Social Queer Planet: NBC film that looks at LGBTQ animals

[GearSolidMetal]

Those dogs ain't gay they are retarded

How do you know how they identify?

They're not retarded, they'te barksexual.

 

[Osculater]

How do you know how they identify?

They're not retarded, they'te barksexual.

Barksexual? I like it

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Barksexual? I like it

Yes, so they're barksexual..... and retarded.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Lol. This thread should keep Sherdog occupied for a few years.

 

[Neck&Neck]

I use to keep breeding pairs of aquarium fish and it’s common for them to eat the offspring if you don’t remove them
Cuz they just want to mate again

 

[Osculater]

Yes, so they're barksexual..... and retarded.

 

[Osculater]

I use to keep breeding pairs of aquarium fish and it’s common for them to eat the offspring if you don’t remove them
Cuz they just want to mate again

Fvcking burns a lot of calories

 

[Poon Goon]

Has anyone suggested that this sub be changed from "War Room" to "Queer Planet" yet? If not, consider this my nomination.

 

[shockaholic12]

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.

Not every single action taken by these highly social species needs to be directed singularly towards breeding for a trait to a neutral or positive. The social aspect of their lives is vital to their survival. I’m not sure how that simple fact is over your head. “Numbers”? Lol.

This is why studies list numerous theories regarding their social benefits and you keep choking to find any studies to back up your assumptions. Not sure why that fact is over your head either. It’s clear you’re coming in with a personal belief that gay behavior must be spun as something bad and are trying to force it on nature and having to ignore all the research to keep your fairy tale alive.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Has anyone suggested that this sub be changed from "War Room" to "Queer Planet" yet? If not, consider this my nomination.

Beer Planet

 

[oldshadow]

Not every single action taken by these highly social species needs to be directed singularly towards breeding for a trait to a neutral or positive. The social aspect of their lives is vital to their survival. I’m not sure how that simple fact is over your head. “Numbers”? Lol.

This is why studies list numerous theories regarding their benefits and you keep choking to find any studies to back up your assumptions. Not sure why that fact is over your head either. It’s clear you’re coming in with a personal belief that gay behavior must be spun as something bad and are trying to force it on nature and having to ignore all the research to keep your fairy tale alive.

The fact is that 2 females or two males cannot reproduce. That's a simple fact. Why is that over your head. To keep a species going they must reproduce, that's a fact. I never said gay behavior was good or bad.


I did say that saying it's found in nature so it must be good is as bad as say it's not found in nature.

Humans are a lot more complex mentally then any other species on earth.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

The fact is that 2 females or two males cannot reproduce. That's a simple fact.

you might want to look up parthenogenesis. there are some species of animals and insects that do not need a male to reproduce.

 

[shockaholic12]

The fact is that 2 females or two males cannot reproduce. That's a simple fact. Why is that over your head. To keep a species going they must reproduce, that's a fact. I never said gay behavior was good or bad.


I did say that saying it's found in nature so it must be good is as bad as say it's not found in nature.

Humans are a lot more complex mentally then any other species on earth.

Your simple fact doesn’t mean anything in this debate because of the simple fact there are other benefits attributed to the behavior in highly social species so whether or not the behavior results in offspring is not what dictates whether the trait is neutral or a benefit to survival. You can’t fathom that for some weird reason. More likely you do but are playing dumb so you don’t have to concede a point.

I never claimed its existence alone is a good thing. I’ll say it’s common existence in highly social highly intelligent species that have thrived implies there are likely social benefits and its likely to appear in us. I’ll say it makes the argument it’s some detractor from survival seem really weak.

 

[Poatan Power]

. If not then you are projecting that question onto the film.

Duh. I'm saying you're being obtuse if you're missing the broader message. This isn't a peer reviewed double blind study. You're projecting scientific objectivity onto this where it doesn't exist, silly.

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.

Side stepping with autistic focus. Primate alpha males kill other males for female attention. primate males kill offspring for personal gain. The species doesn't matter. So I guess it's not odd that it appears in us. So, the conclusion is... I don't look in nature to validate human behavior. Some people itt are lol but this pernicious mindset of "male pigs fondle each others balls with their snouts, see, gay is okay!" is retarded.

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.

Fair enough, I may be conflating you with some other posts. Plus, a lot of the anti-gay crowd does, as you point out, say things that draw people into pointing out observation of homosexuality in nature.

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.

Among other things, yeah.

 

[Belaya Smert]

Prob used a heterosexual camera person.

Disgusting

 

[EL CORINTHIAN]

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.

It really isn't and actually attacks the heart of your position. You basically have blinders on with respect to every other action (eating shit for instance) but are trying to convince everyone that observed homosexual acts are part and parcel of intelligent design hence the whole "it's been observed in intelligent animals" schtick.

Basically, you're trying your hardest to make it seem like animals are legit gay because the behaviour has been observed while disparaging everything else, to a point where you asked for studies quantifying the rate at which animals eat shit.

The only one who's getting emotional here is you. You aren't fooling anyone with your "objectivity" by hiding behind a study that observed a behavior we all agree happens in nature because you have no answer for the other appalling shit that happens along with it, and yes that includes rape.

