Oh Snap! NYT doesn't even mention homosexual bonobos....Vanessa Woods sets 'em straight.

by Vanessa Woods
From PsychologyToday.com
Can animals be gay? - are you serious NYT?
An article about sex with no bonobos is like a brownie with no sugar.

Having a story about same sex sex in animals then leaving out bonobos is like writing an article about big ears without mentioning elephants.

The science of homosexuality in animals (or socio-sexual behavior) and then you talk about albatrosses?? that don't even have a clitoris?? Or do they? the point is, even if they do have them, it's not like you would ever notice. I know the albatrosses are the latest thing, and I love albatross and think it's really cool the female raise babies together, but does that really compete with two females rubbing their clitorises together with ever increasing frenzy until they orgasm - which by the way helps them reduce social tension and live in a world without violence??

I can only think that the journalist

a. doesn't know what bonobos are

b. got scared by the 2007 New Yorker article saying bonobos don't even have that much sex

c. is a lesbian albatross doing her own PR campaign.

And not that I want to be mean to the photographer, but how do I even know all those animals were same sex?

And how could he not want something like graduate student Jingzhi tan took at Lola last month [see photo above]. Now that is two females. Look at Noki's face and tell me she's not having a fine lesbian experience. Sorry, but compared to that, the two chickens in NYT look BOR-ing.

If you're going to talk about the 'science behind homosexuality' don't leave out bonobos. The use of sex to reduce conflict in a social group across gender is one of the most fascinating leads we have to follow. Why don't you offer me a cake with no sugar? Or a brownie with no fat.

Or as King Lear would say, fresh meat with no salt? That Cordelia. She was a bonobo for sure.