Horny, Lesbian, Japanese monkeys offer new challenge for Darwinists

monkspider · February 21, 2003, 00:35

Lesbian Japanese monkeys challenge Darwin's assumptions
By David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent, in Denver
(Filed: 19/02/2003)

The promiscuous sex life of lesbian Japanese monkeys is challenging one of the central tenets of Charles Darwin. He argued that females are coy, mate rarely and choose mates to ensure the best genetic inheritance for their offspring, while males are promiscuous and fight among themselves for female partners.

But after studying Japanese macaques in the wild, Dr Paul Vasey, of the University of Lethbridge, Canada, begs to differ. He found that bisexuality is common in females and that they often compete with males for sexual partners.

"In some populations, female Japanese macaques sometimes prefer same-sex partners," he told the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Denver. "That occurs even when they are presented with sexually motivated, opposite-sex alternatives."

Males are often prompted into sexual intercourse only if they are first mounted by females. Dr Vasey said: "Female-male mounting in Japanese macaques is an adaptation that sexually motivated females employ to prompt sluggish or uninterested males to copulate with them."

He observed that the females gain pleasure from mounting males, often rubbing themselves against a male's back or stimulating themselves with their tails.

Dr Vasey said that once they evolved the capacity to mount males, they could gain the same sexual gratification from mounting females. "I see females competing for males all the time," he said. "I see males ignoring females that are desperate to copulate with them."

Dr Joan Roughgarden, a biologist at Stanford University, said the macaque was just one of many species that did not fit Darwin's theory of sex selection.

Female langur monkeys promiscuously mated with many males, for instance. Homosexuality in animals - at least 300 invertebrates practise it - was also unexplained by Darwin.

Dr Roughgarden said that a more comprehensive theory of sex selection should take into account social as well as sexual selection. Mating could function to build and manage relationships as well as to reproduce. "Female choice, I am pretty sure, has much more to do with managing male power than it does with trying to obtain good genes."

Boris Godunov · February 21, 2003, 00:42

monkie, if you're to afraid to link to the source, don't bother!

Skanky Burns · February 21, 2003, 00:47

Good ol' macaques.

monkspider · February 21, 2003, 00:48

What's a link between gentlemen?

Boris Godunov · February 21, 2003, 00:50

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider
What's a link between gentlemen?

It's rather intellectually dishonest to quote a story with a rather ridiculous attempt at "discrediting" Darwin and not give us the source (which I would wager is some sort of creationist web site).

monkspider · February 21, 2003, 00:57

Honestly, I originally saw this posted on the EU OT forum without link and found it too amusing not to share with you all.

MRT144 · February 21, 2003, 01:00

boris, wouldnt you also wager that most creationists are also anti homosexual?

Boris Godunov · February 21, 2003, 01:01

Quote:

Originally posted by MRT144
boris, wouldnt you also wager that most creationists are also anti homosexual?

I'm sure they think these monkeys are damned sinful!

Shi Huangdi · February 21, 2003, 01:04

Just when the darwinists were looking to defeat the creationists, they get attacked from the rear by the vicious japanese lesbian monkies, creating a two front war.....

monkspider · February 21, 2003, 01:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Just when the darwinists were looking to defeat the creationists, they get attacked from the rear by the vicious japanese lesbian monkies, creating a two front war.....

loinburger · February 21, 2003, 01:08

Female cats are also extremely promiscuous -- the more semen they can gather up, the greater the genetic diversity of their offspring. Plus it's all in good fun.

Kramerman · February 21, 2003, 01:09

Oh my god! ive been living a lie! evolution is wrong! By extrapolating the observations of this obscure species of monkies to all species has shown me the light...

Ben Kenobi · February 21, 2003, 01:10

http://www.psycport.com/stories/comt...arwin.xml.html

http://www.medserv.org/modules.php?n...ticle&sid=1877

monkspider · February 21, 2003, 01:11

Hey, thanks Obi.

Ben Kenobi · February 21, 2003, 01:17

You're welcome, monkspider.

Too gay for the creationists. Too controversial for the Darwinists.

You just know that has to be real.

Urban Ranger · February 21, 2003, 04:26

No biggie. A number of primates also have certain hemosexual tendencies.

Oerdin · February 21, 2003, 04:42

So does my dog but then again he also tries to hump the sofa.

Urban Ranger · February 21, 2003, 04:47

Dogs don't count

Bonobos

Tolls · February 21, 2003, 05:11

"He argued that females are coy, mate rarely and choose mates to ensure the best genetic inheritance for their offspring"

Was this really a central tenet of Darwins? Or simply a generalisation?

