A recurring theme in the Catholic bishops’ campaigns against gay marriage, is the claim that it is somehow “against nature”, or contrary to “natural law”.

In its theological sense, “natural law” does not (surprisingly) mean anything at all connected with that which is found in nature, and I’m not going to get into that now (we have a specific series in preparation which looks at just what it does mean - or not). However, in practice those who use the term are in fact making or implying assumptions about “human nature”, or about what is found in the natural world of animals. It’s time to take another look at “natural” sexuality, procreation and raising of young.

In a particularly fatuous remark reported at LaSalette, Dr. Antonio Pardo, Professor of Bioethics at the University of Navarre, Spain, is reported to have stated,

“There is no homosexuality in animals, if there were, they would die out, wouldn’t they? I mean it stand to reason.”

Reason alone, unsupported by any reference to evidence, can be exceedingly dangerous, leading to wildly erroneous conclusions. Dr Pardo’s unwarranted assumption here is widely shared, but easily refuted. Another common but erroneous belief is that animals only engage in sex to make babies - and so the only purpose of sex is procreation. The evidence in fact shows precisely the opposite. Homosexual activities, and non-procreative sexual activities, are commonplace in the animal kingdom. The truth may even be the exact opposite of what Dr Pardo and his ilk claim: what is truly “unnatural” may be exclusive heterosexuality, and homophobia.

Let’s do what Vatican theologians seldom do: let us consider some evidence on sexuality in nature.

When the Norwegian Natural History Museum of the University of Oslo in 2006 mounted the first public exhibition to focus on homosexuality in the animal kingdom, a report at medical News noted that

Homosexual behaviour has been observed in 1,500 animal species.

Bruce Bagemihl (Biological Exuberance) has meticulously documented and described the evidence from published scholarly articles for hundreds of species of mammals and birds, and listed the species of reptiles, amphibians, fish, and even insects where such behaviour occurs - that is, reliable published observations exist for every branch of the animal kingdom.

Those are just the published observations. For reasons good and bad, there are other instances where there have been observations of animal same-sex interactions that have not been published, or have been misrepresented.

“The theme has long been taboo. The problem is that researchers have not seen for themselves that the phenomenon exists or they have been confused when observing homosexual behaviour or that they are fearful of being ridiculed by their colleagues. Many therefore overlook the abundance of material that is found. Many researchers have described homosexuality as something altogether different from sex. They must realise that animals can have sex with who they will, when they will and without consideration to a researcher’s ethical principles.”

medical News

As Bagemihl describes, there have been instances where observers of animal copulation have simply assumed that one individual, the one “on top” was male, the other female, and described them as such without checking. In the same way, observers of bird pairs have often simply assumed they were of opposite sexes. Often, when the researchers have taken the trouble to check the sexes of the individuals they were observing, they have found their assumptions were simply wrong. Some researchers, correctly identifying what they were seeing, avoided publishing their findings for fear of ridicule or disbelief from their colleagues. Others accurately described what they were seeing, but misrepresented its nature - simply denying that sex between males was actually sexual. In one study of giraffes, for instance, nine out of ten pairings was between males, but

Every male that sniffed a female was reported as sex, while anal intercourse with orgasm between males was only “revolving around” dominance, competition or greetings.

In still other species, no homosexual activity has been scientifically described, simply because no sexual activity, of any kind has been described.

To turn the approach on its head: No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, with the exception of species that never have sex at all, such as sea urchins and aphis. Moreover, a part of the animal kingdom is hermaphroditic, truly bisexual. For them, homosexuality is not an issue.

The Diversity of Sexual Activity

A dearly held popular myth among sexual puritans is that animals only engage in sex for procreation - and so that is it’s only purpose. The evidence flatly contradicts it. Masturbation is common, and also oral sex, group sex, anal intercourse, penetration without ejaculation, and even forms of sex not available to humans: porpoises and dolphins use their partners’ blowholes as additional sexual orifices, some primates use their agile toes for masturbation, elephants use their trunks. Some species even make their own sex toys.

