"saying animals do it isn't a good argument, animals also do this, that, and that..." That's a horrible argument that ignores the initial focus of the conversation. Which is the claim "being gay isn't natural." Acknowledging animals can be gay isn't a claim made within a vacuum.
Again, I will repeat it: there is no homosexual gene. Homosexuality didn't exist since the very existence of humans, nor did same sex intercourses were viewed in the same concept of LGBTQ/homosexuality. Nor is it part of a physical evolution. Therefore it's a social construct and social animals outside of humans are capable of complex interactions and behaviors actually. Does it mean that understand what homosexuality is? Nope, just like Ancient Greece and Sumerians, they didn't know this concept even though some men and women engaged in said same sex relationships. Homosexuality is very much an esoterical social concept based off of same sex relationships. Big difference.
@@cegesh1459 I get you, but if it's just an ocasional small red flag, it's fine, people didn't come to his content for that. The problem was when he started dressing all in red and it began becoming the content. It was supposed to be a metafor, but it does kinda align with when he started dressing in the red gambeson.
It's wild that he actually holds onto this argumentation so tightly. It's obviously not what anyone says. He's clinging so hard to his dead fish of a counterargument because he can't address anything that's actually on the table. He's given himself the absolute weakest platform and he's still incapable of doing anything with it. I also love that he wants to "celebrate traditional families" when he can't keep his together.
@@bongosmcdongos4190 I don't really have anything to expand other than what is known, he used to wear a wedding ring now he doesn't. But I used to watch Shad regularly years ago, he talked about being mormon and only meeting his wife a handful of time before they got married and had 5 kids.
With homosexuality you either accept homosexuality is natural product of evolution or you have to be real silly and accept that god made some men attracted to men either as 'destiny' or as a natural urge.
I’m somewhere in the middle. I believe in gods, but I also believe in evolution, and I believe that each person’s sexuality is completely natural and should not be judged as long as they harm none in their indulgence. (Also when I say “harm none” I’m not talking about bondage or floggers lol.)
@@stingerjohnny9951 i was talking about people that believe in creationism. Either way you cant accept its just a social product because even on the video they acknowledge some animals are homosexual and we see same sex relationships in basically every civilization with half decent records
@@Edax_Royeauxyou could look at every single rule, lesson, and revelation in Christian teachings and find something else in those same teachings that totally contradicts it. Christian logic is quite something
I love how he uses “Animals will murder, animals will eat their young,” etc when humans do both of those things. We do them so consistently that we have specific names for those behaviours/crimes 💀🤣
The only difference is we have highly evolved societies with established laws and governments. The majority has decided that certain behaviors are harmful and should be punished. Homosexuality in the past used to be considered a crime, then it was considered a mental illness and now the western world is coming more and more to the conclusion that it is very much acceptable. As a result of education and I think overall being a bit more emancipated. Also we are very wealthy and most of our basic needs are fulfilled so we have the time to think about these issues of working against discrimination.
There is an evolutionary benefit to homosexuality, especially in species like lions, for instance. Prides with bonded males do better than prides with one male. Those male lions establish loving, lifelong bonds. They're eachother's ride or die lovers, when one dies, it's often catastrophic for their bonded partner. In humans; we historically would raise children in a more communal way in many pre-colonial societies. Queer family members who do not have kids would traditionally assist in raising children, or would be able to help their relatives by sharing with them, as they tended to have no/less children. And they provided optional families for children who may have lost both parents or are unwanted. That's why we have the saying 'it takes a village to raise a child'.
people are not ready to ask the question "who do people cheat?" If we're really meant to be in monogamous relationships, not advocating for breaking another person's trust, just saying, why do we do it in the first place?
I'll also add that species that engage in mate copying behaviour have higher rates of bisexuality as well. Iirc this was done on guppies who have mate copying behaviour (like humans supposedly do) and it was found that duller, damaged, and smaller male fish were selected for more often than brighter, healthier, and larger males, so long as they were seen mating. And the sex of who they mated with didn't matter. So male guppies making love to male or female guppies were selected for by other female guppies more often than the "sigma chad guppy". TL:DR in species where having a partner makes you more attractive, being with a male or female partner makes you more attractive. So being bisexual is a huge advantage.
