_______________ THE FABULOUS KINGDOM OF GAY ANIMALS BY SUSAN McCARTHY (03/15/99)
	Oh, my god! The author has just discovered "homosexuality" among animals! And all this time it had been hidden by those homophobic scientists! Oh, please. When I studied biology 15 years ago at the University of South Carolina (trust me, not an institution on the cutting edge of enlightenment), homosexual behavior among animals was acknowledged, discussed and much theorized about. At that time, the popular position was that about 10 percent of animal behavior has homosexual. Homosexual behavior was observed to be more common among species with frequent sexual contact (such as the much-mentioned bonobos) and less common among animals with rare sexual acts tied to a receptive "season" (salmon, for example). This led to the common theory that sexuality was used for other social purposes beyond reproduction in many animals. This was not considered to be a controversial position. I have no doubt that the reviewed book is entertaining (although the conclusions drawn hardly seem supported by the evidence) -- but clearly the author is attempting to promote sales by creating a "Queer Fear Controversy" where none exists. -- Deirdre Seim Susan McCarthy repeatedly refers to animals that engage in same-sex sexual behavior as "gay" or "lesbian." There is a good reason why researchers who study animal and human sexuality do not use these terms to refer to species besides humans: Being gay or lesbian or straight is an aspect of a person's identity, personality, self-concept. Sexual identity is not solely determined by sexual behavior (many "straights" have had same-sex sexual relations, and many gays and lesbians have had opposite-sex sexual relations). Rather, sexual identity is the complex result of biological, psychological and sociohistorical forces. I appreciate the importance of emphasizing the diverse sexuality of other species and undermining the "opposite-sex sexual encounters are natural" rhetoric. However, McCarthy misrepresents the complexity of human sexual identities when she thoughtlessly applies terms like "gay" and "lesbian" to mountain gorillas and bighorn rams. -- Miles Jackson Early in my undergraduate days, I took a year-long human sexuality course from acclaimed sexologist Paul Pearsall. He explained early on that many animals participated in homosexual (and even cross-species) sexual behaviors, for any number of reasons. What I found most peculiar with the idea was that Pearsall claimed that only humans had the capacity for orgasm. So why would animals that could not have orgasm participate in sexual behavior other than to reproduce? The dominance theory, the hilarious "Big Greeting" and other theories seem logical, but are they really? In light of the fact that many animals create their own sex toys for masturbatory purposes, I doubt that we've even begun to scratch the surface. How much do we really know about ourselves or the rest of the animal kingdom, when we're not even privy to the mention of it in zoological studies or anywhere else? I'm upset to think that the "powers that be" would try to sit on this kind of information (pardon the language) instead of studying it openly and publishing it for all to see. How much better our understanding and tolerance of each other might be if the unnatural was suddenly proven natural after all. Bring the PC barriers down! Let all of us animals be animals! -- Alison Widmer
	N E X T+P A G E+| Mega-grocery store madness; I'm gay, and I don't have sex in bushes!