I think that is a relatively ignorant, and inaccurate view. Many species practice homosexuality, not merely for dominance, as noted above, but for 'fun.' In fact many species of mammals practice homosexuality among both genders, even when mated to the opposite sex. Besides, by your logic, if the evolutionary drive is to reproduce one's own genetics material, the homosexual should represent a welcome lack of competition for available mates.
However, the idea that we reject social norms on evolutionary grounds (and I won't even get into the dubious use of 'unfit' in that context) I think misunderstands the roles or both evolution and social functioning. I think it far more likely that we view things different from ourselves with some suspicion in general.
After all, if the idea of eating raw fish is distasteful to you, you may well feel uncomfortable sitting next to someone eating sushi. While it is not always the case that attraction to one sex does not mean 'anti-attraction' to the other, for many of us I suspect that the notion of attraction to our own sex is just too different to be naturally palatable. However, it seems that a general feeling of unease can be either overcome by rationality and reason, or exacerbated into loathing when the difference is transformed into a threat.
And it seems that the principle discourses which render the homosexual as a threat are, in fact, religious in nature. I would therefore answer that while not the reason discrimination exists, religion is why it persists.
Mith, just curious, how do you know they do it for "fun?" How do they communicate that to you? Also can you be more specific to name those animals who practice "homosexuality?" (which is a human concept and may have a different meaning for animals)
Secondly, do you think humans have contributed to the behavior of animals by tampering with their natural environment?
I tend to agree with your last statement that religion causes the discrimination to persist, but in ways it also promotes it. Do you think the human brain and the brain of our nearest primate share the same anthropological concepts? If not how does homosexuality relate to both species?
Lastly, are you a "homosexual?" Which would make your view bias at best and wrong at worst.
"How do they communicate that to you?!" Don't be ridiculous, or snarky, please. There is naturally some interpretation required in deducing the motivations behind animal behavior, which is why I put it in quotes. I'm not sure how homosexuality could have different meanings for different species (it's a pretty simple term: homo=same, sex=well, I hope I needn't clarify that one). Nevertheless, to be clear, I mean behavior which is normally associated with mating, bonding, sex, or sexual contact occurring between individuals of the same sex.
That said, these topics have been the subject of study by animal behaviorists and zoologists for some time. There are instances where species seem to use sex or sexual activity for dominance, and some where they seem to do so for pleasure. or even engage in bonding/mating behavior. This is especially notable in primates, but has been observed in birds.
I doubt you'll take my word for it, but a short list of species known to behave in an array of same-sex sexual behavior include primates like macaques, bonobos, baboons, and chimps; as well as dolphins, giraffes, elephants, swans, penguins, and even some insects.
It may be that in some cases, human encroachment on territory may have led to many changes in behavior, but I am not aware of any evidence linking human contact to changes in specifically homosexual behavior. Much of what has been documented and documented has been, as far as I can see, has been observed in the wild, which would tend to work against such an assertion.
No, I don't think that other species share our 'anthropological concepts;' why would you think I would? Homosexuality seems to be a naturally occurring behavior in many species, our own included. It seems to be only in our species that feel the need to attach values of 'rightness' or 'wrongness' to the selection of sexual partners, and then, as I said before, it seems to take a social discourse (such as religion) to turn it into a question of morality or ethics.
Lastly, my sexual preference has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of my answer. Do you really think one has to BE a certain orientation to understand it, or to find discrimination against it repugnant? Furthermore, it's none of your business, and I find the manner in which you have asked to be rude at best, downright offensive at worst.
Would seem you missed this in the news when it happened..
Or this from the Audubon society..
Then there's this to wrap things up..
this is boring. I've gone over this already. manipulation of environment, labeling from a cultural perspective, cultural need for power and the validation of associated behaviors. I know this is a simple view but Nature made the anus for excrement not for the human mammalian brain to seek boundless pleasure or self gratification thru sexual behavior. (The vagina for the insertion of a penis) Hell we can say that according to our view, animals practice beastiality, so it's "normal" for us to follow suit since we too are animals. We can pass a law to make it legal, why not, it's within our scope to behave as such. Homosexuality is aberrant in Nature (not practiced universally or even in great numbers) even among zoo animals
Individualism allows for a few "individuals" to express their personal desires. Ideas of "freedom" and "rights" allow other "individuals" to support them because they too feel that this idea of "rights and freedom" shouldn't be breached because they too have them. Now when this is juxtaposed against the idea that we are above Nature and are boundless, hell we'll almost accept any behavior.
Why does the g-spot exist then? Whats that for?
How can you be sure it exists...? Have you ever seen it.. ? LMAO
As for not being practiced universally, you apparently didn't follow those links I provided. They would show you that in fact it is practiced universally.
So what if its not practiced in great numbers in animals? That doesn't invalidate it.
Sounds like both of your suppositions have just bit the dust there.
I missed this earlier:
@Shabaka Tecumseh "I know this is a simple view but Nature made the anus for excrement not for the human mammalian brain to seek boundless pleasure or self gratification thru sexual behavior. (The vagina for the insertion of a penis)"
So do you also say that oral/genital sex is aberrant? By the logic you present here, it is. The mouth is for eating and making sounds, not sexual gratification. Would you say that the only time a penis should be inserted in a mouth is when the intent is to bite it off?
If you don't consider oral/genital sex aberrant, how is that not a hypocritical view?
My best friend is gay , we have been friends for 44 years and I am glad that I didn't have to go through all of that thinking to value him as a terrific friend !!!! We just love and respect each other as human's. Not as a species, or competition,, social functioning being palatable.... geez after all of that ... who would have any friend..... I just want to live and enjoy my time on earth . If I meet a person I like and they happen to be gay , so what !!!!! I have many gay friends and my children have gay friends . I taught them well and they don't thing any thing different about their friends gay or straight.
You are correct, butother species do not have the ability to develope cultures, which regulates behaivor. If you have a family member, it would be logical for evolution to push you to get that family member to reproduce (passing on their genes (and thus, a fraction of your own genes)). Because of this incorporation into religion, our culture pushes this mindless instinct onto all people, not just relatives. Religion was also evolved, so you can not fully separate culture and religion from biology (which I am trying to unite in this idea).
That's the problem.. you can't unify religion and biology.