The weird thing about evolution is that a trait is only successful if it can reproduce and be passed on to further generations. So while having more nurturing people in a community is absolutely helpful, it's not advantageous from a genetic stand point (unless they procreate). So while it's beneficial to the species as a whole, it's not at all be beneficial to the propagation of a "homosexuality gene". So the answer to "why do gay people exist" needs to be found beyond it having an evolutionary advantage. It's more likely that homosexuality just isn't genetic (or is only partially so), meaning it wouldn't be subjected to evolutionary pressures in the same way as genetically inheritable traits
@@GamingpandacatI think it's less that, and more that people choose to stay in relationships they're unhappy in, usually because of social stigmatization. I've had family members try to get me back with an ex who I openly told them was abusing me in every way when I got away. We didn't have kids nor were we married or engaged, but it took a year for my mom to stop trying to get us back together.
or they think it won't survive, many times when a mother rejects her offspring and human caretakers take over, it's later discovered that it had a congenital defect and had low survival expectations in the wild, and in some cases it had to be put down because it was too painful to let them live on and/or they would die a slow and painful dead, it's not like chudiverity is implying, that they particularly enjoy killing their young Also, this may be news for some people but not all animals have maternal instincts, and they don't recognize their young, they simply see "a small thing I can eat"
@@LaNoir. for what? some (I would say actually most) animals not having maternal instincts? or the part where some animal mothers somehow know that their young won't survive to adulthood and don't even waste time and energy raising them?
@@CRSB00 It's so freaking annoying seeing people repeat researchers word by word that never put in the effort to actually bond with an animal. It's like lumping together every human because there's no diversity at all to be found. Plot twist: humans are animals. We all are just different species sharing this planet, and within those different species you find different personalities. Working as an animal rescuer, I had to directly foster different species, and a lot of cases that would have been just killed off by standardised researchers are perfectly thriving. They say that hatchlings always have to crack their shell on their own or they are sick and won't make it anyways. We had an entire nest of duck eggs that would not have made it if we didn't crack their shells in time because they became too weak, the average of those 9 ducks became 8 years old, with the oldest hitting age 15. None of them had any health problems, they died of age or when a fox dug a hole into the run. Coming back to what you said, the rate of animals killing off their offspring is extremely low to begin with, and it's mostly out of stress (one factor being that they couldn't process what giving birth means, so much for "we made our pet pregnant to let it enjoy the delight of motherhood at least once" - they fcking don't care. They care when they're there, but they never asked for it). They have basic instincts but they are not super beings sniffing out cancer. In fact, there were documented cases where e.g. a mother cat would spend extraordinarily much time with their sick offspring and becoming heartbroken when it dies. The reason why a lot of baby rescued cases die is bad care, that they were away for too long from the warmth of their mother or that they could not build up their immune system due to lack of maternal lactose. Saying "most animals don't have maternal instincts" is the weirdest take I've ever heard, you basically say that animals lack the natural instinct of continuing their species - ???how did you come so far in life???
@@LaNoir. you're sooo incredibly closed minded that it even ocurred that most animals are not mamals, reptiles or birds, most animals are invertebates and most of their matenal inctincts only go so far as to "look for safe place to lay eggs, lay eggs and done" Also all ypu gave is anecdotal information and yess, I agree thya all animals have thir own unique persanilties and quirks knce you get to know them but my whole point was to counter Chudiversity's stupid claim of "some animals kill their offspring ergo homosexuality is wrong" with the implication that they do it for shits and giggles, I have never known of predatora actually enjoy killing thier prey, save for the more inteligent ones, ironically, like dolphins, chimps and us.
The species with the highest percentage of observed homosexuality are: Dolphins, giraffes, penguins, lions, sheep, elephants, albatrosses, black swans, macaques, bison, orcas, and bonobos. Bonobos, being mostly bisexual.
Lions are particularly interesting. Male lions can hold multiple different prides, and female lions don't only mate with the dominant male who they're supposed to have cubs with. Lionesses only want to mate when they're ready to conceive, it's the male lions who bond together the hardest and mate together the most. A coalition of 2 or more feline boyfriends will often ride and die for one another, and when one passes, his mate (in both senses of the word), is often not far behind. Working together, they have much better chances of winning and holding onto a pride long enough for their cubs to become adults.
"You can't say it's good because animals do it" can't be true at the same time as "look at nature for the truth"-type arguments that people like Shad do to talk about other things
No shad, the framing comes from the right. They claim that homosexuality is a human creation and doesn’t exist in the animal kingdom. This documentary proves it’s just not the case.
