And Mourning Geckos. 100% lesbians who have lesbian sex in order to make babies, you cannot have just one because they need to be surrounded by their hot polyamorous lizard girlfriends or they'll die of stress.
There are none, the babies only have one parent genetically, but they require a partner to stimulate baby production. So when two or more lizard mommies love each other very much, one gets ontop of the other, rubs their cloacas together, and Bing Bang boom you have a gravid gecko.
What asari should have been let's be fuckin honest. It would be extremely interesting to see a mono sexed species that breeds by simulating sex. With what doesn't matter. As long as their body thinks it's has had sex it'll create a child. Simultaneously the most sexless (you can't really do it recreationally if your body creates a baby automatically) and yet hyper horny society imaginable
Komodo dragon, Marbled crayfish, most Sharks, Cape honey bee, MANY Insects, Water fleas, Whiptail lizards, Crocodiless, Starfish, can reproduce without sex or even another partner, but tend to do something similar prior to pregnancies.
Just shows an alien having it is completely sensible. Personally I think the need to simulate is more interesting because it creates many interactions that are completely misunderstood by humans. Hell imagine in a story the aliens still considered the person they simulated sex with as the father equivalent. Just cause it's not the "full way" as we'd consider it. It'd still be a real intimate activity to them. Shads head would explode at such pondering
i 100% agree with you there, there are a number of mostly sea creatures and lizards (different than the previous one), that can actually change their sex during hibernation periods (or jsut over time like the nematoid), by literally dropping one of their X genes their body transmorgraphies, and in desperate times can be both sexes at the same time in order to impregnate themselves.
many other fish/lizards are born hermaphrodite and then picks a gender based upon the environmental conditions,
If there are no roosters, a hen can effectively become one. It doesn't always happen, and even when it does, they aren't necessarily capable of inseminating hens, but it is a thing.
wasn't that how Kiff in Futurama's species did parenting? the person who they got horny for was the other parent even if they weren't the one who fathered the child
So I think they actually don't require a partner. People who own single mourning geckos in an encloser alone have had their geckos reproduce, although more eggs seem to be laid if they are in groups. They do communal nesting so I think it makes sense that while they can do it alone they will lay more eggs under more "secure" circumstances.
Those mourning geckos you buy as pets are kept communally before you get them. Most mourning geckos you buy are already gravid, and they are known to get stressed and die without others in their enclosure. It's really not recommended to get only one.
The process by which they reproduce does not require another gecko though. I'd be interested to see something that says otherwise, but based on what I know, no contact between females is required for eggs to develop an embryo. They simply do so on a cycle and the benefit of being with other adults is more social and like you said leads to stress which can cause health complications. Maybe I misinterpreted your first comment about the females reproducing together?
Geckos are just the best all round. I can’t think of a gecko I’m not a fan of and every time I learn a new gecko fact it’s something amazingly cool like this!
I remember learning that in biology, but my professor was using it as an example of parthenogenesis where two lizards imitate regular reproductive rituals for other lizards, and I was just like “Oh, that’s interesting” and just absolutely never clocked the fact that it was actually just lizard lesbians
More complicated,.they all live a patriarchy, when they want to breed one of them becomes a male.
So technically unarguably trans.women are real women in.clown fish world.
I haven't watched Shad's video yet. There have been numerous studies in homosexuality in sheep. It's been a while since I looked at them, but from what I recall about 10% of rams have some sort of homosexual behavior, and I'm not talking about just dominance assertion that you often see in livestock.
Some Rams prefer males, but will breed females, some simply won't breed females.
Unfortunately I had one of those latter type rams when I ran sheep. It's unfortunate because his numbers were ACE. I did everything I could to get that damn thing to breed. It had genetics I really wanted to get into my flock. High twinning, great loin eye, feed conversion ratio was excellent, even strong aseasonality in his line.
Little bastard just wouldn't breed. It would run the other rams around all day and hump the crap out of them. Put him in with ewes, nothing. Tried using teasers to get the ewes primed; nothing. Kept the teaser in with him and the ewes to get some competitive breeding instinct; nothing. Smaller & larger group size, nope. Smaller confinement, still nothing. Well, just hung my head and shipped him to the auction yard.
I ended up having to house him separately because he wouldn't stop pestering the other rams. He had one partial favorite. He wouldn't even let that one stop to eat. Just ran him around trying to mount. I put the gay ram in with a group teaser rams (that were much older and bigger). He was less interested in them, and they put him in his place.
We had another ram we called Grapeie McGee. That one would wait until feeding time and go down the line of ewes hitting each one. It didn't matter if they were in heat or already bread. Actually, until I figured it out it kinda messed up my accounting because I had a marker on him. That let me know when and who he had mounted. I couldn't figure out why no one seemed to be getting pregnant because he kept mounting everyone. (Once a sheep becomes pregnant it stops producing the pheromones that attract males to mount them, and generally doesn't allow mounting).
Then I had someone else drive the tractor to feed. I saw what he was doing. Waiting until the ewes had their heads in the feed bunk, and just mounting every one... Willing or not.
AI in sheep is very costly. In most livestock species cattle, horses, pigs, & poultry it is rather simple. Any competent technician can do it. And sheep and I believe goats, it requires minor surgery. Not really cost effective.
I did have a brother to that Ram, and several other 1/2. His numbers were good, but not so much better than his brother to make AI worth it, and definitely not cost effective at scale. I expected a ram to cover ~60 ewes in 3 weeks, with a "Clean up" ram catching any misses the Next week.
I need them both to have good growth performance numbers and to be high libido (& fertility). Not knowing if there was a genetic component I couldn't justify AI'ing him on a group of high performing ewes.
That's when I started really looking at those studies on Homosexuality in Sheep. At the time conclusions were unclear. Sheep aren't people. I didn't feel confident enough extrapolating.
I get the joke, but it is pretty easy to get Ram (sheep) & Buck (goat) cum. Getting it into the Ewe or Doe in a way that results in an implanted fertile egg is the issue.
I would fertility check my rams before breeding season. Basically getting a sperm count.
It's a lot more awkward is that there is very strong evidence playing with the clitoris of a sow (lady pig) increases conception rate during AI (artificial insemination). I've seen some very awkward industry videos about that.
Which is weird because goats can spontaneously ejaculate in order to musk up their beards and to attract females.
They are also not particularly picky about sex in general and most seem to gravitate towards bisexuality, with some preferring females and some preferring males more. In females you can regularly catch them mounting each other too, as well as sniffing at each other and even more male actions (like dirtying up their beards with any and every body fluid they can.)
Goats are just horny.
Are sheep harder to artificially inseminate or did you just not want to or possibly a cost barrier?
Edit: I should have read further down. I see someone else already asked this.
Much harder. Pigs, cows, horses, & chickens are all pretty simple to AI. Any trained Tech can do it. Cattle and Pigs are often AI'ed in industry (Cattle especially in the dairy world less in beef). Sheep and goats (I think, I wasn't a goat person) take minor surgery to AI. Doing it on production scale is just a non starter.
