No sooner has the dust settled (depends on your definition of ‘settled’ of course) on the Gay Marriage discourse than we have a fresh outbreak of hysterical outrage. Dr Brett Mills of the University of East Anglia – which sought to challenge our ‘commonly held perceptions’ on climate change by fair means or foul – is out on the airwaves challenging other ‘commonly held perceptions’.

It is time for wildlife programmes to release their inner pink panther – wildlife documentary maker David Attenborough is in his cross-hairs for perpetuating the notion that the birds and the bees ‘are predominately heterosexual’…

Enough of this focus on evolutionary reproduction and Darwinism, we should be watching the Gay Gorillas on Bareback Mountain. Press the pink button on your handset for a full length report on the Pride march of the Longleat Lions.

‘I am the Horse that dare not speak its name’ (on the label). Equality for Equus caballus. You can Find us everywhere, is wearing a bit thin now.

‘Dr Brett Mills of the University of East Anglia says wildlife documentaries should be offering viewers a wider perspective on animal behaviour’. Researchers found BBC wildlife documentaries portray animals as heterosexual families too often, even though animals can also be gay.

Can it be true that the only reason we have not seen transgendered animals (snails anyone?) on screen is that the programme makers have been leant on by bible bashing homophobic water buffaloes?

Surely that dear old duffer, David Attenborough, also fails to deal with the male chauvinistic attitudes of some species, that perpetuate sexual stereotypes and even extend to rape? The feministas have missed a trick here.

Dr Brett Mills –  From his University of East Anglia web site biography.

My teaching and research focuses on popular television forms. I’m especially interested in the sitcom, both historically and institutionally, as well as its national and international inflections. My other interests are the relationships between media/culture and identity, especially related to nation, region, and class.

Occupy your minds this morning thinking up some programme titles that suitably reflect mainstream homosexuality in the animal world.  ’The world of the Gay Gnus’? ‘Come Prancing – the pink Flamingos’?

(There’s a limerick in there somewhere Mudplugger!)

*Yes, I do know that’s not how you spell Laffer curve.

Elena ‘andcart
February 10, 2013 at 15:57

Good God!

General Mayhem
February 10, 2013 at 13:11

It is possible that among animals of the same species it is more of a
dominance thing – “gonna make you my bitch”

Although one day during lunch at a local pub, I had let my (entire, quite
dominant, male) dog loose in the garden. A few minutes later there was quite a
kerfuffle outside and the pubs male vietnamese pot bellied pig was rather
vigourously rogering my unfortunate dog. He then climed down and trotted off.
The dog was seemingly none the worse for the experience, apart from being a
bit quiet for a few days, and was markedly reluctant to go back to the
particular hostelry.

Perhaps the immortal Georges Brassens can shed some light on this subject –
(Jake Thackery interpretation)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQm_8uoljWM

Mark February 9, 2013 at 23:05

On the same serious note, initial research has shown a possible gene that
may make people more attracted to men. When this gene is expressed in women
they have more babies. When expressed in men they are gay. Therefore a gene
that ptogrammes for homosexuality might enhance human reproductive
success.

Mark February 10, 2013 at 12:37

As a corrollary, men who like their heterosexual relationships to have a
physical content that is above average might be well
-advised to seek
women from families containing homosexual men.

therealguyfaux
February 9, 2013 at 20:24

Realising that most of the posts in this thread are satirical, I almost
hesitate to turn serious for a moment, but here goes:

Why cannot homosexuality in the human species be presented as sui generis?
(And no “sooooo-eeeee, pig” references please!) If all creatures have an
“evolutionary strategy,” so to speak, why couldn’t it be a uniquely human
adaptation, and one which, in small-enough scale, i.e., representing a
minuscule percentage of humans, is an advantage in that, if you are a
Malthusian population-growth-outstrips-sustainability-of-feeding-them type, it
tends to hold that sort of geometric progression down, however mildly and
short-term? Why does Homosexuality in the human species NEED to be justified
or explained with reference to any other? I’m probably offending everybody by
even posing these questions, inviting each agenda in their own way to take
umbrage at me– but ask me if I really care.