The documentary is wrong since it's a consensus that there is no "homosexual" gene in our DNA, the documentary extrapolates that if two male animals or two female animals do stuff, then it applies to our perception of homosexuality even though said animals don't even understand the concept behind it. You can look everywhere as much as you want, you will never find the proof that there is an homosexual gene. Therefore, same sex relationships are the result of social influence and interactions, especially true for social animals and mammals in general. Outside of humans, other animals wouldn't even understand the concept our concept of homosexuality just like back in ancient times, let's say Ancient Greece, homosexuality didn't exist despite the fact that there were for instance two males doing things in bed. They were also expected to procreate. Hence why it's a modern social construct and influence. You cannot be born gay, whether it's us HSS, dolphins, other apes, elephants, felines, dogs, ants, bees whatever.
Some conservatives might make that claim, but even being shown that there are gay animals won't resolve the issue - because it's a moral question for them. They feel outrage and disgust about it. That's really hard to tackle, because these are their core values and really woven into their personality. I think to convince them of not being anti-gay would be as difficult as convincing someone to like a food that they don't like or appreciate music they are annoyed by. One would have to recognize that they feel this aversion and reflect on why and work on themselves to change it. But that requires a high level of empathy and capability to self-reflect.
5:55 - If dolphins are anything like other cetaceans, then it's pretty likely they have similar capacities for empathy to us - but they also have a similar capacity for having that empathy undermined and subverted by sociocultural factors. Whales have distinct languages, traditions, etc. If I had to guess, dolphins are stuck in the same boat as us: poisoned by violent, dysfunctional ways of life passed down via abuse. We definitely know that female dolphins are averse to having sex when it's not on their terms; the males gang up on them, corral them, and keep them from surfacing to breathe in order to coerce them into sex. Sounds a lot like a socially normalized form of rape to me.
IIRC the coercive tactics also happen in mostly-male, usually juvenile mob groups. There's an argument to be made that sexually frustrated male dolphins get ostracized and double down on bastard behavior (there's studies on other mammals being sexually aggressive toward other species and the individuals doing that are usually unsuccessful at competing with successful males for mates, and we have reports of horny male dolphins harrassing female humans. correlation, anecdote plurals, etc, but I'd wager if we did a following study we'd find the ones in the coercive tactics groups are the males who haven't figured out how to actually court.)
It’s specifically bottlenose dolphins and yes they share the same empathy level as other cetaceans, but they don’t only do that, they also hit baby dolphins out of the water and play with them like a ball often resulting in their death, then rape the mother of the baby they had just killed. Male bottlenose dolphins are the worst.
Empathy doesn't necessarily turn uncaring creatures into kind creatures, it can also just turn them into sadists. "I know this makes you feel bad and that's why I do it."
I have a diploma in animal studies and hearing Shad's... arguments? ...believes? what ever you can call it, about animals and their behavior is just so painful to my brain. I now know how physicists feel when they meet flat earth believer
A mild special interest of mine is very roughly human evolution. Hearing people talk about the two genders and two sexes, about how men are made for this and women are made for that. All that shit? Depressing beyond belief.
I know I don't need to say it, but I will. No one says "it's OK to be gay because animals do it" that argument is only ever used when homophobes say being gay is "unnatural" It's an argument for it being natural, it has no prescriptions on the morality of it. The fact that it doesn't harm anyone, and how cruel it is to refuse people their desires in connection to that is the argument for the morality of it.
Every single argument made by homophobes, transphobes etc has been debunked a thousand times. It's because they don't move on to better arguments, no, they just cover their ears and go say the same thing to someone else. Every single time.
"Gay relationships are unnatural! They aren't found in nature, it's a human invention and therefore a mortal sin!" *Points to gay animal relationships.* "Okay really? You're gonna use that framing? Okay wow. Animals do all sorts of horrible things, that doesn't make it right! So it's still a mortal sin!"
Except that animals don't understand the concept of homosexuality as in modern human societies' homosexuality. Homosexuality didn't even exist in ancient times. Same sex relationships were not perceived the same way at all back in history and people were expected to procreate. There is no gay gene in our DNA. You can't be born gay, only influenced to become one.
Technically, everything is natural because everything in the universe exists in nature. The only things that are not natural are things that are supernatural like ghosts and God.
@@RonJeremy514When did you decide to be straight? Only a bisexual could ever think the way you do. I’m only into women no matter how hard you try to "influence" me to be into guys.
