reply to post by ziggystrange
Same sex coupling is normal in humans and other species. It's not a pathology and it's not environmental.
You know, I keep hearing this argument, but it always confuses me. Here's why:
I have two outside male dogs. Occasionally I will see one of them trying to mount the other. That would be akin to what we deem as homosexuality in
humans, according to your argument. But never have I seen a male dog ignore a female in heat to go after a male. In the homosexual humans I have
known, they have absolutely no interest in females, but much interest in males (this by their own admission). Therefore the correlation is broken.
There are also other differences. Humans generally do not mate in public (unless they are being paid for it
). Dogs do, regularly. Humans have a
sense of privacy, perhaps induced by societal pressure, while dogs do not. However, I would not hesitate to suggest that dogs could not be deterred
from openly mating with another dog regardless of who else is present. We apparently can.
All animals are subject to the influence of pheromones to at least partly control the mating response. Females in heat produce these chemical
messengers, which then stimulate the males and lead to mating. In humans, we have pretty much taken control of this process through the use of
fragrances that mimic natural pheromones. That is hardly 'natural', and the very fact that the Axe Bodywash commercials are obvious exaggerations is
a testament to the fact that these natural pheromones actually play a less important role in our sexuality than they do in other animals.
All this tells me that dogs do not have the sense of right and wrong we do, and are more driven by chemical influence than by intellectual
realization. Thus, a dog who receives 'confusing' chemical signals in the absence of a female can be considered to be less 'responsible' for
'improper' choices than an human who has access to the opposite gender.
Another point that confuses me in your argument is that of evolutionary theory. The basis behind evolutionary theory is that mutations which improve
the ability of an animal to survive will be passed down to future generations, while mutations (or lack of such) that decrease an animals ability to
survive will not, thus insuring that the most hardy traits of the species survives. This would be impossible to accomplish if homosexual preference in
animals existed to the extent it does in humans. No genetic traits may be passed to another generation except through reproduction. Therefore, if
homosexuality (defined as
strongly preferring same sex over opposite sex) were to become the 'norm' among a species, that species would
quickly die off within a few generations. It is not possible for dogs to use technology to genetically create puppies artificially. Only we, humans,
have that ability.
So while I admit that same-sex coupling occurs in the animal kingdom, I also can state that it is not the same activity as human homosexuality. The
drives are different, the mechanisms are different, and the extent to which the behavior occurs is much less pronounced.
TheRedneck