Do I believe any of what I just proposed– maybe, maybe not, let’s see how
it goes. All I’m saying is that old Atts need not stray too far from an
Occam’s Razor explanation of why animals might be the way they are, and humans
the way we are, in any presentation of wildlife on TV, and Prof Mills may need
to recalibrate his attacks upon the old man.

Joe Public
February 10, 2013 at 01:16

“……homosexuality in the human species ……… representing a minuscule
percentage of humans……”

Surely not? Boy Dave wouldn’t have gone to so much trouble to allow them
to “marry”, if there’d only be a few votes to gain.

Moor
Larkin February 9, 2013 at 19:14

I regularly kiss ass at work. Doesn’t make me feel gay in the
slightest.

JuliaM February
9, 2013 at 21:33

Robert Edwards
February 9, 2013 at 18:16

Well, if I could lick my own nuts, I probably would. The fact that I can’t
does not compel me to find another bloke who would…

20 Rothmans
February 9, 2013 at 21:18

And dogs look at us and think ‘if only I could suck’.

It’s a talent wasted on them, I tell you.

But if you blew yourself, would you be a poofter? I know that St Ron
could and did, but I’m not sure if he went all the way.

20 Rothmans February 9, 2013 at 17:42

‘Dr’ Brett Mills, of Meeja Stdies fame, has rightly highlighted that
Attenborough failed to out the full homosexual wonders of the animal kingdom.
Take our Sydney silky terrier. She did munch rugs, but not metaphorically,
that’s not what I am on about.

She was also into bestiality, she had a shoe fetish and the shameless
harlot went around stark NAKED. She could also masturbate with her own tongue,
and would do so in front of underage CHILDREN!

For all I know, ‘Dr’ Mills might well like the taste of a penis (he looks
the type) but I think that we can safely say that this is a human aberration.
For whilst we might see the odd dog cleaning his own genitals with his tongue
(old joke time: because he can/ I wish I could do that – best give him a pat
first) I have yet so see a male animal blowing another.. Even in some of my
Dutch films, this method of pleasure takes part only between a human and an
animal, I mean, who’s going to buy a donkey on donkey red hot gay action film
apart from an ass trying to ensure that the meeja are on track with their
animal sodomy quota and not being biased? On a personal note, were I a male
donkey, I’d probably decline being on the bottom – if you get my drift.

No doubt ‘Dr’ Mills has his motives for criticising Attenborough for
leaving out some Vegemite-drilling content. I suppose that if your life is as
worthless as that of a meeja lecturer (wasn’t the 9K tuition fee meant to put
a stop to this?) the lack of animal perversion on the BBC is a burning
issue.

JuliaM February
9, 2013 at 21:33

“…I have yet so see a male animal blowing another.”

Check out bonobos (what used to be called ‘Pygmy chimpanzees’). It’ll
open your eyes.

20 Rothmans
February 9, 2013 at 23:36

I giggled it and I cannot stop laughing because the next ‘recommended’
clip involves a cat entertaining a labrador. I could do with a cat like
that, if I could teach it to cook Mrs 20 would be out. It would also fix
any mice problems.

I bow, Julia, to your superior knowledge of animal sexual perversion.
Whether you put that on your CV or not is a matter entirely up to you

Robert Edwards
February 9, 2013 at 16:48

And never forget the immortal Melville, whose masterpiece was supposed to
be called Moby Arse.

I know it’s pretty weak/obvious, but when you examine the subliminal soap
themes already extant, then little more needs to be said; Left+queer = a good,
Christ-like figure. All others bad, unless the character happens to be from a
religious minority (unless Mormon, which = funny) and not black (which = naive
and stupid, translated as ‘conflicted’, or ‘confused’ or ‘angry’ Or all three.
Oh, and they will never stab each other or use drugs. Slavery will appear
somewhere, but not in the soap narrative, as this theme will emerge later in a
quickly-commissioned drama documentary regarding, etc., etc., etc.)