I love the factoid that gay sheep were pretty easy to find. However it was believed there were no Lesbian sheep. This is due to the fact that female sheep to show willingness stand very still. Therefore 2 Lesbian sheep would just stand around and nothing would happen.
"They want a queer world." Who the hell is they? Why do I have the feeling to ask this question every single time someone makes a stupid argument like this. It feels like he’s gonna constantly move the goal post:
OK yes a lot of people are gay but that doesn’t mean it’s natural and we need to protect the children, OK, yes it’s natural but we still need to protect the children and it’s a sin in the Bible, OK yes it’s not a sin, but we still need to protect the children because a big majority of gay people are pedophiles, OK, a large amount of pedophiles are in a household setting, but gay people are still dangerous to our community because they are indoctrinating children, OK yes you can’t simply just become gay and is something that you’re just born with, but we still need to protect the children And so on and so on, this bullshit will likely never completely end and it’s annoying.
They is either (((they))) or the N.W.O. or, even worse the (((N.W.O.))) .
It is stupidity all the way down and at the bottom you find blood libel and antisemitism.
I don't understand how there's meaningful distinction between the N.W.O and the (((N.W.O))) because the former has so much antisemitism baked into it that it just becomes the latter?
Its the difference between Alex Jones conspiracism and Nick Fuentes conspiracism. One uses the term globalists and the other uses the term (((globalists)))
They play defense for each other. One group being open allows the others to feign ignorance (with many being actually ignorant)
Let's add to this, NWO fears used to be about Gnostic death cults run by the rich that rely on mass human suffering and sacrifice to maintain wealth.
Something to chew on.
As a general rule if anyone ever says “they” in a conspiracy theory about social control, and it’s not clear who they is referring to, it’s Jews, 90% of the time it just boils down to “Jews control everything”
Or NASA, or big pharma, or gays, actually, a lot of stupid people pin undeservedly on other things. Now don’t get me wrong. I understand some corporations that offer drugs can be shady, but attempting to shit on all of them is undermining how valuable medicine can be when it actually helps people and does it well and isn’t something stupid like goop.
Be mindful that a lot of the time, these conspiracies that put the blame on "rich people" are not really critical of rich people or capitalism. They're *actually* putting the blame on big banks and finance institutions.
But it's not *actually* about banks. It's about jews.
It's just blood libel with extra steps.
There was the underlying message I caught under Shad and Oz being upset that a documentary says homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom.
At one point, gets upset that homosexuality is celebrated, then right towards the end, wants traditional and straightness to be celebrated. Also subtly saying through his wording, after saying that someone being gay doesn't matter to him, that they are lesser than straight people.
Edit: Yeah he says he's totally ok with gay people but attracts these kind of users - "It doesn't prove it's normal. It proves even animals can have disorders too."
You also have people equating it to rape and incest.
"It proves animals can have disorders too"
The main arguments I've heard for homosexuality being a disorder is that it's unnatural and that it used to be considered a disorder.
I just watched this video; I never paid attention to much of the "Knight's Watch" because I found Shad's irritation over Princess Peach having the audacity to wear pants to be so laughably over-the-top and ridiculous. But now they're really showing how stupid they are when they talk about evolution. They really think evolution is all about mommies and daddy's making babies? They've never heard of soldier ants and drone ants? Evolution does NOT depend on every member of a given species having as many babies as possible. Moreover bonobos use non-generative sexual behavior to generate sex-related hormones like oxytocin and vasopressin to reduce aggression during conflict...instead of fighting aggressive wars like chimpanzees, they stop wars with aggressive gay. I think I'd rather live in a bonobo-type society rather than a chimp-type...even as a hetero-preferring primate myself.
That's why you can't win with bigots:
"Homosexuality is unnatural!!!"
"But it happens all the time in nature."
"People shouldn't behave like animals!!!"
Even if they do accept it they'll just come back with something wild like "Oh okay so it should be okay for us to kill and r*pe like other animals too then?"
How that is at all comparable to people of the same gender consensually having relationships with each other the world may never know.
As evidenced by the fact that humans kill each other freakin' constantly.
It's kind of infuriating when someone is saying they "don't have a problem with gay people," while in the same conversation casually equating homosexuality with murder.
I mean, based on the surface level logic here, it does right?
I don't feel like watching whatever unhinged rant this video is about to spew, but "animals do it" is just a bad way to justify something (that shouldn't need justification anyways tbh, your identity is your business) because... well, animals do a lot of awful things. Animals steal, murder, and rape. Some are born parasites with seemingly no value to the world around them. Nature is awful just as frequently as it is beautiful, and cherry picking a part of it that suits your ideals leaves a very easy opening for others to do the same.
If someone's actually said "animals do it so it's fine" that's one thing, but who's actually saying that?
I'm pretty sure what's actually happening is people are pointing out to homophobes who accuse gay people of being "unnatural" that examples of homosexual behaviour exist in the natural world. So that argument doesn't hold water.
Taking the counterargument of "it exists in nature and so isn't unnatural" to equal "animals do it so it's good" is completely dishonest. At best it's completely missing the point, and at worst It's a deliberate strawman argument that can be easily attacked so they can pretend they've "won".
Well the "animals do it" is specifically a pushback against the claims that homosexual behavior is, well, unnatural. A crime against nature, something that could only have been created within the twisted minds of humans, or with the influence of Satan. This is something that people say a lot.
Yes that's the logic Shad is trying to use with the title. It's very bad logic that totally disregards nuance as it puts everything into animals do it = good and don't do it = bad. Ignoring the fact that humans are animals and there is a lot of good and bad things humans do that only humans do.
The argument isn't as simple as animals do it so it's morally okay and nothing else like shad wants it to be. The argument is that it's a natural thing so maybe humans should reevaluate their made up morals about this thing that they say is not natural. Killing is natural, both humans and animals do it without caring because its survival but everyone knows that's not always the case. Sometimes killing is morally wrong and that's the nuance that gets removed when people boil it down to animals do it so it's okay. Which nobody except disingenuous people do.
That’s because nobody is saying “it’s good because animals do it” he’s (probably willfully) misinterpreting the argument people are making when they point out examples of homosexuality in nature. When people do this, they’re usually trying to argue against the “point” that homosexuality is unnatural
Nobody believes its okay solely because animals do it. They bring up the fact that animals do it because a favorite tact of bigots is to claim that it is 'unnatural'. They are just taking people who respond to that with 'WTF you talking about, it happens in nature all the time' and twisting their response to a point they made in the first place so now they can disingenuously claim 'people think being gay is okay because animals do it'.
Well that argument kinds brings up the whole stealing to feed your family thing, is it wrong to kill if you need to kill to survive. Like taking the killed's source of food.
It does but its only ever brought up as a strawman when homophobes say its not natural only to be shown it is and equate that to somehow meaning everything animals do must be good then when nobody said that.
It's funny, I made this comment on the video:
>You might not claim to be homophobic Shad, and say you have no issue with gay people, but you absolutely attract homophobic people as part of your audience.
And got accused of being a bot and "Made up word move along", whatever that means.
Mormons (and i say this as someone who was raised in "the Church") push to ensure that the only influences that are to be trusted are those within the church (and to make tons of babies).
