Lesbian albatrosses, gay giraffes and some very open-minded penguins. So, can animals really be gay?

As the two birds gently entwine their heads, their soft, downy necks form a heart shape. They are, quite literally, a pair of love birds - Laysan albatrosses, reunited after months apart.

These seabirds, with a seven-foot wingspan and curved yellow beaks, soar over the oceans as far north as Alaska every November, after six months alone, before meeting at Kaena Point.

This rocky outcrop overlooking the Pacific in Oahu, Hawaii, is their ancestral breeding ground. It is here they return to mate and put on the world’s greatest display of monogamy.

For all is not how it seems on Kaena Point. A biologist studying the 120-strong albatross colony at the University of Hawaii has ruffled quite a few feathers with her extraordinary discovery. She has found that many of the albatrosses appear to be, well …gay.

Lindsay Young, who has worked on Oahu since 2003, has discovered that a third of the pairs at Kaena Point consist of two female birds.

The albatrosses have previously pulled the wool over conservationists’ eyes with their cosy cuddling - as the two sexes look identical.

According to Young, who used DNA analysis to genetically test the birds’ gender, some of the female pairs have been together for up to 19 years - as far back as biologists’ data extends.

In that time, these same-sex partnerships raised dozens of chicks. It seems the females choose a male to father their chicks, but then return to their nests to incubate them with their ‘wives’.

This colony is literally the largest proportion of . . . I don’t know what the correct term is - “homosexual animals?” - in the world,’ says Young.

Her revelations turn our knowledge of the animal kingdom upside down and begs the question: can animals be gay?’

In fact, same-sex sexual activity has been recorded in more than 450 species from flamingos to bison, beetles to warthogs, according to Jon Mooallem, who has written in The New York Times on the subject.

Read more: dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1279241/Lesbian-albatrosses-gay-giraffes-open-minded-penguins-So-animals-really-gay.html#ixzz0oHBBQOHU

I am not a bit surprised about pink flamingos. Here’s a comment that I thought was so Brit. :slight_smile:

They’ll need counselling, outreach workers, wholesale revisions of various Equalities & Equal Opportunities Acts.

I read an article about a pair of penguin who were both male, and seemd to be “partnered,” always hanging out togehter. The media article said they were homosexual, or gay.

This made me so mad, because they were in no way ever “intimate” with each other, if you know what I mean. It doesn’t make sense. Why can’t they just be best friends? Why aren’t the albatrosses best friends or cousins that are raising the chicks? How can an animal be homosexual without the “sexual” part? Animals just don’t preform those kinds of acts, whether it be lesbian albatrosses or gay penguins.

Am I crazy, or do people (mostly the writers) not realize this?

The internal “wiring” of sexual attraction can be “defective” just as other wiring can be.

However it must be conceded that such defective “wiring” will work against and not in favor of the propagation of the species and therefore is not a desirable trait.

So - from a purely natural standpoint this only demonstrates that no matter how the effect might effect the lives of those with it, it cannot be considered a desirable trait for it is contrary to the survival of the species.


Can animals be gay? Yes. In fact, much like in our own society, they still have their own role to play newser.com/story/60917/gay-penguins-raise-chick.html However, it is not a trait that is expected to propagate.

Maybe so, maybe not? But so what? Christians need not be threatened by what behavior exists in lower animals. There are plenty of cannibalistic animals out there too. Why would one case have implications on healthy human behavior and not the other? Is anybody arguing that cannibalism is morally acceptable since we can find it in the animal kingdom? (I suppose Gloria Steinem might be rather fond of black widow spiders if this line of thought ever occurred to her…)

The bottom line is that humans are not mere animals and we need not look to them to divine our true nature.

In fact, same-sex sexual activity has been recorded in more than 450 species from flamingos to bison, beetles to warthogs, according to Jon Mooallem, who has written in The New York Times on the subject.

And my answer is, “So what?” There are also animals who eat their young, fight to the death, die after spawning, hibernate inside balls of cow excrement, and commit suicide in droves by leaping off cliffs. Since the purpose of this article (as we all really know) is to give human homosexuality a sheen of legitimacy by pointing at the critters and saying, “See? It’s completely natural!”, my next question would be, “Then why arwen’t you also copying some other forms of animal behavior, like those above? It’s all completely natural!”

I thought that was the point of this thread :stuck_out_tongue:

Funny you should say that. I remember watching and reading about an african tribe that would eat their relatives after passing. When asked why, they stated that instead of feeding the earth their relatives are helping to feed their souls. It was a weird way of staying connected and close to a family member, maybe even too close :smiley: But, that was their culture, and they’re not hurting anyone, so what does it matter? Does that make cannibalism moral in this context?

True. We’re smart animals, with the ability to speak and reason much better than others.