This jerk is already singing to the pretty choir.

Bill
Sticker February 9, 2013 at 16:37

It’s a nonsense. There is no ‘Gay’ in animals. If anyone spent enough time
working with livestock and wildlife they’d realise that the same sex
‘mounting’ display is more often about establishing dominance than sex alone.
Usually among ‘beta’ males and females. Add to that, some creatures are so
highly sexed when in season (or there aren’t any receptive femalies) it’s ‘any
port in a storm’. No available girls around? – sorry Bob.

Is there a proper zoologist in the house?

Frankie February 9, 2013 at 16:30

‘…Researchers found BBC wildlife documentaries portray animals as
heterosexual families too often, even though animals can also be gay’.

And their evidence for this is, exactly? Just because a boy dog ‘dry humps’
another boy dog does this mean that the dog is gay? Says who?? Perhaps the dog
has adopted the ‘any port in a storm’ mentality. We know too little about the
animal kingdom to establish this for a fact.

The rate things are going, being gay will be compulsory…

Harbinger February 9, 2013 at 15:40

Interestingly enough, I read an article where local fishermen down in
England somewhere complained that the fish were turning hermaphroditic. An
investigation found that pollution of the water supply of mercury from a local
factory was to blame. Even more interesting were the birds who fed on the
offspring of Hermes and Aphrodite. The males had taken a fancy to one another
along with the females. It therefore proves the case that the overwhelming
majority of homosexuals today have been bio-engineered to be that way through
food, water and vaccine tampering, most certainly while in the womb and the
early stages of infanthood and growth development. As for those who haven’t
been ‘tampered’ with chemically, studies show childhood abuse of some form or
another. The bottom line is homosexuality is abnormal and completely unnatural
when it comes to the survival of any species. And no, I have no irrational
fear of homosexuals, thank you.

Harbinger February 9, 2013 at 15:58

I should also have noted that the most obvious question asked is ‘why
would people tamper with the sexual orientation of humans?’ Well, there are
a few reasons, but the main one is the de-population agenda. The plan is to
bring the world’s population to under 500 million. Yes that means the
culling of some 93% of the human race. By creating homosexuals then you
remove the desire of parenthood as well as the physical possibility of
procreation. While some have started families the overwhelming majority seek
a hedonistic lifestyle. Children impede on that way of life. You won’t bring
the population down to under 500 million just through sexuality tampering.
That’s why constant warfare is planned, poisoning of food and water supply,
deadly vaccines and GMO’s, spraying of the skies, weather warfare through
H.A.A.R.P. technology and making everyday life so costly couples resort to
only one child if any. Then of course you’ve the continual promotion of
feminism to destroy the family unit. Sorry for going a bit off topic, but
the gay agenda is all part of a far more insidious plan, that many in
society are unaware of.

Engineer
February 9, 2013 at 16:26

Were the ancient Greeks early proponents of this, or were they just
indulging in horse play?

Harbinger
February 10, 2013 at 00:40

The ancient Greeks were just sexual perverts, as were the Romans,
Phoenecians etc etc. Homosexuality in ancient times was indulged in by
the elites. As for the Spartans having sexual relations with one
another, it was forced upon them by their commanders in order that they
would fight better protecting their sexual partners. Regardless it was
still a sexual perversion, as it is today and it also proved that it was
a choice as when Spartans left the army they went back to their wives
and raised/continued with their families. Homosexuality is and always
will be immoral, abnormal and unnatural. Homosexuality is detrimental to
species survival or do you disagree?