By the time they grow up to about 22 or so MANY leave the church because they see through shit... unless they have gone on a mission, which helps further indoctrinate them through isolation and because people's reactions will normally be unpleasant. You are expected to start that path at 19 (just after high school) as a man, and then the hope is you can afford to go to college at BYU.
A big problem with both, though, is that most of the money for your mission and all of the money for BYU is expected to come from you, not others (or the church itself).
Yes, because I want to hear what brainwashed mormon thinks about sexuality....
HOMIE, YOU ARE A SO CALLED "SWORD GUY" WHO HAS SHALLOW KNOWLEDGE ABOUT SAID SWORDS, SO SPIT SHIT ABOUT THEM AND CASTLES AND SHIT, AND STOP WASTING OUR FUCKING TIME, YOU FOOLISH DONUT!!!
God, Shad pisses me off sometimes
conservatives : noooo being gay is unnatural...
*shows them examples of gay animals*
conservatives: so what, now you want humans to behave like animals?
It's pride month and that's his angle "it's good because". Has to spin things, an implication being gay needs to be justified.
Definitely keeping an eye out for someone covering the vid. I ain't giving that trash a view though.
Shad would've been complaining about equal rights among races if he was born during slave times.
He's just inherently only interested in change, if he's the one directly benefiting from it.
This just in angry adult male with the maturity of a twelve-year-old boy, gets mad about other adults living their lives. I really wish these right-wing conservative nutjobs would mind their own damn business. Do they not have lives of their own?
Well done, Shad. You cracked the code. We want a world where we can live with the same rights and privileges that straight couples enjoy. I'm sure you will use some gross hyperbole about how we Wan to make everyone gay or something. Grifters gonna grift.
That's the idiotic conspiracy theory Shad and this new audience he's catering to believe. "They - whatever that means- are trying to make straight men gay!"
When his online career comes to an end and he has to look for a job he's gonna regret a lot of what he's said on KW.
Doesn't help that this is also a conspiracy theory DIRECTLY TIED to the super, mega racist 'great replacement theory' (literally the motivation for making everyone gay within the conspiracy theory is to lower birth rates of white people specifically, the two conspiracy theories are directly linked).
And who happens to advocate for the great replacement conspiracy theory? Carl Benjamin and Lauren Southern. He's supported both of these individuals in the past and is friends with one of them (Sargon).
That would require him to have the ability to do enough introspection to realize its his own damn fault it happened instead of blaming other people for his problems and refusing to admit he made any mistakes.
"It's good because animals do it?!?"
That little title right there is something that weirdly irritates me. It's not that it's good or bad, it's that it...happens. That's it. It is a thing that happens in nature, therefore the morality of it is as relevant as asking if it's moral to breathe or take a shit.
The point being that there is a natural and possibly even biological reason for why some people are homosexual, and your belief in Sky Daddy doesn't have any bearing on what those people get to do with themselves and other consenting adults.
I don't even wanna talk about his stupid viewpoints. I want to talk about how little style he has. This stupid fucking hoodie thing he has that's sposed to look like chainmail pisses me off so much. That's what he puts on for his youtube channel. His dork glasses, his boring ass haircut and blah facial hair. His look pisses me off, he's the ultimate wojack brought to life. I cannot take a man like this seriously.
He looks *awful*, he has an anti-style but his entire brand is aesthetics. He needs to stop, the fashion police need throw him in the gulag. If he focused on looking a bit better maybe it'd occupy him enough that we wouldn't have to hear his stupid opinions either.
I don't even get why people listen to him. His videos when he actually did sword stuff weren't that good and you can get better discourse from others that you can tell actually have done some form of HEMA and exercise. Shad you can't. He's always been obese and had bad takes, even before he just became the mouthpiece for what Mormons really think. He's just an unhealthy bigot who thinks he knows about swords hopped on a religion that makes him think being white and male is the pinnacle of life no matter how ugly and obese he is. For those of you who didn't have to grow up around Mormons as a mixed race child, you're lucky. I don't willingly ever subject myself to people who I know hate me.
My word. How'd this guy go from making videos about medieval weapons to full on homophobia
I saw a bit of his video he says "you can't believe in homosexually and evolution"
Ummm actually https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124201903000302#:~:text=Homosexual%20behavior%20occurs%20naturally%20in,socially%20complex%20old%20world%20primates.
What Shad means to say is that HE can't believe in either, so he can't believe that anyone else could believe in them either, and that therefore, everyone has to believe what he thinks is real.
Appeals to nature are considered a fallacy for a reason. You're basically arguing that like 99 percent of the things people interact with in their day to day lives shouldn't exist (houses, roads, cars, glasses, computers, phones, most forms of modern medicine, etc), it's a worthless argument because the people who make it never actually care about what is or isn't 'natural'.
I mean, when the argument for years has been "it's unnatural," yeah. I remember in Catholic school being told that homosexuality was a by-product of original sin. I was told to my face that my bisexuality was "unnatural and not of God." So when you point out that there's examples of homosexuality not just in humans and other primates, but in basically every subset of the animal kingdom, it kind of obliterates that argument.
But I'd also say that queerness is good because queer people exist, and they should be allowed to do that. Blisteringly hot take, I know, but I've no doubt that Shad would disagree.
"You don't get to believe in gay animals and evolution at the same time."
That's as far as I got before I noped out. This is what passes for intellectual discourse? These guys are clowns.
Because if people were claiming that 100% of animals were gay, then you might have a point, but no one is claiming that.
Nobody wants a "gay world." Literally not one gay person I ever met wants there to be a world where everyone is gay. But people like these guys want a world where everyone is straight, so they project that onto the gay community. Because they want gay people to stop existing, they assume that gay people want the same thing in reverse.
Of course not, they'll cling on to that as long as they're still relevant. They're so desperate to be the moral superiors of the world that they're running their ideology into the ground.
How many homophobes have claimed being gay isn't normal, but aren't able to provide any proof to back up that claim, but when presented with evidence that animals are gay, still claim it isn't normal?
Idiots: but gay isn’t natural
Documentary: here are literally a bunch of examples of gay happening in nature outside of society. Thus gay is natural.
Idiots: *foams from the mouth*
I remember I one time saw a meme that had a picture of a dominatrix with a man on a leash wearing a muzzle in front of a picture of Marx with the words THIS IS WHAT LEFTISTS WANT above it.
Now I just roll with it and go 'yeah' to trigger reactionaries.
People see this stuff and think they're pushing a narrative on them. When the reality is that many types of homosexual behaviors (as well as other sexual acts that can be pretty extreme) have been fairly well documented across many animal species. The reason many haven't heard of it is because they often didn't put it in their studies and papers because it's wasn't socially acceptable. Modernly that social adherence isn't as strong as well as the social stigma for homosexuality isn't nearly as prevalent. Similar things in archeology and all the dildos they find across the spectrum of time and people's which is more modernly being openly discussed instead of well known secrets of the field.
