It's fairly common for animals to exhibit homosexual behavior though. Let's not start transing cows πŸ™„

[–] IrishTheFrenchie non-cis logic 14 points
[–] furyosa MERF 26 points

Had a biologist chime in on the same notion in the local newspapers here as well. He wrote at length about different biological mechanisms and summed it up as male = thrusting and female = arching. To me it sounded like a roundabout way of saying "whoever does the dishes is the woman". πŸ™„

They are borrowing ideas from Ancient Greeks where anyone who is penetrated in sex is female including within a gay relationship between two men.

Isn't this "logic" also homophobic?

Once you reached a certain age as a man, you had to only do the penetrating or they'd strip you of your citizenship. Having chin hair was the cut-off point for age.

I came across this idea when reading Paul Among the People, but haven't been able to find additional information. Can you recommend any reading?

[–] Circe 18 points Edited

Female cows starting to mount other females is actually an indicator that she's fertile and soon ready to breed (proestrus). The estrogen makes them all giddy and nervous. Had a few eye opening conversations with my boyfriend, who has an agricultural education. It's like common knowledge for him.

[–] demonista 4 points Edited

Lmao. Female mammals mounting others is actually pretty common in many species, and is even a norm in some species and/or groups within species eg dogs, maquakes. There's even some birds where females mounting males is a norm eg 1/6 or 1/4 of all mounts are females mounting males

Since when does an animal engaging in a less usual sexual behaviour mean that animal isn't their sex? And is it the fact that it's same sex or that it's a less common sexual behaviour for their sex? Is a female mounting a male female or "not female"? If so, all those female dogs--aka most of them eg females mounting males is a normal part of their sex play/playful sex--who have been declared not female have a puzzled look for you. The puppies many of them birthed would like a look too.

Also, this just in: sea lions are also male and "not female" (the females regularly mount males, even each other).

Or are those male dogs and sea lions who are mounted (usually by females) "not male" too?

TIL my female dog humps her stuffies because she identifies as male, apparently.

[–] histri0nic 9 points Edited

Lmao wait wait so he essentially is suggesting cows have complex thoughts regarding their behavior, that they think about how they will come off when they mount other cows? It's just a dominance display, they are social and hierarchical animals. A cow herd has 'boss cows' that lead the rest of the herd. Mounting is often used a dominance display in mammals that live in groups. As one may have seen with dogs, even female dogs will mount other female dogs if they are dominant enough.

So if I'm reading this right, he is equating social hierarchy roles cows hold as identities not unlike trans? Because those implications say a lot about how he thinks- apparently the trans are the boss cows in his eyes and the rest of us just need to be the complicit herd. Nice!

[–] [Deleted] 12 points Edited

Gavin Crook's supporting argument to his original assertion:

I think it's fair to say that 99% of those on Mumsnet don't understand the biology themselves. It's more complicated and much more interesting than simple male or female:

So a man is lecturing a bunch of women, most of whom have given birth, that it's much more complicated than "male or female", and his proof is... that if a female cow mounts another female cow, she has a "bull soul" (and if we complete his poor excuse for "logic" here in transferring this over to humans, lesbians are all just transmen. Trans the gay away!).

Men are fucking imbeciles.

Mumsnet. Mothers. Women who are about to or have given birth. "They" don't understand the biology?

Well, you see... this guy watched a video of two cows humping each other so it is obvious that he understands biology more.

The fact that most people on mumsnet are mothers is why the feminism board there is so deliciously terfy.

It's rather hard to pop out a baby and still live in denial about the realities of biology. (Though some TIFs apparently manage.)

That's really true. I hadn't thought about that, but that's another reason you want mothers in power--they are in touch with reality in a way others are not.

Well thank god a man is here to enlighten us and save the day. What would we have done without him?

So we've gone from clownfishing to cowhumping, eh?

BTW, for some reason the mention of cows mounting other cows immediately caused me to think of "Elsie the Cow" from my American childhood in the 1950s and 60s. Elsie was the mascot of the Borden's Dairy Company and was voted one of the top 10 US advertising icons of the 20th century. Some say Elsie at one time was more famous than Mickey Mouse. Elsie was supposedly married to Elmer of Elmer's Glue fame, and together they had two offspring, Beulah and Beauregard.








Random aside but I've met Elsie the cow! There was some dairy conference in the city that I grew up in and she was stabled at the stable where I took riding lessons. Beauregard was with her. They loaded her up and took her to the conference every morning so people could have their picture taken with her. Really beautiful Jersey.

Okay, so this doesn't mean the same thing for cows anyway, but I assume this foolish man wants this tidbit to be relevant and transferred over to humans, for some reason (why I sit that in order to argue why human males are human females, these TRAs must always talk about entirely different species?)... anyway, if we are to take what I think he's saying a face value, then is he saying that human female homosexuals (and even bisexuals?) are actually not sexually attracted to their own sex on a visceral level so much as that they have a "male identity" inside them that makes their sexuality like that of males (directed at females, also this would also negate/ignore male homosexuality)? This is literally what late 1800s/early 1900s people believed about same-sex attraction. They had all these weird astrology-sounding classification of sexual behaviour (not orientation) that basically posited that if a woman liked women, she had some "man soul" in her, and vice versa. It's literally Victorian pseudoscience for the PoMo 21st century. Wtf? Stop it with the homophobia and woman-hate already. We're sick of it.

Load more (6 comments)