“Queer Planet”: An Analysis
“Queer Planet”: An Analysis
By: Clark Mason, AFP Workforce
The streaming service Peacock is releasing a documentary titled “Queer Planet” showcasing supposed queer behavior in the animal kingdom. The premise of this documentary submits that homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality, and the rest of the alphabet are common occurrences in nature, and thus, these behaviors should be embraced by humans.
In keeping with Pride Month’s tradition of bombarding a weary public, the filmmakers set out to trick their audience into questioning what they instinctually know to be natural and healthy. These types of films are essentially mental sleight of hand where information is misconstrued, oversimplified, and taken out of context.
Narrated by actor Andrew Rannalls, the film’s trailer shows acast of rainbow coalition activists explaining how humans can learn a thing or two from bisexual lions, pansexual bonobos, and transgender clownfish.
What’s natural for lions, monkeys, and clownfish is surely normal for humans, right?
Behaviors observed in female primates such as bonobos areclosely linked to communication and social structure. Female bonobos will often form lasting bonds for the purpose of competing with male coalitions for food and resources. These primitive simian relationships often result in adult on juvenile sexual contact as well. It should also be mentioned (a common theme that will appear in this article) that heterosexual relationships are still required for bonobos to produce offspring.
The claim that bonobos are less violent because they are more sexually active is patently false. Researchers have found that bonobos are more aggressive than previously thought. Due to the bonobos’ remote habitat, conducting in depth studies on their behavior has been difficult for researchers. Female pairs of bonobos will often form coalitions that been observed attacking and injuring males.
In contrast, humans have not evolved to include these kinds of behavior when establishing social structure. Humans have naturally found heterosexual coupling to be most common because that is what nature has dictated. In other words, when monkeys begin surpassing humans in intellectual and technological endeavors, maybe then we should be more inclined to mimic nearly extinct primate species.
The film points out the bonds and “bromances” that will occasionally occur between lions of the same sex. This behavior in pack animals is often characterized by displays of closeaffection and mounting. Animals that engage in mounting behavior- with dogs being most familiar to humans- does not necessarily imply amorous behavior or sexual preference. Dogs often use mounting to establish dominance and hierarchy rather than overt sexual attraction. There is little evidence that mammals such as dogs even have sexual preference, making our labels merely speculation.
What are the filmmakers trying to convey to the audience? That if lions are humping, we should throw away our well-establishedsocial barriers and emulate the behavior on non-sentient beings whose behavior we can barely decipher? This is the voice of social justice activists placing human interpretations on non-human behavior to vindicate a politically charged message.
Male penguins jointly raising their young is another example often taken out of context. In some instances, male penguins have been observed to raise chicks in pairs (again, this is the exception, not the norm). Other birds such as black swans have been observed raising their young in a similar fashion.
The first issue with this is that it still requires a female to create the actual spawn; without this heterosexual encounter, there would be no offspring. Secondly, this is another example ofhumans interpreting animal behavior through a politically charged lens. Zoologists have theorized that avian male pairs are merely unions of convenience, such as mutual territorial defense, then one of any romantic significance.
The filmmakers have to actively search for behavior that by definition is not commonly found in most animal species. However, there is more to address regarding homosexuality in humans in terms of societal, mental, and health implications.
The occurrence of sexually transmitted disease in the heterosexual population is significantly lower than that of the homosexual population. The higher number of STDs including HIV found in the homosexual population are heavily due to sites of contact when having intercourse. When homosexual men engage in intercourse, these methods have a far greater likelihood of contracting STDs than the heterosexual population.
Some studies have indicated that primates who mate with multiple female such as macaques have a higher white blood cell counts than monogamous primates such as gibbons. Researchers at the University of Virginia in Charlottsville found in the same study that humans- who are traditionally monogamous- have lower white blood cells counts than macaques. Though research may be limited, the data indicates that some primates have evolved to be less susceptible to health risks associated with promiscuous sexual behavior.