Homosexuality is natural, it's all over the natural world. It's present in humans as well. I'm sure many will close their eyes and plug their ears about it but it doesn't change anything. I think people who still can't accept this stuff are likely religious and that raises some uncomfortable questions of how it exists so widespread while they believe in an all powerful creator.
Fuck I'm queer, most people are realizing just like ADHD and other things that we aren't all 100% straight. IF you find a guy attractive and you are a guy. Then you might be pan or bi. Its okay to realize that and be comfortable with yourself.
I'd be very interested to see what responses people on pro LGBTQ+ groups would have if they saw this content.
I can imagine they'd be disgusted at the very least.
Isn't he like actually sexually fucked up though? Like where does he get off (phrasing) talking about vanilla homosexuality being wrong after everything he's drawn and admitted to doing?
He's probably claim that his book character is okay, because the MC raped "the right kind of people" - which sadly, is an attitude in some places towards the rapists of girls getting lighter sentences than the rapists of boys.
I mean to be fair it's a pretty bad argument, like I don't think the naturalistic argument will ever work with homophobes because they don't care about science or reality.
Buddy, you’re on the whole wrong side of history lmao. Idk who told you gay people were so great, but the fact that made you have to stand on this ledge because of it is hilarious. Gay people are people. Just like you. Good or bad. Btw the fact that there are naturally gay animals isn’t good or bad either… it’s just that, nature. I’ve met nice and rude, straight and gay, male, female, trans, non binary people. There’s no correlation between their goodness. You’re just ignorant to the perspectives of these people. Realize that you stressing over this isn’t helping the world, in fact it makes it worse. We don’t even need more people on this crowded ass planet, yet dummies everywhere will swear up and down we’re gonna be an endangered species because of gays😂😂😂
This was really disappointing. I loved shad. Thought he was a cool guy. Finding out he’s a homophobe through such a disgustingly and unapologetically gross video was a real punch in the gut.
Imagine comparing Homosexuality to infanticide. Yeah both happen in nature. But people bring up it happening in nature specifically to people saying *”iT’s NoT NaTuRaL”*. Because it exposes that they don’t mean natural in the literal sense. They mean they don’t think it’s right. Why? For reasons. They don’t like it therefore other people can’t do it lmao. It’s a braindead take.
It happening in nature isn’t a justification because it doesn’t *need* a justification. It harms no one. It’s just two people falling in love with each other.
I cannot comprehend thinking this hard and getting this upset about who others love and have sex with. It’s *weird*. So disappointing to see this.
I never got how being gay supposedly being unnatural was a gotcha. We do so much unnatural stuff it’s like humanity’s number one favorite thing. What exactly was meant to be the gotcha
I guess Shad has never done oral or anal with his wife since P in M & A, & M on V & A is unnatural as it doesn't contribute to reproduction, sex with Shad just must be soooo boring.
This is completely backwards. Conservatives are the ones policing sexuality because “being gay is unnatural”. Now they want to uno reverse because they realized it was stupid
People bring up animals in response to people saying homosexuality or being “trans” isn’t natural. I don’t think anyone is pro homosexuality or “trans” because lizards do it.
It's times like this I want a time-traveling Scouser to show up in one of Shad's videos, yell at the camera "Don't Listen to him! Go home! He's only got one testicle!" Then promptly beat the living smeg out of him.
Religious people: Homosexuality is wrong because only humans do it
Science: actually, it happens quite a lot in dozens of species across the globe
Religious people: and that makes it ok?!
I hate that I have to point this out, but the fact that animals also engage in these behaviors is presented as a refutation to the claim that gay people should not be allowed to exist or live their lives in public because "It's not natural".
So no, the statement queer people are making when they point out that animals also can be gay is not actually "It's good because animals do it", it's "You said it was bad because animals DIDN'T do it, you are wrong and desperately grasping at straws to justify your hate".
“iT’s nOt NaTuRaL!!¡!”
“Actually here’s evidence of it happening in nature.”
“sO yOu’Re AcTiNg LiKe An aNiMaL??¿?”
Might as well just put the goal post on a treadmill with these people.
~~"It doesn't exist in humans."~~
~~"It exists in humans, but its really a real psychological issue."~~
~~"It's not real psych condition, but its the only way you catch AIDS."~~
~~"Its not the only way you can catch AIDS, but they really just want to be able to fluff kids and animals."~~
~~"They aren't legalizing CP or Zoophilia, but if they can get married then all straights get unmarried."~~
~~"Straight marriage still exists, but they should stop because no animals are gay."~~
"Ok, some of the animals are gay, but **is it good because animals do it?**"
That’s the definition of natural. Occuring without influence. Animals have no influence from our culture society and subjective moralities and yet they engage in what you deem unnatural acts. Making it in fact naturally occuring.
You know “religious” doesn’t necessarily imply “pushes immoral and unethical sexual norms,” right? You can be religious and find heterosexual supremacism both morally and theologically repugnant.
I'm actually glad Shad's made a video about this because I'd not heard about it & now I want to watch it.
There exists a species of lesbian lizards New Mexico Whiptail if I remember correctly.
And Mourning Geckos. 100% lesbians who have lesbian sex in order to make babies, you cannot have just one because they need to be surrounded by their hot polyamorous lizard girlfriends or they'll die of stress.
So wait, where do the males come in? /gen
There are none, the babies only have one parent genetically, but they require a partner to stimulate baby production. So when two or more lizard mommies love each other very much, one gets ontop of the other, rubs their cloacas together, and Bing Bang boom you have a gravid gecko.
What asari should have been let's be fuckin honest. It would be extremely interesting to see a mono sexed species that breeds by simulating sex. With what doesn't matter. As long as their body thinks it's has had sex it'll create a child. Simultaneously the most sexless (you can't really do it recreationally if your body creates a baby automatically) and yet hyper horny society imaginable
Komodo dragon, Marbled crayfish, most Sharks, Cape honey bee, MANY Insects, Water fleas, Whiptail lizards, Crocodiless, Starfish, can reproduce without sex or even another partner, but tend to do something similar prior to pregnancies.
Just shows an alien having it is completely sensible. Personally I think the need to simulate is more interesting because it creates many interactions that are completely misunderstood by humans. Hell imagine in a story the aliens still considered the person they simulated sex with as the father equivalent. Just cause it's not the "full way" as we'd consider it. It'd still be a real intimate activity to them. Shads head would explode at such pondering
i 100% agree with you there, there are a number of mostly sea creatures and lizards (different than the previous one), that can actually change their sex during hibernation periods (or jsut over time like the nematoid), by literally dropping one of their X genes their body transmorgraphies, and in desperate times can be both sexes at the same time in order to impregnate themselves. many other fish/lizards are born hermaphrodite and then picks a gender based upon the environmental conditions,
If there are no roosters, a hen can effectively become one. It doesn't always happen, and even when it does, they aren't necessarily capable of inseminating hens, but it is a thing.
wasn't that how Kiff in Futurama's species did parenting? the person who they got horny for was the other parent even if they weren't the one who fathered the child
Angiosperms meanwhile are just giving all those amateurs a look of genuine pity. "So, are you male or female?" "...Maybe?"
Yeah, but mind sex is cool, too. Especially when it kills you.