Ultimately, it just sounds possibly, because of original sin, homosexuality is a perverted way that was not planned in the original God’s plan? Maybe sin entered into creation by way of genes or whatever? What say y’all???

Let’s see. These birds live on rocky outcroppings by the sea and spend most of their time at sea. They all look alike; so alike, in fact that these people had to test their DNA to even know their gender. And they did all that without ever becoming confused whether the ones they were testing were actually the “pairs” that stayed together for up to 19 years notwithstanding they were out to sea most of the time and lived on rocky cliffs when they were around. I’m no scientist, but it does not seem resoundingly convincing to me.

I don’t know about cockroaches either, but I have certainly observed “homosexual-like” behavior among animals. But none I have ever seen is “real” in the sense that human homosexuality is. Cows will engage in what looks like lesbian sex when one is in heat. But you don’t have to see much of it to realize it’s actually a visual tipoff to the bull that one is, in fact, in heat. The cow that momentarily acted the part of the bull instantly loses interest. But the act draws the bull’s attention and things proceed naturally from there. Cows don’t do it otherwise, and never, ever form “pairs”. So, as to the alleged homosexuality of the bison mentioned, at least, I’m overwhelmingly skeptical.

I have seen it with poultry when there are no females around. I have even seen solitary roosters try to mount cats. I have seen animals mount inanimate objects as well. But all animals I have ever seen do anything like that revert instantly to heterosexuality as soon as the opposite sex becomes available.

I’m no expert, but I am inclined to think some of these researchers find what they set out to find in the first place.

I find this difficult to believe theologically. Everything is in God’s plan right?

Assuming this is the case I would think that the information would have been more formally refuted by now. Bottom line, homosexual tendencies are witnessed in other animals and sometimes, as in the gay penguins I posted, those tendencies last for life.

Animals are incapable of both sin and moral behavior. They are incapable of going against their instincts.

People on the other hand, who act out on the basis of instincts, do not descend to the level of animals, but in fact, descend to a level much lower than that of animals.
It comes with the territory of morality.

I didn’t until you pointed it out. Thank you. Just as two friendly old ladies need not be gay to live together, animals don’t really fit the description unless there is evidence of sexual intimacy. :shrug:

God’s most perfect plan for the whole world was in the garden of Eden. When Adam and Eve sinned, sin entered creation. Whilst before, there was no sin…is this clearer?

Perhaps I’m being thick, but I can’t see what you are driving at. My point was precisely that whether or not animals sometimes exhibit homosexual behavior or orientation is a moot point when considering whether or not homosexual behavior is a healthy or moral behavior for humans. There simply is no connection.

You don’t think that tribe was hurting anyone? How about themselves? Do you think a depressed individual who ends up committing suicide isn’t hurting anyone? The act of eating human flesh, whether for nutrition or religious superstition inherently degrades the dignity of the human person. It is doing harm whether you recognize it or not. Same goes for human homosexual behavior, in fact.

Exactly. Disordered behavior occurs in all species. Natural does not mean normal or desirable.

For clarity, the use of “natural” in my post refers to “occurring in nature.” I realize that there can be some confusion in the use of the term. Same-sex acts are unnatural in the other use of “natural” - conformity with the ordinary course of nature.

Just a passing thought. How do these supposedly lesbian birds know their eggs won’t hatch unless fertilized by a male? Seems to me that requires an awful lot of knowledge for a bird.

I would think sin must have existed before that. If God created everything then God created sin. As such, sin must be part of God’s plan, albeit perhaps not his perfect plan (who’s to say he has only one).

People are animals, we are mammals, closely related to chimpanzees. We are all a part of the scheme of nature. As such, there are traits that we might share with other animals, which is why we do a lot of pharmaceutical testing on human analogs like pigs. If physically we can be very similar, why not behaviorally?

They thought it a religious act to be eternally close to loved one. So no, I don’t think they were hurting themselves. However, I do not believe humans have much nutritional value to ourselves. We’re really meant to eat more grains, fruits and veggies.

If someone is depressed then they are mentally ill and not capable of making a rational decision about euthanasia. They would in fact be the victim of their illness.

Well I guess that’s morally relative, dependent upon the culture you come from. In this case, these people willingly wish to be eaten after death. You may think it degrades their humanity, they see it as maintaining their humanity.

Homosexual behavior is arbitrarily attacked without good reason. Why people choose to attack this minority religiously day in day out, deny them rights, and make threats against them boggles my mind. I suspect, it has to do with protectionist measures within a group, but i’ve never read anything that supports or refutes that claim.

Birds can be smart, look at the Raven :slight_smile: youtube.com/watch?v=lrYPm6DD44M and pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/ravens/video-raven-intelligence/1549/

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.