The documentary would have you think that lions, bears, and monkeys are shacking up and handing out free love like it’s Woodstock in 68’. Regardless of sexuality, sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancies cost the US taxpayer over $10 billion and $21 billion a year, respectively.
This means that humans have evolved to be naturally selective when selecting a partner. Our bodies are susceptible to promiscuous behavior and certain methods of intercourse typically associated with homosexual behavior. The type of behavior this documentary is suggesting would not benefit human health or society in any way.
The audience is treated to a shot of some kind of plant squirting a bead of liquid- the audience should understand the innuendo. The catchline for this documentary may be “nature shows it true colors”, but the filmmakers are really talking about themselves. This isn’t just a nature documentary- it’s smut with an agenda hidden behind the rainbow curtain. Just like everything else Big LGBT peddles, it’s covered in a veneer of perversion and hypersexuality.
A favorite example activists tout is that certain that marine life such as clownfish are able to fluidly change gender. There are over 500 species of fish that can change genders; however, these types of animals are hermaphrodites- that is, they are born with both male and female sex organs. Also known as sequential hermaphroditism, this phenomenon is common marine life.
Clownfish are protandrous, meaning they are born male but retain the ability to become female (the opposite of this occurrence is called protogyny.) A group of Clownfish, called a queue, live within a sea anemone with a dominant male and female pair. When the dominant female dies, the dominant male will grow in size and take the place of the female through a process of hormonal alteration.
In contrast, there are no known special of mammals that can change gender naturally. Whether it be humans, dogs, or elephants, all mammals live out their lives as the gender they are assigned at birth. While hermaphroditism is found as a birth defect in some mammals, but it ranks as a statistical anomaly barely worth mentioning. In fact, the number of instances where a doctor cannot identify a gender is as a low as .018% in all human births.
If certain fish can change sex, does that mean there is acorrelation to humans changing gender? Do fish that change sex need extensive surgeries, hormone therapy, or skin grafts? Do fish that change sex experience a plethora of mental and health risks after transitioning? Studies have shown that at least 42% of transgender adults in the US have attempted suicide (compared to 1.6% of the overall US population.) Health risks stemming from hormone therapy carry a greater risk of blood clots, liver disease, stroke, and certain types of cancers.
If transsexuality is natural and healthy behavior, why do humans have an apparent negative reaction to gender transitioning?
This is a natural and accepted occurrence in marine life because those species are biologically suited to gender transitioning. The human body treats sex change operations as intrusive and damaging surgery that it is not equipped to handle.
While there’s more to refute and more to see from the upcomingfilm, we can already see the filmmaker’s angle from a mile away. The idea of these documentaries is to keep pushing- and never stop pushing- behaviors that are unnatural and unhealthy. Animals don’t need to be coerced and propagandized into engaging in these behaviors; they are simply natural and fundamental to their survival. These same behaviors are unnatural and often unhealthy to our uniquely evolved human bodies.
Behind the bright rainbow colors and upbeat music is a politically charged mouthpiece that pushes the most objectionable sexual behaviors imaginable. Behind this film is the multi-trillion-dollar fist of corporate Big LGBT coercing Americans into engaging in behaviors they would naturally avoid. The reason social norms exist is because these behaviors are conducive to a healthy society that is capable of creating the next generation.
Sources:
More than 40% of transgender adults in the US have attempted suicide – Williams Institute (ucla.edu)
How common is intersex? a response to Anne Fausto-Sterling – PubMed (nih.gov)
The evolution of sexuality in chimpanzees and bonobos – PubMed (nih.gov)
No, When Male Dogs Mount Other Males, It Doesn’t Mean They’re Gay | Psychology Today
Bonobos are more aggressive than previously thought, study shows | ScienceDaily
The Problem With Promiscuity | Science | AAAS
LGBTQIA+ Health – Health Encyclopedia – University of Rochester Medical Center