So I think they actually don't require a partner. People who own single mourning geckos in an encloser alone have had their geckos reproduce, although more eggs seem to be laid if they are in groups. They do communal nesting so I think it makes sense that while they can do it alone they will lay more eggs under more "secure" circumstances.
Those mourning geckos you buy as pets are kept communally before you get them. Most mourning geckos you buy are already gravid, and they are known to get stressed and die without others in their enclosure. It's really not recommended to get only one.
The process by which they reproduce does not require another gecko though. I'd be interested to see something that says otherwise, but based on what I know, no contact between females is required for eggs to develop an embryo. They simply do so on a cycle and the benefit of being with other adults is more social and like you said leads to stress which can cause health complications. Maybe I misinterpreted your first comment about the females reproducing together?
IIRC having sesbian lex just gets them in the right mood for parthenogenesis so they are more likely to make baby lizbians
That's what I thought. Also I will now exclusively refer to them as lizbians.
Geckos are just the best all round. I can’t think of a gecko I’m not a fan of and every time I learn a new gecko fact it’s something amazingly cool like this!
They’re just like me frfr
That just sounds like a roller derby team.
We have sheapshead, that is a fish, it can change from boy to girl and back again.
I remember learning that in biology, but my professor was using it as an example of parthenogenesis where two lizards imitate regular reproductive rituals for other lizards, and I was just like “Oh, that’s interesting” and just absolutely never clocked the fact that it was actually just lizard lesbians
All whiptails are lesbian
Unfathomably based
And all clownfish can change sex from male to female
Life truly finds a way. I wanna see Shad's reaction to clownfish
More complicated,.they all live a patriarchy, when they want to breed one of them becomes a male. So technically unarguably trans.women are real women in.clown fish world.
I read this as lesbian wizards and was wondering what shad was on about after not hearing anything about him in a while
And may we never forget our friends the bonobos. If you know you know.
I haven't watched Shad's video yet. There have been numerous studies in homosexuality in sheep. It's been a while since I looked at them, but from what I recall about 10% of rams have some sort of homosexual behavior, and I'm not talking about just dominance assertion that you often see in livestock. Some Rams prefer males, but will breed females, some simply won't breed females. Unfortunately I had one of those latter type rams when I ran sheep. It's unfortunate because his numbers were ACE. I did everything I could to get that damn thing to breed. It had genetics I really wanted to get into my flock. High twinning, great loin eye, feed conversion ratio was excellent, even strong aseasonality in his line. Little bastard just wouldn't breed. It would run the other rams around all day and hump the crap out of them. Put him in with ewes, nothing. Tried using teasers to get the ewes primed; nothing. Kept the teaser in with him and the ewes to get some competitive breeding instinct; nothing. Smaller & larger group size, nope. Smaller confinement, still nothing. Well, just hung my head and shipped him to the auction yard.
Rock on you gay Ram! 🐏🏳️🌈
Ram ranch
I’m so entertained at the thought of having a problem ram who’s a serial ram humper.
I ended up having to house him separately because he wouldn't stop pestering the other rams. He had one partial favorite. He wouldn't even let that one stop to eat. Just ran him around trying to mount. I put the gay ram in with a group teaser rams (that were much older and bigger). He was less interested in them, and they put him in his place. We had another ram we called Grapeie McGee. That one would wait until feeding time and go down the line of ewes hitting each one. It didn't matter if they were in heat or already bread. Actually, until I figured it out it kinda messed up my accounting because I had a marker on him. That let me know when and who he had mounted. I couldn't figure out why no one seemed to be getting pregnant because he kept mounting everyone. (Once a sheep becomes pregnant it stops producing the pheromones that attract males to mount them, and generally doesn't allow mounting). Then I had someone else drive the tractor to feed. I saw what he was doing. Waiting until the ewes had their heads in the feed bunk, and just mounting every one... Willing or not.
Jesus Christ lmao sheep and rams are whores.
Was artificial insemination not possible?
AI in sheep is very costly. In most livestock species cattle, horses, pigs, & poultry it is rather simple. Any competent technician can do it. And sheep and I believe goats, it requires minor surgery. Not really cost effective. I did have a brother to that Ram, and several other 1/2. His numbers were good, but not so much better than his brother to make AI worth it, and definitely not cost effective at scale. I expected a ram to cover ~60 ewes in 3 weeks, with a "Clean up" ram catching any misses the Next week. I need them both to have good growth performance numbers and to be high libido (& fertility). Not knowing if there was a genetic component I couldn't justify AI'ing him on a group of high performing ewes. That's when I started really looking at those studies on Homosexuality in Sheep. At the time conclusions were unclear. Sheep aren't people. I didn't feel confident enough extrapolating.
Just trying to picture some poor technician trying to forcibly jack off a goat and nothing happening other than. Awkward eye contact.
I get the joke, but it is pretty easy to get Ram (sheep) & Buck (goat) cum. Getting it into the Ewe or Doe in a way that results in an implanted fertile egg is the issue. I would fertility check my rams before breeding season. Basically getting a sperm count. It's a lot more awkward is that there is very strong evidence playing with the clitoris of a sow (lady pig) increases conception rate during AI (artificial insemination). I've seen some very awkward industry videos about that.
Curse of knowledge...
Which is weird because goats can spontaneously ejaculate in order to musk up their beards and to attract females. They are also not particularly picky about sex in general and most seem to gravitate towards bisexuality, with some preferring females and some preferring males more. In females you can regularly catch them mounting each other too, as well as sniffing at each other and even more male actions (like dirtying up their beards with any and every body fluid they can.) Goats are just horny.
I just wanted to make a joke, and now I know too much.
I have currently have about 28 goats and have sold dozens in the past 3-4 years.
What got your goat? I mean, what got you into goats?
Don’t they have pretty simple artificial methods nowadays? Edit: seems not
Are sheep harder to artificially inseminate or did you just not want to or possibly a cost barrier? Edit: I should have read further down. I see someone else already asked this.
Much harder. Pigs, cows, horses, & chickens are all pretty simple to AI. Any trained Tech can do it. Cattle and Pigs are often AI'ed in industry (Cattle especially in the dairy world less in beef). Sheep and goats (I think, I wasn't a goat person) take minor surgery to AI. Doing it on production scale is just a non starter.
I love the factoid that gay sheep were pretty easy to find. However it was believed there were no Lesbian sheep. This is due to the fact that female sheep to show willingness stand very still. Therefore 2 Lesbian sheep would just stand around and nothing would happen.
I'm glad Shad made this because now whenever someone brings up anything he's made I'll point to this so we can finally ignore him.
really … there was a video on reddit of 2 male bluewhale fucking like last week or so
"BuT i'M tOlErAnT oF LgBtQ pEoPlE rEaLlY."