 

[The_Renaissance]

Gayness in animals = testosterone fuelled male animals fucking any hole they can find for sexual release. Which basically sums up the male gay scene in general, to be honest.

 

[shockaholic12]

Duh. I'm saying you're being obtuse if you're missing the broader message. This isn't a peer reviewed double blind study. You're projecting scientific objectivity onto this where it doesn't exist, silly.


Side stepping with autistic focus. Primate alpha males kill other males for female attention. primate males kill offspring for personal gain. The species doesn't matter. So I guess it's not odd that it appears in us. So, the conclusion is... I don't look in nature to validate human behavior. Some people itt are lol but this pernicious mindset of "male pigs fondle each others balls with their snouts, see, gay is okay!" is retarded.



Fair enough, I may be conflating you with some other posts. Plus, a lot of the anti-gay crowd does, as you point out, say things that draw people into pointing out observation of homosexuality in nature.



Among other things, yeah.

Again, for like the 3rd time you’ve choked when asked to show anywhere in doc where they make any statements on animal behavior justifying human behavior. That is a notion you seemingly are bringing into the doc yourself unless you can show it. The only thing Disney just wants is streams. They know people like nature docs where animals exhibit behavior that humans can relate to. They know there is a large gay demo or people who aligned with the gay community who would stream this. That makes them money. The ethics of human homosexuality and conflating that to the animal kingdom is something you’re concerned with. They care about money. Don’t be obtuse or show in the doc where they get political with it. Does a Disney doc about social pack animals mean they are commenting on socialism in human societies, derp?

Lol see you dropped the bird example after my advice, good idea it was terrible. This one is pretty bad too. The species definitely does matter greatly. “Interestingly, the team also compiled the figures for bonobos, with strikingly different results: just a single suspected killing from 92 combined years of observation at four different sites. This is consistent with the established view of bonobos as a less violent species of ape.” maybe all the gay sex bonobos have chills them out lol. Chimps kill each other when they are in overpopulated area, not to impress females.

You should look to nature, since we are a part of it and have close genetic relatives in it, to consider where our behavior traits come from. The people who bring nature into the argument about gay behavior in humans start with the ones that are against it and try to argue it’s unnatural, against survival, anti-evolution, etc. Then it’s fair to point to nature and show them they are being dumb and the opposite is true. Sometimes chimps in overpopulated areas killing each other doesn’t change that. This is just deflecting.

You can’t argue the gay behavior trait is a negative in their species so you have to find this other less common trait that includes violence to chance the subject. No one is saying all of primate behavior is acceptable in humans as well, but that doesn’t mean we don’t share traits that are positive, like consensual gay behavior.

So if you want to argue gay behavior is wrong because some silly old book told you it was, or because it offends your sensibilities or whatever feels its triggers..fine. Just leave the “it’s against nature and bad for species” bullshit out and no one will bring up nature.

Among others things? Like what? Say it with your chest dude.

 

[EL CORINTHIAN]

Again, for like the 3rd time you’ve choked when asked to show anywhere in doc where they make any statements on animal behavior justifying human behavior. That is a notion you seemingly are bringing into the doc yourself unless you can show it. The only thing Disney just wants is streams. They know people like nature docs where animals exhibit behavior that humans can relate to. They know there is a large gay demo or people who aligned with the gay community who would stream this. That makes them money. The ethics of human homosexuality and conflating that to the animal kingdom is something you’re concerned with. They care about money. Don’t be obtuse or show in the doc where they get political with it. Does a Disney doc about social pack animals mean they are commenting on socialism in human societies, derp?

Lol see you dropped the bird example after my advice, good idea it was terrible. This one is pretty bad too. The species definitely does matter greatly. “Interestingly, the team also compiled the figures for bonobos, with strikingly different results: just a single suspected killing from 92 combined years of observation at four different sites. This is consistent with the established view of bonobos as a less violent species of ape.” maybe all the gay sex bonobos have chills them out lol. Chimps kill each other when they are in overpopulated area, not to impress females.

You should look to nature, since we are a part of it and have close genetic relatives in it, to consider where our behavior traits come from. The people who bring nature into the argument about gay behavior in humans start with the ones that are against it and try to argue it’s unnatural, against survival, anti-evolution, etc. Then it’s fair to point to nature and show them they are being dumb and the opposite is true. Sometimes chimps in overpopulated areas killing each other doesn’t change that. This is just deflecting.

You can’t argue the gay behavior trait is a negative in their species so you have to find this other less common trait that includes violence to chance the subject. No one is saying all of primate behavior is acceptable in humans as well, but that doesn’t mean we don’t share traits that are positive, like consensual gay behavior.

So if you want to argue gay behavior is wrong because some silly old book told you it was, or because it offends your sensibilities or whatever feels its triggers..fine. Just leave the “it’s against nature and bad for species” bullshit out and no one will bring up nature.

Among others things? Like what? Say it with your chest dude.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Again, for like the 3rd time you’ve choked when asked to show anywhere in doc where they make any statements on animal behavior justifying human behavior.

does this count?