@@zenbear9952 Plastic is not natural ahhahahaha I know what you mean but let's not do that. We are not natural, we've gotten out of the food chain or climbed to the top through intellect and now we're literally undoing nature. Actually destroying billions of years of evolution, and I don't mean progress. The natural world evolved to the point to where it was more or less perfect for us. We've managed to make it poisonous to both ourselves and almost every ecosystem. We have literally used intellect to turn nature on its head. We have outgrown influence in our natural world.
Shad: "Critical thinking, understanding moral complexity, actually comprehending good and evil is what sets humans apart." Also Shad: is a Mormon Is Shad admitting that he isn't human?
mormons think critical thinking is when you stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalala i can't hear youuuuu" anytime anyone brings up joseph smith's treasure stone or the mountain meadows massacre or how the cult tried to posthumously baptize the victims of the holocaust or how mormon leadership did the "i'm a mormon" campaign and then immediately turned 180 and started saying anyone who says "mormon" instead of "lds" is devil-influenced or literally any facts about history or reality source: i'm an ex-mormon
Lmao don't christians, and yes i am putting Mormons under that umbrella, believe that the biggest mistake humanity ever made was eating a fruit THAT MADE YOU COMPREHEND GOOD AND EVIL!?!?!
It's so funny watching Shad's Kind try and desperately move the goalposts every time their positions are proven wrong. They're always rushjobs, you can see the tracks they make in the dirt along the way. It's pathetic lmao
Well they basically want to fight, or hump anything during their breeding season. That's not so much gay, as willing to hump anything which will stay still long enough. They also run face-first into each other at that time, and will charge random inanimate objects. So it's more, they are dosed to the eyeballs with hormones.
Also most female Koalas and some Lions. I LOVE how conservatives use the Lion as a symbol of purified, traditional masculinity when most male Lion coalitions are part-time butt-buddies. 😜
for real, like trans rights are still a hotly debated topic and many people are still on the fence on a lot of things so people can get away with being transphobic a lot easier for now, but gay people at this point in most developed countries are largely accepted by the majority so being an open homophobe will obviously alienate a lot of people right off the bat
This is honestly my biggest pet peeve, humans are animals, i dont care what anyone thinks the "difference between us and animals" is a thing, and then put chimps and birds into a set (animals) saying they are more alike then humans are to either one is just dumb. Just is.
Reading back over that I realise I made a critical error in sentence formation and I don't know how to fix it so I hope you all understand what I meant 😅
17:52 - Same reason 20% of human embryos get flushed out of the uterus and end up as a microscopic stain on the woman's panties, I would bet. The evolutionary meta for a lot of larger mammals (IE, not small mice) is to prioritize the survival of the mother over that of the offspring. This is present throughout the actual process of pregnancy - human bodies, at least, can be astonishingly quick to pull the plug on a pregnancy if the mother is subjected to stress, nutrient deficiencies, injury, etc. (Look up 'fetal absorption' to get an example.) Before I get into my original speculation, I'll also point out that pigs, to my understanding, can end up stark raving mad from being raised for food, because they're smart enough to figure out what's going to happen to them. That added stress could easily prompt abnormal, disquieting behavior from the pigs, especially in the hormonal aftermath of pregnancy & birth. That aside... I'm not a zoologist, but I could see these behaviors as an extension of that meta: animals are wired to prioritize their own survival while the babies are too young to fend for themselves, because the animals of the past which _didn't_ ended up having their entire litter get wiped if the mothers prioritized making sure all of them survived, even at the cost of their own wellbeing. There's a tension between maximizing offspring and reducing the number of mouths in need of feeding. "They're just filthy beasts" is about as boneheaded of a take as I'd expect from a Mormon dullard like Shad.
And social animals at that. But we have created various complex social interactions which don't necessarily compare to other animals. It's not because an animal has same sex relationships just like another species that it's homosexualtiy in both cases. Both animals will have a different perception or understanding of it.
@@RonJeremy514 Right. Like how Bonobo and Chimpanzee societies differ in their approach to conflict resolution. Chimpanzees will wage actual war on a neighboring clan, wiping them all out. What do Bonobos do to resolve conflict? Make love! We're not the only species that screws for pleasure, but we are the only one that judges each other for enjoying it differently than ourselves based on our own theo-delusions. That's both arrogant and insane when you think about it.