Masturbation is common in the animal kingdom.

“Masturbation is the simplest method of self pleasure. We have a Darwinist mentality that all animals only have sex to procreate. But there are plenty of animals who will masturbate when they have nothing better to do. Masturbation has been observed among primates, deer, killer whales and penguins, and we’re talking about both males and females. They rub themselves against stones and roots. Orangutans are especially inventive. They make dildos of wood and bark,” says Petter Boeckman of the Norwegian Natural History Museum.

In an earlier post on Procreation, and Natural Non-Procreation, I wrote

To take just one important example, consider the Bonobo Chimpanzee, described as the closest in evolutionary terms to humans. For this species, the most commonly observed form of sexual activity is between females. Strictly heterosexual activity described for these animals includes, among activities that for humans would be in contravention of the Catechism, mutual masturbation, fellatio, group sex, and intercourse with juveniles (adolescent females go through a period of several years’ sexual activity with adults before becoming fertile). Females mounting males, and copulation without penetration, or without ejaculation, have also been described. Even when we consider only strictly conventional heterosexual intercourse, this occurs through all phases of the menstrual cycle. Estimates are that roughly a third of all copulation occurs at times when conception is unlikely, or impossible.

Bagemihl also describes non-procreative and alternative heterosexual behaviour for Common Chimpanzees, Gorillas, Orang-Utans, Gibbons, Siamangs, Langurs, seven species of Macaques, three of baboons, and some new world monkeys, and lemurs and bush babies. In fact, for every single primate species which he discusses for observed homosexual behaviour, he also describes various forms of non-procreative heterosexual activity.

The “Purpose” of sex.

The range of non-procreative sexual practices completely demolishes the idea that the sole purpose of sex is procreation. The opponents of marriage equality insist that as procreation and with it the survival of the species is impossible without heterosexual intercourse, Sthe sole purpose of marriage is procreation - a complete non-sequitur. Reproducing the population does not require that every individual reproduce, nor that every reproductive individual need do so with every sexual act. This is clearly illustrated in the world of animals. In many mammal species (bighorn rams a notable example), only a handful of males ever participate in heterosexual intercourse. Among bonobo chimps, the most common sexual interactions are between females. In others, heterosexual intercourse is far more common, but individuals will also have occasional homosexual activities.

Among some animals homosexual behaviour is rare, some having sex with the same gender only a part of their life, while other animals, such as the dwarf chimpanzee, homosexuality is practiced throughout their lives.”

Animals that live a completely homosexual life can also be found. This occurs especially among birds that will pair with one partner for life, which is the case with geese and ducks. Four to five percent of the couples are homosexual.

In biological terms, the survival of a species needs more than simple reproduction. There is also a need that the progeny are successfully raised to adulthood, and that, especially in social groups, requires maintaining social cohesion, and the transmission to the young of social skills. The evolutionary biologist Joan Roughgarden (“Evolution’s Rainbow“) has described how in this way, there are many more evolutionary purposes to sex than simple procreation. For bonobo chimps, of all primates the one most closely resembling humans, she lists several:

1. Sex facilitates sharing (for example, reducing conflicts over food supplies)
2. Sex is used for reconciliation after a dispute
3. Sex helps to integrate new arrivals into a group
4. Sex helps to form coalitions
5. Sex is candy - females sometimes barter sexual favours to obtain gifts of food from males
6. “Oh, I almost forgot - sex is used for reproduction”

There’s something else she forgot - sex is fun.

Procreation, and Natural Non-procreation

Same - Sex Couples Make Good Parents

Some of the homosexual activities among animals is purely recreational, but not all of it. Among birds especially, some same - sex couples pair for life, and raise young together. Some of these offspring are raised from their own eggs, fertilized by available transient fathers, some are adopted as abandoned or orphaned chicks - and some come from stolen eggs. Whatever the source, the evidence is that the same - sex parent couples are every bit as successful at raising children as opposite sex pairs, and in some cases, even more so.