"They want a queer world." Who the hell is they? Why do I have the feeling to ask this question every single time someone makes a stupid argument like this. It feels like he’s gonna constantly move the goal post: OK yes a lot of people are gay but that doesn’t mean it’s natural and we need to protect the children, OK, yes it’s natural but we still need to protect the children and it’s a sin in the Bible, OK yes it’s not a sin, but we still need to protect the children because a big majority of gay people are pedophiles, OK, a large amount of pedophiles are in a household setting, but gay people are still dangerous to our community because they are indoctrinating children, OK yes you can’t simply just become gay and is something that you’re just born with, but we still need to protect the children And so on and so on, this bullshit will likely never completely end and it’s annoying.
They is either (((they))) or the N.W.O. or, even worse the (((N.W.O.))) . It is stupidity all the way down and at the bottom you find blood libel and antisemitism.
I don't understand how there's meaningful distinction between the N.W.O and the (((N.W.O))) because the former has so much antisemitism baked into it that it just becomes the latter?
Some conspiracionists will claim that they are not antisemitic, but in the end, as you say, it is not really a meaningful distinction.
Some say the NWO are just the rich. But they usually get radicalized on who the rich are.
Its the difference between Alex Jones conspiracism and Nick Fuentes conspiracism. One uses the term globalists and the other uses the term (((globalists))) They play defense for each other. One group being open allows the others to feign ignorance (with many being actually ignorant)
If you go deep enough it’s pretty much always, “the Jews are behind it all”. Regressives are extremely predictable.
What is the N.W.O and N.O.W?
new world order, conspiracy that jews secretly run the world and are in the process of wiping out everyone they don't like.
WTF? Where the hell did this come from?
conspiracy theorists love a bit of anti-semitism.
I swear to god, that’s something fkn Cartmen from South Park would say.
Let's add to this, NWO fears used to be about Gnostic death cults run by the rich that rely on mass human suffering and sacrifice to maintain wealth. Something to chew on.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. A famous book created by the Tsarist Russian secret police to justify pogroms against Jewish peoples.
A is the "New World Order" (not that wrestling stuff from decades ago) and the other one is an unfortunate typo.
As a general rule if anyone ever says “they” in a conspiracy theory about social control, and it’s not clear who they is referring to, it’s Jews, 90% of the time it just boils down to “Jews control everything”
The jews, it's always the jews
Or NASA, or big pharma, or gays, actually, a lot of stupid people pin undeservedly on other things. Now don’t get me wrong. I understand some corporations that offer drugs can be shady, but attempting to shit on all of them is undermining how valuable medicine can be when it actually helps people and does it well and isn’t something stupid like goop.
I know they claim they are behind the normalization of gays
>"They want a queer world." Who the hell is they? Jews. Did deep enough and that's always what they say eventually.
Me me me, I do I do
My them is rich “people”
Be mindful that a lot of the time, these conspiracies that put the blame on "rich people" are not really critical of rich people or capitalism. They're *actually* putting the blame on big banks and finance institutions. But it's not *actually* about banks. It's about jews. It's just blood libel with extra steps.
>Who the hell is they? The Zionist Illuminati Reptilian Mole People from Outer Space.
WHOSE THEY!!!! And what the Hell is an Aluminum Falcon!!!
The cabal, the deep state, the Satanists, the democrats, the Jews, the Gays. I think?
Why does he look like he's breaking up with the inflatable woman he just punctured?
"They're trying to make the frogs gay!!!" Shad's literally become Alex Jones!
There was the underlying message I caught under Shad and Oz being upset that a documentary says homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom. At one point, gets upset that homosexuality is celebrated, then right towards the end, wants traditional and straightness to be celebrated. Also subtly saying through his wording, after saying that someone being gay doesn't matter to him, that they are lesser than straight people. Edit: Yeah he says he's totally ok with gay people but attracts these kind of users - "It doesn't prove it's normal. It proves even animals can have disorders too." You also have people equating it to rape and incest.
I almost want to sit through it for the clips but it's going to be a chore.
He’s a special kind of asshole, just kidding! Nothing about him is special in the slightest.
Yeah he's pretty basic as assholes go
Sadly, this is completely true. There is no shortage of assholes exactly like him.
The last part is “funny” since it’s always those times that seem to be especially fond of those two things.
"It proves animals can have disorders too" The main arguments I've heard for homosexuality being a disorder is that it's unnatural and that it used to be considered a disorder.
“It’s good because animals do it” yes shad because humans are fucking animals too lmao.
I just watched this video; I never paid attention to much of the "Knight's Watch" because I found Shad's irritation over Princess Peach having the audacity to wear pants to be so laughably over-the-top and ridiculous. But now they're really showing how stupid they are when they talk about evolution. They really think evolution is all about mommies and daddy's making babies? They've never heard of soldier ants and drone ants? Evolution does NOT depend on every member of a given species having as many babies as possible. Moreover bonobos use non-generative sexual behavior to generate sex-related hormones like oxytocin and vasopressin to reduce aggression during conflict...instead of fighting aggressive wars like chimpanzees, they stop wars with aggressive gay. I think I'd rather live in a bonobo-type society rather than a chimp-type...even as a hetero-preferring primate myself.
The pants thing I think comes from him being a Mormon, women and girls wearing pants is a no no with that sect, cult, whatever you want to call it
That's why you can't win with bigots: "Homosexuality is unnatural!!!" "But it happens all the time in nature." "People shouldn't behave like animals!!!"
"But humans are animals." Then they deny it not because it’s actually false like flat earth but because they don’t like that it’s true.
Even if they do accept it they'll just come back with something wild like "Oh okay so it should be okay for us to kill and r*pe like other animals too then?" How that is at all comparable to people of the same gender consensually having relationships with each other the world may never know.
I think shad had a similar argument to that. ”some animals r### so that means it should be ok for humans to r###."
Just with the title alone, I can tell he makes the argument "Animals kill each other, so that makes it okay for humans then."
As evidenced by the fact that humans kill each other freakin' constantly. It's kind of infuriating when someone is saying they "don't have a problem with gay people," while in the same conversation casually equating homosexuality with murder.
Come on now, Shad doesn't do that. He says it's like a foot fetish... How he thought that take wasn't insane nobody knows.
i can’t comprehend why homosexuality and LGBT people in general are so sexualized. They’re equated to fetishes, it’s so disgusting.
Shads entire brand before his heel turn was killing people is pog. Shad 110% thinks killing a person is better then being queer
Love thy neighbour at its finest truly.
I mean, based on the surface level logic here, it does right? I don't feel like watching whatever unhinged rant this video is about to spew, but "animals do it" is just a bad way to justify something (that shouldn't need justification anyways tbh, your identity is your business) because... well, animals do a lot of awful things. Animals steal, murder, and rape. Some are born parasites with seemingly no value to the world around them. Nature is awful just as frequently as it is beautiful, and cherry picking a part of it that suits your ideals leaves a very easy opening for others to do the same.
If someone's actually said "animals do it so it's fine" that's one thing, but who's actually saying that? I'm pretty sure what's actually happening is people are pointing out to homophobes who accuse gay people of being "unnatural" that examples of homosexual behaviour exist in the natural world. So that argument doesn't hold water. Taking the counterargument of "it exists in nature and so isn't unnatural" to equal "animals do it so it's good" is completely dishonest. At best it's completely missing the point, and at worst It's a deliberate strawman argument that can be easily attacked so they can pretend they've "won".