I missed the timestamp, but I really want to address the "of the homosexual penguins - who lays the eggs" question. They adopt orphaned eggs. Just like gay swans do. And potentially many other species. Like bad things can happen to parents before eggs hatch. And having a pool of individuals who can take care of orphaned offsprings actually sounds like an evolutionary advantage for the species. And permitting gay couples is a solid way to have such individuals ready to take over care of orphans.
99.999% of bees were never supposed to reproduce, they do other cool stuff. they are the most successful and beloved animal on Earth, it's been speculated most terrestrial life would die without them. Biology bros should just wait and let the gays cook.
We observe homosexuality naturally occurring in a huge amount of animals, including humans, and it causes no harm. I think part of the issue is Shad being obsessed with something having to be good or bad, when no, homosexuality is just a thing, it’s *amoral*. The fact that you can see something not harmful and natural and call it evil is so fucking weird
Specifically it's the split gill, or Schizophyllum commune. It's a pretty common mushroom in North America, and you can often find it growing on logs. The mushroom is also safely edible.
I somehow suspect that his assertions of the reasons behind homosexual behaviour in animals is not backed up by biological studies but rather is something he made up to refuse to accept reality.
Its a little hard to play the appeal to nature card and the "were better than that" card at the same time. Its almost like the argument doesn't hold water
oh he definitely is. ironically, he is offended by everything thats not like his own personal experience of the world, despite acting like everyone else is offended all the time lmao
One thing to address is one of the first times homosexuality was documented in nature was the social pairing of lesbian seagulls, rather than only seeing two gay animals having sex. Saying its a "sexual deviancy" in animals is still fundamentally incorrect.
💀 I just watch so little of his stuff I never picked up on it. Same with metatron. I look up their vids on this or that topic and I don’t care for the rest. I really wish I could say I’m surprised my fellow military history nerds pay no attention to any other aspect of this species’ past
9:00 This argument about "homosexuality out of desperation" can fly for some species that mate sporadically. But there are multitude of species that are monogamous. Like Swans. And it turned out a lot of swan couples are homosexual. Also why are they so obsessed with male-male homosexuality? Like are they going to comment on hyenas - the IRL futanaris?
Spotted Hyenas are not hermaphrodites. The females have an elongated clitoris in the the vague shape of a penis where they birth their young. The real interesting aspect of Spotted Hyenas is that Female hyenas are stronger and larger on average compared than male ones. This weird case of gender dimorphism isnt exclusive to hyenas btw.
Happy Pride month everybody!!!! We want to normalize LGBTQ identities, that's it. I want to live in a world in which nobody gets fired from their job because they're gay. I want to live in a world in which nobody bats an eye when a child that used to dress girly is now wearing slacks and asking you to address them with they/them pronouns and nobody asks any questions, they just respect that child and use they/them pronouns when referring to them, I don't understand why people think we're some kind of extremists, we just want the same rights and respect everyone else has taken for granted for generations.
I am a sword lesbian. I cannot stress enough that i learned so much from him in regards to medieval weapons, and armor. And i absolutely love learning about how everyday people lived in the medieval world. Knowing that this guy doesnt support my fundamental person and all of my fellow lgbtq people is really saddening. On a positive note there is a group of people dedicated to learning and putting into practice different cultures and time periods in the medieval times. The SCA Society of Creative Anachronism. An incredibly diverse and accepting group of people and oh yeah love gay people.
Shadiversity: I'm totally not bigoted and will make no judgements against a person for being gay. Unless they suggest equivalency. If they suggest they are my equal I will pitch a fit.
I don't just go "I'm straight and married..." So he *never* casually mentions his wife, from which it's obvious he's straight and married? Apparently Shad is an animal psychic and can read their minds to know they don't feel sexual attraction to a same-sex mate?
Anthropologist and biologist here. We've observed "homosexuality" in hundreds of species, including invertebrates. Especially invertebrates, in fact. We've known this for decades and the list has only grown. Humans are the only organism that punishes homosexuality. So, his confusion, however stupid, is unfortunately expected.
Homosexuality is very much natural, wearing clothes and glasses aren't. Also yeah these two doesn't have any on screen chemistry. I couldn't watch this kind of content by itself. Its all just whiny...
10:00 if "a lot of these cases arent entirely because the animals are legitimate gays" doesnt that mean that there ARE some cases where its entirely because the animals are legit gay? and wouldnt that destroy the whole argument?