Moor Larkin February 10, 2013 at 10:46

@ As for the Spartans having sexual relations with one another, it
was forced upon them by their commanders in order that they would
fight better protecting their sexual partners @

So far as I recall, one of the primary modern reasons given for not
allowing female soldiers to fight on the front line was that soldiers
would form romantic attachments, which would then affect effective
military discipline, since in a battle situation the soldiers would be
too busy looking afte one another to be properly focussed on obeying
orders and killing the enemy. I’m also a bit dubious about the
proposition that being ordered. under military duress, to engage in
sex with the squaddie in the bed next to me, would somehow make me
love him too. I suspect it would be more likely to make me go
awol.

My father once told me a story of his National Service days and how
his billet had a member who kept trying to get into someone elses bed
at night. In due course they ganged up on him (not in a terribly
violent way I should add, but more along the lines of one of those
*initiation/mild humiliation* type of ceremonies) and made it plain
that nobody else shared his proclivities and so he desisted. After
that he continued to be part of their platoon and nobody bore a grudge
on either side by my fathers account.

Harbinger
February 10, 2013 at 14:28

Moor,

The reason you give for problems of females joining the armed
forces although certainly plausible is not the main one. There has
been a recent drive to have women on the front line as opposed to
driving and desk duties. America is going ahead with this which has
been met with ridicule. A former female officer has come out stating
the obvious that women are simply not able to keep up with the men and
this puts people’s lives in danger. She also stated that because of
this standards have been dropped in order for women to pass tests. The
thought of a woman trying to fast march with a 115Ib bergen or
hoisting a male soldier on her back in a fireman’s carry is laughable.
Moreso women captured by the enemy would receive far more abuse than a
male and they would easily be broken down by rape. Sexual harassment
also seems to be a regular complaint also.

Going back to the Spartans, they were forced by their commanders to
form sexual relations with their colleagues. As you know a homosexual
remains homosexual all of their lives from young rent boys to old
queens. Spartans upon leaving settled down with a female partner and
raised families. This proves the sexual release they gained from one
another was purely by choice and not nature.

Moor Larkin February 10, 2013 at 14:50

@ As you know a homosexual remains homosexual all of their lives
from young rent boys to old queens. @

I personally knew a guy who was totally normal, had a wife and
children and he told me that he had never felt like he was “secret
homo”; then, later he fell in love with a bloke and left his wife and
children. I know he was very emotional about losing the normality for
his children’s sake, but said he loved the guy, so what could he
do….

Chris Huhne gave up his family (and career in the end) to co-habit
with a woman who some years before had *married* another woman.

Did the Spartans perhaps merely tolerate homosexuality on the basis
it did the blokes no harm in the end? …..
I
find it difficult to believe the men were *forced* to take a partner,
human beings don’t change that much and that wouldn’t really be
tolerated in terms of men and women, outside of a cult at any
rate.

John February 9, 2013 at 15:21

It would be interesting to note whether David Attenborough has, during his
50 years of wildlife research, ever come across a male lion or gorilla
buggering another one or not.

I know where by betting money is…

Woman on a Raft
February 10, 2013 at 07:45

When Attenborough did his famous Gorillas in the Mist sequence, the BBC
were very careful to point out that it was a female who showed great
interest in him. Sounds like that was doubly lucky.

Griffin February 9, 2013 at 14:55

How funny! As a man who has given the nation cause for gaiety, so to speak,
surely Dr Mills deserves praise?

Ali ‘Rum’ Baba
February 9, 2013 at 14:26

It brings out the full flavour of beef mince – which with the current mixed
up state of the meat rack could mean inter-species bestiality.
Horse mince
– it puts the Butch in Butcher!

Dick the Prick
February 9, 2013 at 13:47

How does one go about getting a ‘job’ like that? Geez, if I was him i’d
keep my mouth shut and tell everyone I was a mortgage adviser, politician,
pimp even than admit to that. Hey ho, none of my business, really.