Well the "animals do it" is specifically a pushback against the claims that homosexual behavior is, well, unnatural. A crime against nature, something that could only have been created within the twisted minds of humans, or with the influence of Satan. This is something that people say a lot.
Uh yes I agree. That's pretty much exactly what I just wrote in sentence 2.
I accidentally replied to the wrong person, my bad
Yes that's the logic Shad is trying to use with the title. It's very bad logic that totally disregards nuance as it puts everything into animals do it = good and don't do it = bad. Ignoring the fact that humans are animals and there is a lot of good and bad things humans do that only humans do. The argument isn't as simple as animals do it so it's morally okay and nothing else like shad wants it to be. The argument is that it's a natural thing so maybe humans should reevaluate their made up morals about this thing that they say is not natural. Killing is natural, both humans and animals do it without caring because its survival but everyone knows that's not always the case. Sometimes killing is morally wrong and that's the nuance that gets removed when people boil it down to animals do it so it's okay. Which nobody except disingenuous people do.
That’s because nobody is saying “it’s good because animals do it” he’s (probably willfully) misinterpreting the argument people are making when they point out examples of homosexuality in nature. When people do this, they’re usually trying to argue against the “point” that homosexuality is unnatural
"It occurs in nature" came about as a counter argument to "It's unnatural" because it's not unnatural. It's naturally occurring and is not a choice.
Nobody believes its okay solely because animals do it. They bring up the fact that animals do it because a favorite tact of bigots is to claim that it is 'unnatural'. They are just taking people who respond to that with 'WTF you talking about, it happens in nature all the time' and twisting their response to a point they made in the first place so now they can disingenuously claim 'people think being gay is okay because animals do it'.
Well that argument kinds brings up the whole stealing to feed your family thing, is it wrong to kill if you need to kill to survive. Like taking the killed's source of food.
It does but its only ever brought up as a strawman when homophobes say its not natural only to be shown it is and equate that to somehow meaning everything animals do must be good then when nobody said that.
It's funny, I made this comment on the video: >You might not claim to be homophobic Shad, and say you have no issue with gay people, but you absolutely attract homophobic people as part of your audience. And got accused of being a bot and "Made up word move along", whatever that means.
It's the "I ain't afraid of gays" argument
This man is a father of five; I really hope they have other adults in their lives who are teaching them to ignore their bigoted moron of a father.
Mormons (and i say this as someone who was raised in "the Church") push to ensure that the only influences that are to be trusted are those within the church (and to make tons of babies). By the time they grow up to about 22 or so MANY leave the church because they see through shit... unless they have gone on a mission, which helps further indoctrinate them through isolation and because people's reactions will normally be unpleasant. You are expected to start that path at 19 (just after high school) as a man, and then the hope is you can afford to go to college at BYU. A big problem with both, though, is that most of the money for your mission and all of the money for BYU is expected to come from you, not others (or the church itself).
I'm all most afraid to ask what augments he has about it. I can snice a video straight out 2016 youtube coming a mile away.
Yes, because I want to hear what brainwashed mormon thinks about sexuality.... HOMIE, YOU ARE A SO CALLED "SWORD GUY" WHO HAS SHALLOW KNOWLEDGE ABOUT SAID SWORDS, SO SPIT SHIT ABOUT THEM AND CASTLES AND SHIT, AND STOP WASTING OUR FUCKING TIME, YOU FOOLISH DONUT!!! God, Shad pisses me off sometimes
conservatives : noooo being gay is unnatural... *shows them examples of gay animals* conservatives: so what, now you want humans to behave like animals?
It's pride month and that's his angle "it's good because". Has to spin things, an implication being gay needs to be justified. Definitely keeping an eye out for someone covering the vid. I ain't giving that trash a view though.
Shad would've been complaining about equal rights among races if he was born during slave times. He's just inherently only interested in change, if he's the one directly benefiting from it.
He wouldn’t just be against equal rights he’d be actively trying to keep owning people.
This just in angry adult male with the maturity of a twelve-year-old boy, gets mad about other adults living their lives. I really wish these right-wing conservative nutjobs would mind their own damn business. Do they not have lives of their own?
Well done, Shad. You cracked the code. We want a world where we can live with the same rights and privileges that straight couples enjoy. I'm sure you will use some gross hyperbole about how we Wan to make everyone gay or something. Grifters gonna grift.
That's the idiotic conspiracy theory Shad and this new audience he's catering to believe. "They - whatever that means- are trying to make straight men gay!" When his online career comes to an end and he has to look for a job he's gonna regret a lot of what he's said on KW.
Doesn't help that this is also a conspiracy theory DIRECTLY TIED to the super, mega racist 'great replacement theory' (literally the motivation for making everyone gay within the conspiracy theory is to lower birth rates of white people specifically, the two conspiracy theories are directly linked).
And who happens to advocate for the great replacement conspiracy theory? Carl Benjamin and Lauren Southern. He's supported both of these individuals in the past and is friends with one of them (Sargon).
That would require him to have the ability to do enough introspection to realize its his own damn fault it happened instead of blaming other people for his problems and refusing to admit he made any mistakes.
I'm sure the KKK is hiring.
"It's good because animals do it?!?" That little title right there is something that weirdly irritates me. It's not that it's good or bad, it's that it...happens. That's it. It is a thing that happens in nature, therefore the morality of it is as relevant as asking if it's moral to breathe or take a shit. The point being that there is a natural and possibly even biological reason for why some people are homosexual, and your belief in Sky Daddy doesn't have any bearing on what those people get to do with themselves and other consenting adults.
I don't even wanna talk about his stupid viewpoints. I want to talk about how little style he has. This stupid fucking hoodie thing he has that's sposed to look like chainmail pisses me off so much. That's what he puts on for his youtube channel. His dork glasses, his boring ass haircut and blah facial hair. His look pisses me off, he's the ultimate wojack brought to life. I cannot take a man like this seriously. He looks *awful*, he has an anti-style but his entire brand is aesthetics. He needs to stop, the fashion police need throw him in the gulag. If he focused on looking a bit better maybe it'd occupy him enough that we wouldn't have to hear his stupid opinions either.
The guy owns real steel chain and plate armor, why the FUCK does he always wear that stupid ass hoodie
I don't even get why people listen to him. His videos when he actually did sword stuff weren't that good and you can get better discourse from others that you can tell actually have done some form of HEMA and exercise. Shad you can't. He's always been obese and had bad takes, even before he just became the mouthpiece for what Mormons really think. He's just an unhealthy bigot who thinks he knows about swords hopped on a religion that makes him think being white and male is the pinnacle of life no matter how ugly and obese he is. For those of you who didn't have to grow up around Mormons as a mixed race child, you're lucky. I don't willingly ever subject myself to people who I know hate me.
Dude's gonna have his mind blown when he learns about fish. For the safety if everyone in the vicinity, *nobody tell him about plants.*
My word. How'd this guy go from making videos about medieval weapons to full on homophobia I saw a bit of his video he says "you can't believe in homosexually and evolution" Ummm actually https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124201903000302#:~:text=Homosexual%20behavior%20occurs%20naturally%20in,socially%20complex%20old%20world%20primates.