I really don't like when people say humans are above the animal kingdom. humans are animals, end of story. "Critical thinking" isn't human exclusive, nor is creating tools. Ever watch a crow solve a puzzle? or craft a hook? should look into that if you haven't it's p cool
In a manner of speaking we're both winning and losing the hardest in the game of life on Earth. Our masses are miserable, lack the means to properly struggle for their own survival outside of the misanthropic context we've built for ourselves, and yet we dominate the planet with the footprints of our endeavors, have created artificial ecosystems in which the majority of our population resides, understand the world and ourselves far better than anything that has come before and possess the emergent capacity to turn that position of power into paradise.
@@beansworth5694 We have the means, but we don't. Only because we are more concerned with short term monetary gain to make sure we at the moment survive or amass more wealth. That's what makes us not any better than animals still. We are basically *SLIGHTLY* more sophisticated chimpanzees to the point we are not flinging feces anymore, just ICBMs. A good quote I heard someone say on twitter is that if a monkey in an enclosure would start hoarding more food than they could ever eat and still keep it all to themselves even as other monkeys starve our scientists would study the monkey to figure out what was wrong with them. When a human does it's put on the cover of Forbes.
I stg this dude got criticized *ONE TIME* by a women who knew more about women’s clothing in the Middle Ages than him a few years ago and it sent him down a *DARK* path…
You know it’s so baffles me that Chad on his primary channel used to be all about like hey just because we have disagreements doesn’t mean we can’t be civil doesn’t mean we can’t get along doesn’t mean we can’t be polite with each other. He was always big saying that you know live and let live because he doesn’t agree with certain things as mean that he’s against peoples right to do it if you’re not hurting anybody, but then as soon as he got his four buddies involved, he just spiral hard and now he’s hanging out with Benjamin and the arch and it’s just sad. Also, what happened to his wedding ring? Voice to text so hopefully not all gibberish
We don't say it's okay because animals do it. We say animals and humans do it so it's natural. Of course, it's then funny when the theists complaining then turn around and say murder or abusing children is okay because the Bible or Quran does it.
Not out of a difference in beliefs (he was very insistent he was still friends with Shad and everything) but because the cost of living literally got too high for him to stay so he had to drop to move somewhere that was affordable. So, eh, I wouldn't bring Nathan quitting shadiversity as much of a good point. It's a lose/lose
@@neoqwerty We don't know if Nathan's stated reasons for leaving the squad are actually the truth. Maybe it was just a facade so as to not antagonize Shad too much, since we know he very easily gets upset.
This is giving, 'having to sit around after a d&d session while waiting for an Uber and the really awkward dm and their friend start talking about something to make themselves seem cool', kind of vibes.
Classic moving of the goalposts. First they say being gay is against god's law -The only time it was said it was wrong in the bible is listed with a whole bunch of other rules they say were dissolved Then they said it's unnatural -Animals, with no human intervention, have homosexual tendencies at about the same percentage as humans do (besides that fact, we ARE literally animals, just with egos) Then they say that it's some kind of axiomatic truth that it's wrong -When it's an axiomatic belief, you're admitting "I have no demonstrable reason to say this, or it is so obvious it does not have to be said to be understood" Which, the claim homosexuality is wrong fails the second aspect of axioms because there's nothing intrinsically making people be against it and tends to be a learned behavior and requires someone telling you it's wrong for it to appear so.
Wolves have wars fairly often. Mostly to stop an enemy pack from trying to claim their territory. You can actually mark the boundaries between the territories of different packs from the corpses you find from skirmishes at the borders.
While I miss living in a world where I didn't know every bigot's dumbass opinion, at least nowadays I can pretty quickly suss out who to block. Hate that a lot of people I used to like are bastards, but thems the breaks.
Most people are bastards in at least one dimension. Not many people pursue personal growth in all areas of their life honestly, they take shortcuts and get into mental loops and make allowances for evil instrumentally in order to feel successful and happy.
It's astonishing that people still try to make it; there's humans and then there's everything else animal. We are part of this stuff and are directly related to them.
So, Shad is saying that calling heterosexuality "natural" and justifying it by pointing to the animal kingdom is bad? I don't believe any of the other Christians got that memo.
I am 25 minutes in, Shad has yet to make it past the intro. Damn. When you get this bamboozled over a couple quick action shots of animals before an announcer even opens their mouth, you probably are not mature enough for hte conversation.
Don't know about everyone, but I definitely want the queer world. My ideal utopia is that everyone accepts their own sexuality and is free to express it, however they want.