Ljh February 9, 2013 at 11:48

Male giraffes have more sex with each other than the procreative kind. I
found that out after watching a prolonged erotic bout which surprised me when
I worked out the genital details but not the ranger who said thebfemalescwere
only interested when fertile but the males were always up for it. I also
remember the mutual devotion of a ram and an Alsatian dog, despite females of
each species being around. They really seemed to prefer each other’s company
even when unaroused.

Moor
Larkin February 9, 2013 at 13:03

Presumably most lionesses are the gay ones in the pride, since as I
understand it there’s only one big male allowed, so little opportunity for
manly pursuits of a different kind. Perhaps the giraffe thing is the result
of males having to eat only vegetables….

binao February 9, 2013 at 11:02

My most sincere apologies to any natives, but having spent a little time
working in Norwich, I wonder if Dr Mills is influenced by the alleged local
social habits? In which case, more to come.

Belsay Bugle
February 9, 2013 at 10:00

And who said that Roman emperor fellow was mad making his horse a
senator?

Mudplugger
February 9, 2013 at 11:43

At least he didn’t make it into a lasagne, like Emperor Findus.

Engineer
February 9, 2013 at 12:14

The only surprise was that a Findus lasagne actually contained meat of
any species.

Anna
Raccoon February 9, 2013 at
12:19

Having tasted the ‘Quorn’ variety of lasagne, I am convinced I know
where the horses harness went to.

isar
February 9, 2013 at 12:33

that would be Findus eqcuisine then

Engineer
February 9, 2013 at 20:54

Question – How do you know if your lasagne is
undercooked?
Answer – It starts eating your carrots.

Woman on a
Raft February 10, 2013 at 07:38

UniQuorn.

Anna Raccoon February 10, 2013 at 07:42

Divine. Superb! Full marks.

Belsay Bugle
February 9, 2013 at 09:58

Fame is the spur!
Good old Dr Brett Mills has lost no time in coming
out. But he’s prescient.
He has sniffed the wind and although his remarks
appear silly now, there is no modern silliness that does not become orthodoxy
a decade or two down the line.
He is cleverly anticipating the future when
we will have mixed species marriages in church. First confined to
heterosexuals so as not to frighten the horses (so to speak), then in the name
of equality, to include gay animals as well.
Any vicar or registrar who
refuses will be defrocked or whatever.

I’m sure the C of E will be able to come up with a new service for such a
ceremony, Private Eye style.

Moor
Larkin February 9, 2013 at 10:12

Germany recently made bestiality illegal again I think, after legalising
it back in the Sixties. Reactionaries.

Belsay Bugle
February 9, 2013 at 10:17

Was there an epidemic of it?

isar February 9, 2013 at 12:22

was there???

entire krauts where at ‘it’

Joe Public February 9, 2013 at 09:53

Firstly, the University of Easy Access has a school of “Creative Writing”,
which helps explain some of the fiction disseminated by their Climatic
Research Unit and other Departments.

http://www.uea.ac.uk/literature/creative-writing

Secondly, ‘Dr Brett Mills of the University of East Anglia says wildlife
documentaries should be offering viewers a wider perspective on animal
behaviour’. So I await the day when Auntie Beeb broadcasts something along the
lines of one of the similar-subject You-Tube clips such as:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVE60zwXx1k

Rhetorical question – is it bestiality when one species other than man,
sexually assaults a different species?

Mudplugger February 9, 2013 at 09:50

OK, Anna, I fell for it…….

It’s ‘Gay Night’ on BBC1,
And the bum-fun’s just scarcely begun.
It’s
all same-gendered fauna
All acting like porn, a
Rare sight on Page 3 of
the Sun.

JuliaM February
9, 2013 at 10:15

macheath February 10, 2013 at 16:50

Nice one, Mudplugger!