Once again, it becomes clear that the lesson of nature is that what we need just heterosexual intercourse for procreation, but sound parenting - by any biological gender - to nurture and raise them.

Single females will lay eggs in a homosexual pair’s nest. It has been observced that the homosexual couple are often better at raising the young than heterosexual couples.

When you see a colony of black-headed gulls, you can be sure that almost every tenth pair is lesbian. The females have no problems with being impregnated, although, according to Petter Boeckman they cannot be defined as bisexual.

“If a female has sex with a male one time, but thousands of times with another female, is she bisexual or homosexual? This is the same way to have children is not unknown among homosexual people.”

Unnatural marriage, unnatural homophobia.

The most bizarre assertion by the marriage opponents, completely demolished by evidence from the natural world, is that we “need” opposite - sex marriage to reproduce the species. While it is certainly true that we need (some) heterosexual intercourse to create children, it is not true that we need exclusively opposite - sex marriage to raise them - or even to make them. Humans are perfectly capable of making babies without the benefit of marriage, and do so regularly. (For big chunks of Western history, and often today, marriage became urgent only once babies were already and visibly on the way). For animals of course, there’s no question of formal marriage, same - sex or opposite - sex: both are entirely and equally unnatural.

What is also unnatural for animals, in fact almost unknown, is homophobia.

Homosexual behavior has been documented in hundreds of animal species, but the same does not hold for gay-bashing. For starters, few animals are exclusively gay. Two female Japanese macaques might have playful sex with each other on Tuesday, then mate with males on Wednesday. Pairs of male elephants sometimes form years-long companionships that include sexual activity, while their heterosexual couplings tend to be one-night stands. For these and many other species, sexual preferences seem to be fluid rather than binary: Gay sex doesn’t make them gay, and straight sex doesn’t make them straight. In these cases, the concept of homophobia simply doesn’t apply.

-quoted by Andrew Sullivan, at the Daily Beast

Sexual Nature - Morally Neutral

In pointing to the diversity of sex in nature, I most emphatically do not claim that this makes any particular case for the morality of sexual acts. Some equally “natural” practices among animals are emphatically not recommended for humans, including incest, intercourse with sexually immature adolescents, necrophilia, or the practice of some spider and praying mantis females of eating their male sexual partners after insemination. ”Nature” is morally neutral.

However, if it does not demonstrate that any particular form of sexual activity or choice of partner is morally good, nature most certainly not demonstrate that they are “against nature”, and so necessarily bad.

So: can we please keep arguments from “nature”, or a non-existent “law of nature” entirely out of debates on homoerotic relationships, or gay marriage?

 

Books:

Bagemihl, Bruce: Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity (Stonewall Inn Editions)

Roughgarden, Joan: Evolution’s Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People

Sommer, Volker and Vasey, Paul: Homosexual Behaviour in Animals: An Evolutionary Perspective

Poani, Aldo:Animal Homosexuality: A Biosocial Perspective

Related articles

• Aquinas, “Nature” – and Sex.
• Marriage, Procreation, and “The Broad Book of Nature”.
• “Unnatural” Nature, Immoral Butterflies: The Great Cover-Up of Animal Homosexuality
• Our Queer Primate Cousins
• Same Sex Parents, Furred and Feathered
• Natural Law, Laysan’s Albatross, and the Question of Evidence
• Is Exclusive Heterosexuality Unnatural?
• Bighorn Rams: Macho Homos, Wimpish Heteros
• Procreation, and Natural Non-procreation
• Animals Use Sex-toys, Too
• Queer Bonobos: Sex As Conflict Resolution
• Sexual Nature: Picture Gallery

• Squirrels Masturbate to Avoid Sexually Transmitted Infection(Discover Magazine)
• Holy fellatio, Batman! Fruit bats use oral sex to prolong actual sex(Discover Magazine)
• Sex and Morality, Penguins and Fallacies (Psychology Today)
• Is Homophobia Natural? (Andrew Sullivan)
• Homosexuality in Nature (Cross Examined)