Dolphins definitely know what they doing. We give them way too much credit bc we think we're better than everything else. The Dolphins are smarter than us fam. We can't cut them slack
@nondescriptcat5620 ig it would be difficult for something without meaningful ways of communicating to complete an iq test against something else dedicated to proving they dont have internal experience....
Just imagine an editor is given this raw video. They just watch what they have to work with, get up from their desk, go into the bathroom, stare at themselves in the mirror for hours, and simply watch their own will to live seep from their eye sockets.
I was a paralegal, 9ne who would if on a jury let any pdf killer walk scot free. I worked defending a pdf once, the firm was worried that I would attack the dude on sight. After the first time I had to deal with him everyone was stunned and said how professional I was. I said I truly believe everyone deserves the best legal defense possible and he is pleading guilty, so I will do my best. And remember I was merely professional and civil not friendly, he was the only client I've ever had that called me by my legal name, every ing other client used by nickname after the first meeting, most clients would swear in front of me when they had a problem because they knew their little paralegal Jules didn't give a shit about politeness only civility.
Fun fact: It's incredibly rare for any individual ant to reproduce. They're thriving regardless. Not every individual has to reproduce to perpetuate a species, and in fact, it can actually be advantageous to NOT reproduce, because that allows the children that do happen (which may still carry some of your genetics through siblings etc) to have a better survival rate. This is especially true for a species like humans that puts a lot of resources into fewer offspring. So yes, it is actually an evolutionary advantage to have a portion of the population not reproduce. Pair-bonding with someone an individual can't reproduce this is an especially good way to achieve this as it allows for better teamwork in supporting their community.
I'm at the start of the video so it might come up later but wasn't there some kind of study or research that showed that animal researchers didn't even bother reporting on gay animal activities a majority of the time? So it's likely way more common and widespread amongst animals than we even realise.
@@StormCrownSr Well the point of observing animals in a scientific context is to make records of them and their behaviours etc. If this is new information about a species then it should ideally be properly recorded and shared with the world just like any other new information.
I like to think that we humans like to practice selective critical thinking, a discipline where we just decide what we think critically about without using our personnal opinions.
Well this made me unsubscribe from Shadiversity. I hadn't watched any of his videos in a while anyway, but as a pansexual trans girl I now realize I wouldn't be welcome on his channel anyway.
I think I just had the dumbest Christian conversation ever. I had two Christians claim animals do not feel emotions and I convinced one but the other still never believed it, also as a furry Foxes are the gayest animals. Profile picture? What do you mean... yeah that is a Fox.
Another Christian here. Quote Romans 8:22 to them. How is all of creation groaning in pain and misery if they don't have emotions? Or talk about Balaam and his talking donkey. Fear is an emotion. So if they are fundamentalists who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, evidence is there. I am not a fundamentalist, by the way. I think claiming that animals have no emotions is at the core more of an argument to justify or even glorify eating meat or not caring about the mass production of meat. I mean, I also eat meat, but I try to be a bit more aware of what I buy. And I know what we are doing for the sake of profit is wrong. There are also Proverbs about treating animals with respect. So this modern capitalist factory farming mind set doesn't go well with an ancient oriental view on how to treat your lifestock. It was something so precious back then. I am rambling. Maybe in the end the person you talked to has underdeveloped empathy and cannot recognize the emotions in animals.
@@kadda1212 Oh it was definitely just a lack of empathy on behalf of the person, like I said they both thought it was an absolute slam dunk at first and clearly had prepared answers. All the obvious happy dogs are just domesticated so they imitate emotions. Apparently they have had that pay off because I already talked about wild corvids clearly showing emotions. I reiterate that and the only implied corvids are a breed of dog very smugly. I am sat there like “Bruh we are talking about Ravens and crows” and his friend knew what a corvid is and was like _”yeah bro they are birds!”_ That guy got it, if birds in the wild can be happy the script is just wrong abandon the script.
@@animalxINSTINCT89 nah seahorses had reversed sexual reproduction. Clownfish have natural sex changes due to simple biological functions (same with frogs)
No, that would be the whiptail lizard, which is an all female species that reproduces through parthenogenesis, which still involves a courtship ritual between couples.
The tragic and hilarious thing about that, to me, is that most bigoted people wouldn't have or intentionally cause a problem with an actual queer person as much as the idea of one they've made up in their heads thanks to constant propagandizing they've been exposed to and choose to continue to inundate themselves in.