I feel Dr Mills has rather missed the point…

When Attenborough speaks to the nation
He always includes
procreation:
God’s creatures may be
L G B or T
But that won’t
spawn the next generation.

john warren February 9, 2013 at 09:15

I must have been a slugs-n-snails tyke too. We thought it was odd yet also
funny when one dog appeared towing another one in reverse. They never looked
very happy. Never really did dare to get close enough in to see which bit had
entered which bit or why what went in couldn’t come back out… if you know what
I mean and if you’ll pardon the expression. All a shaggy-dog story I
reckon.

The Jannie February 9, 2013 at 09:04

As it’s the UoEA again, can we presume his data’s bent?

Moor
Larkin February 9, 2013 at 08:44

Back when I was a kid and allowed to roam the streets – so were the dogs.
It was always a source of great hilarity for us slugs-n-snails tykes to
observe one dog mounted upon another dog dog, thrusting away like a good ‘un.
It never occurred to me that they were gay – just that they wanted to mate
with something….. I found as I grew older that my trouser leg would do just as
well for the small ones. Bitch dogs had something my mother called “heat” and
apparently if they were allowed out in this condition they would become
puppified. The strange thing is that I only remember the tooled-up dogs
humping one another in the street, so perhaps they were the gay ones.
Presumably the lesbian dogs had to wait for their *heat* to combine before
they could get it on. Woof Love is better than no love.

macheath February 9, 2013 at 10:06

I suppose labels like ‘lesbian’ are an anthropomorphic step too far, but
I once owned a bitch who was a constant source of social embarrassment
because of her keen interest in certain other bitches, particularly the red
setter from the next street. Still, I suppose it breaks the ice when you
have to reassure the horror-stricken owner that the animal enthusiastically
humping her pedigree bitch was highly unlikely to bring about a litter of
mongrels.

Woman on a
Raft February 10, 2013 at 21:58

I knew a cat, deceased now, whose special friend was a wellington boot.
I think they buried him with it. It’s what he would have wanted.

Mark February 9, 2013 at 08:44

I understand that an example of homosexual necrophilia has been observed in
(at least one) male duck

Anna
Raccoon February 9, 2013 at 08:55

Not that old canard again….!

corevalue
February 9, 2013 at 20:37

I keep a few ducks. Wonderful animals to watch, and yes they are
frequently and rampantly sexual, both genders mixing quite freely. We have
a dyke duck, who is always mounting our other girl, who is quite to eager
to display and dance for her, even though most of the time she is the boss
of the roost. Now what they get out of this I have no idea, because drakes
are singularly unusual in that they are one of the few birds to have a
pen1s. And it’s huge. For your enlightenment, try Googling exploding +
duck + pen1s.

There was an excellent Horizon documentary years ago on animal social
behaviour. It went the whole range from rape to the deliberate adultery of
the female sparrows in Cambridge botanical gardens. The trouble is, that
not a lot of these behaviours are approved or desirable in human
society.

JuliaM February 9,
2013 at 08:28

Animals can’t ‘be gay’, driven as they are by Darwinian impulses,
individuals are soon weeded out as aberrations – is that really the message he
wants to send?!?

Robert Edwards
February 9, 2013 at 09:14

Given that Dr. Mills is a senior lecturer in film and media studies, then
we may safely assume, Julia, that he is probably unacquainted with such
imperatives as scientific rigour, a characteristic clearly shared by so many
of his colleagues.

As for gay wildlife; hmm. Some primates will hump anything (see Chris
Huhne – or has he got a job as a dog-walker?) and indeed I once had the
dubious pleasure of watching two monkeys ‘at it’. I was a captive audience,
mind you, as they were on the bonnet of our car in a ‘monkey park’ in
Malaya. Once they had finished, they had minutes of entertainment
rearranging the windscreen wipers.

But I have yet to see evidence of queer Rhinos…

Moor Larkin February 9, 2013 at 09:37

I have witnessed lesbian cows – one cow mounting the one in front, in
the queue for the milking parlour. It all seemed a little perfunctory with
minimal foreplay. I guess they were getting a little frisky . you know how
those milking machines work….