Same-sex sexual behavior has been observed in many non-human species around the world. It’s now a widely recognized phenomenon, but a new study shows there’s a stark disparity between how common the behavior is and how often it’s reported. According to this work, researchers often see same-sex sexual behavior in the mammals they study, but rarely publish information about it.
Homosexual behavior in the animal world
Essentially, same-sex sexual behavior is any sexual act – including mounting, sexual penetration, oral sex or other forms of sexual stimulation – between members of the same sex.
Homosexual behavior is extremely common and widespread among animal species, Josh Davies of the Natural History Museum, London and author of A bit of gay natural history explained to IFLScience.
“Although it has only been officially recorded in about 1,500 species, this figure is probably a vast underestimate. That’s because it can be found in almost every branch of the evolutionary tree, from beetles and butterflies to turtles and squirrels, so the idea that it’s limited to just a few hundred species out of the 2.13 million described so far is incredibly small probable.”
Explanations for the evolutionary value of this behavior vary, Davis added, depending on the animal studied. For example, “behavioral cues for flies will be different from those for primates.”
“In general, however, it has been suggested that homosexual behavior can be beneficial for a number of aspects, including social cohesion, stress relief and even just pure pleasure.”
But despite its frequency and widespread occurrence, same-sex sexual behavior is not often reported in the scientific literature. So what’s going on?
Publication on Homosexuality in Animals
According to a new study published by Karin A. Anderson, an anthropology graduate student at the University of Toronto, and colleagues, the lack of research on same-sex sexual behavior may stem from the misconception that it is rare and therefore difficult to study systematically. In the past, this belief that it was unusual was also mixed with modern moralistic ideas that saw it as deviant and “unnatural”. Of course, this kind of thinking is often used in ethical debates about human homosexuality.
“Historically, there has definitely been a concern that if a researcher publishes about these behaviors, they may in turn be associated with them, but in modern times it seems that there are other factors at play,” Davis told IFLScience.
Although attitudes changed in the 1920sth century, the assumption of “rare” persists in the scientific literature, although the number of recorded cases continues to increase. What has been lacking is a systematic approach, but there may be reasons why this has not yet happened.
Eliminating the publication of brief, anecdotal observations in journals is a widespread problem in behavioral ecology because it means that random but interesting behaviors—such as homosexuality—often go unnoticed.
Josh Davis
Anderson and her international team of colleagues believe that certain methodological challenges, as well as this widespread belief about the rarity of the behavior, may explain the gap in publications on this topic.
Their analysis showed that of 65 researchers studying 52 different species, 77 percent observed same-sex sexual behavior, but only 48 percent collected data on it. In addition, only 19 percent of researchers published their findings.
Interestingly, survey respondents commented that their work was not influenced by socio-political factors. Instead, responses generally fell into three categories—first, that they were unable to collect data due to competing research priorities; second, that posting topics do not rely on data related to that topic; and third, that the behavior is too rare or “anecdotal” to be considered worthy of publication.
This last point is important because it highlights a bias in the publishing industry around anecdotal evidence – if it’s not ‘common’, it’s irrelevant. For example in the field of primatology, as 21St At the end of the century there was a shift to citational and statistical approaches, which were preferred to short narratives or anecdotal accounts.
“The refusal to publish brief, anecdotal observations in journals is a widespread problem in behavioral ecology because it means that random but interesting behaviors — such as homosexuality — often go unnoticed,” Davis said.
Anecdotes are extremely important to the study of things like same-sex sexual behavior, Anderson and colleagues also conclude, because they help us understand their significance within the study of sexual behavior in general.
“The availability of anecdotal reports of [same-sex sexual behaviour]therefore, it serves the benefit of the scientific community and allows us to better understand the variability and distribution of [same-sex sexual behavior] between mammals,” they write.
Expert surveys are therefore useful tools in wildlife biology, the team emphasizes, especially in relation to behaviors that are not often reported or thought to be rare. “We really found the use of expert research important and even necessary, given that most respondents did not publish their observations on [same-sex sexual behavior] in their study species. Expert surveys provide us with a tool to access and study these behaviors on a larger scale.”
Only through anecdotal reports and expert surveys do we see how widespread same-sex sexual behavior is. Although this study was based on a relatively small set of respondents, it supports the idea that future work should pay more attention to the value of these less sophisticated ways of gathering and transmitting information, especially for supposedly rare behaviors.
The paper is published in PLOS ONE.
Read an excerpt from A Little Gay Natural History and our exclusive interview with Josh Davies at July 2024 issue of CURIOUS.
