effect if the species has healthy numbers. Say like the human population can overcome any negative effect population wise.

Yes, you a random dude on a karate forum said that. But you included zero actual research into the topic to make your assumption worth anything.

You can into any of the studies I've posted since like a year ago about it. They seem to conclude a list of benefits or at most a neutral outcome.

 

[oldshadow]

Yes, you a random dude on a karate forum said that. But you included zero actual research into the topic to make your assumption worth anything.

You can into any of the studies I've posted since like a year ago about it. They seem to conclude a list of benefits or at most a neutral outcome.

I'm not sure how you don't understand that 2 males or 2 females can not reproduce. Which is why it does not help the species to continue. As I said that disadvantage is overcome by the numbers.

 

[Osculater]

Saw this and thought posting it would add to the discussion.

Those dogs ain't gay they are retarded