"...the new findings suggest the theory (sexual selection) can be applied only to a portion of the animal kingdom."

...and I thought this had been known for a while.

Urban Ranger · February 21, 2003, 05:19

That's not a central tenet. For parts of the animal kingdom, the females are bigger than the males.

Sprayber · February 21, 2003, 05:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Just when the darwinists were looking to defeat the creationists, they get attacked from the rear by the vicious japanese lesbian monkies, creating a two front war.....

One can only imagine how the creationist view their new ally.

Jack the Bodiless · February 21, 2003, 06:06

How can the author claim that this is challenging "one of the central tenets of Charles Darwin"?

I've read Origin of Species, and I don't recall female coyness as a "central tenet".

The article also provides evolutionary explanations:

Quote:

Males are often prompted into sexual intercourse only if they are first mounted by females. Dr Vasey said: "Female-male mounting in Japanese macaques is an adaptation that sexually motivated females employ to prompt sluggish or uninterested males to copulate with them."

He observed that the females gain pleasure from mounting males, often rubbing themselves against a male's back or stimulating themselves with their tails.

Dr Vasey said that once they evolved the capacity to mount males, they could gain the same sexual gratification from mounting females. "I see females competing for males all the time," he said. "I see males ignoring females that are desperate to copulate with them."

So the females evolved this male-stimulating behavior, then found that it was fun. This is no more mysterious than recreational non-reproductive sex in humans.

mindseye · February 21, 2003, 07:43

I mentioned it before, but there's a great book that carefully catalogs all contemporary evidence of homosexuality among animals. It's a very large book.

Biological Exuberance, Bruce Bagemihl, PhD, St. Martin's press.

My favorite is the special form of "necking" which male giraffes only do with other male giraffes. Gets them so hot they usually end up "doing it" together.

Turns out a very wide array of mammals - it seems like most - engage in some sort of homosexual behavior, including child-rearing by same-sex couples (e.g. she-grizzlies, male black swans).

Seems like there is a correlation between intelligence and homosexual behavior - the more intelligent the species, the more it gets into homosexual behavior. Examples of mammals who really seem to enjoy it: porpoises, many kinds of whales, elephants, lions, cheetahs, wolves ... and of course, most primates.

Other notorious species include sea lions, american buffalo (many of whom never once mate with a female), and bighorn sheep (female bighorns stometimes must try to pass themselves off as young males in order to get some action).

All data is carefully documented (the author is a straight, married guy with kids). Great drawings and photos! The shot of two male gray whales going at it, only their members visible above the water, is memorable indeed.

-=Vagrant=- · February 21, 2003, 07:56

This is proof for evolution! According to some creationists evolution leads to deviancy and immorality. Now we have the evidence!

molly bloom · February 21, 2003, 10:00

Not so much a lesbian monkey, as a red herring.

All it shows is that Darwin was a man of his time- from a society that hypocritically expected grown women to lie back and think of England when engaging in sex, and yet also tolerated child prostitution, sado-masochistic bawdy houses and situational homosexuality- in the Royal Navy, in the Guards regiment (they supplemented meagre army pay by renting) and in public schools.
There was in fact a gay brothel next door to the Albany Street Barracks, maintained by a certain Mrs. Truman.

http://www.victorianlondon.org/ql/queenslondon321.htm

Many 19th century naturalists and biologists 'saw' what their upbringing educated them to see with regard to the sexual behaviour of wild animals. As Christianity decreed homosexuality was unnatural, it could not per force, exist in nature. Also, male-female animal pairings were given an anthropomorphic spin, with the ludicrously romantic notion of animals pairing for life (regardless of whether they did or not).

Observation is all.

Hurricane · February 21, 2003, 10:20

In fact, the idea that all animals are heterosexual family-loving creatures is strong even today. Watch any nature program and wou'll see how their behaviour is put into a christian monogamic family-context.

Jon Miller · February 21, 2003, 10:30

umm

monogamic families exist (And are common) outside of christianity

Jon miller

TheStinger · February 21, 2003, 10:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Hurricane
In fact, the idea that all animals are heterosexual family-loving creatures is strong even today. Watch any nature program and wou'll see how their behaviour is put into a christian monogamic family-context.

British ones aren't like that. the're always showing how animals are ****ging evrything that moves

Tolls · February 21, 2003, 10:32

"Watch any nature program..."

...apart from the ones about spiders, or insects...

Tolls · February 21, 2003, 10:32

...or by David Attenborough...