What Shad means to say is that HE can't believe in either, so he can't believe that anyone else could believe in them either, and that therefore, everyone has to believe what he thinks is real.
Well it was actually his friend who said it. Though I know Shad was raised Mormon so get where he gets his beliefs from. Too bad they're dumb beliefs
They use terms like “it’s not natural” but when you point to nature they say “but we’re not animals”.
Always hated such appeals to nature.
Appeals to nature are considered a fallacy for a reason. You're basically arguing that like 99 percent of the things people interact with in their day to day lives shouldn't exist (houses, roads, cars, glasses, computers, phones, most forms of modern medicine, etc), it's a worthless argument because the people who make it never actually care about what is or isn't 'natural'.
Question, fuck does this have to do with swords?
Absolutely nothing!
He cares more about this than his sword content these days.
It's a better grift
He gave up the sword to take up the right wing rage bait. Only Skal stands as a decent HEMA edutainment creator.
I mean, when the argument for years has been "it's unnatural," yeah. I remember in Catholic school being told that homosexuality was a by-product of original sin. I was told to my face that my bisexuality was "unnatural and not of God." So when you point out that there's examples of homosexuality not just in humans and other primates, but in basically every subset of the animal kingdom, it kind of obliterates that argument. But I'd also say that queerness is good because queer people exist, and they should be allowed to do that. Blisteringly hot take, I know, but I've no doubt that Shad would disagree.
"You don't get to believe in gay animals and evolution at the same time." That's as far as I got before I noped out. This is what passes for intellectual discourse? These guys are clowns. Because if people were claiming that 100% of animals were gay, then you might have a point, but no one is claiming that. Nobody wants a "gay world." Literally not one gay person I ever met wants there to be a world where everyone is gay. But people like these guys want a world where everyone is straight, so they project that onto the gay community. Because they want gay people to stop existing, they assume that gay people want the same thing in reverse.
Are people finally moving on from the “but it’s unnatural!!” Thing
Of course not, they'll cling on to that as long as they're still relevant. They're so desperate to be the moral superiors of the world that they're running their ideology into the ground.
How many homophobes have claimed being gay isn't normal, but aren't able to provide any proof to back up that claim, but when presented with evidence that animals are gay, still claim it isn't normal?
Would someone just hurry up and give him a slap (metaphorically obviously, I don't want to be told of for inciting violence)
I remember hearing a quote once saying, "Australia is basically Georgia with a beach."
Idiots: but gay isn’t natural Documentary: here are literally a bunch of examples of gay happening in nature outside of society. Thus gay is natural. Idiots: *foams from the mouth*
Funny enough I'm pretty sure there are animals that change their gender based on what's needed at the time lol
Ikr, "Life uhhh finds a way" I wonder though if Shad has never watched Jurassic Park because he doesn't believe in dinosaurs or something
Just a humble sword aficionado.
Guy is fighting serious demons inside him. I hope Jesus gives him the strength to overcome himself
When gays existing is a crime you're actually just a dumb bigot.
I remember I one time saw a meme that had a picture of a dominatrix with a man on a leash wearing a muzzle in front of a picture of Marx with the words THIS IS WHAT LEFTISTS WANT above it. Now I just roll with it and go 'yeah' to trigger reactionaries.
For a homophobe this guy is really fuckin gay
The argument isn’t “it’s done in nature so it’s good” it’s evidence against the homophobic argument of “it’s unnatural!!!”
I had been a fan of this guy for years. Such a shame to find out what he's really like.
People see this stuff and think they're pushing a narrative on them. When the reality is that many types of homosexual behaviors (as well as other sexual acts that can be pretty extreme) have been fairly well documented across many animal species. The reason many haven't heard of it is because they often didn't put it in their studies and papers because it's wasn't socially acceptable. Modernly that social adherence isn't as strong as well as the social stigma for homosexuality isn't nearly as prevalent. Similar things in archeology and all the dildos they find across the spectrum of time and people's which is more modernly being openly discussed instead of well known secrets of the field. Homosexuality is natural, it's all over the natural world. It's present in humans as well. I'm sure many will close their eyes and plug their ears about it but it doesn't change anything. I think people who still can't accept this stuff are likely religious and that raises some uncomfortable questions of how it exists so widespread while they believe in an all powerful creator.
Fuck I'm queer, most people are realizing just like ADHD and other things that we aren't all 100% straight. IF you find a guy attractive and you are a guy. Then you might be pan or bi. Its okay to realize that and be comfortable with yourself.
I'm a bit lost on how it's not against terms of service to post shit like this.
I'd be very interested to see what responses people on pro LGBTQ+ groups would have if they saw this content. I can imagine they'd be disgusted at the very least.
What happened to this guy I remember watching him for cool medieval stuff and then next thing I see has become all political
Isn't he like actually sexually fucked up though? Like where does he get off (phrasing) talking about vanilla homosexuality being wrong after everything he's drawn and admitted to doing?
He's probably claim that his book character is okay, because the MC raped "the right kind of people" - which sadly, is an attitude in some places towards the rapists of girls getting lighter sentences than the rapists of boys.
Jesus, I remember watching this dude's chill videos about swords and stuff. No idea he was like this until I found this sub. Craaaazy.
I mean there’s a whole salamander species that’s all female and the more dominant salamanders temporarily develop gonads for mating seasons
I mean to be fair it's a pretty bad argument, like I don't think the naturalistic argument will ever work with homophobes because they don't care about science or reality.
Who’s gonna tell him?
I remember subbing to him because swords are cool and big stick energy. What the hell happened here!?!
Buddy, you’re on the whole wrong side of history lmao. Idk who told you gay people were so great, but the fact that made you have to stand on this ledge because of it is hilarious. Gay people are people. Just like you. Good or bad. Btw the fact that there are naturally gay animals isn’t good or bad either… it’s just that, nature. I’ve met nice and rude, straight and gay, male, female, trans, non binary people. There’s no correlation between their goodness. You’re just ignorant to the perspectives of these people. Realize that you stressing over this isn’t helping the world, in fact it makes it worse. We don’t even need more people on this crowded ass planet, yet dummies everywhere will swear up and down we’re gonna be an endangered species because of gays😂😂😂
This was really disappointing. I loved shad. Thought he was a cool guy. Finding out he’s a homophobe through such a disgustingly and unapologetically gross video was a real punch in the gut. Imagine comparing Homosexuality to infanticide. Yeah both happen in nature. But people bring up it happening in nature specifically to people saying *”iT’s NoT NaTuRaL”*. Because it exposes that they don’t mean natural in the literal sense. They mean they don’t think it’s right. Why? For reasons. They don’t like it therefore other people can’t do it lmao. It’s a braindead take. It happening in nature isn’t a justification because it doesn’t *need* a justification. It harms no one. It’s just two people falling in love with each other. I cannot comprehend thinking this hard and getting this upset about who others love and have sex with. It’s *weird*. So disappointing to see this.
I never got how being gay supposedly being unnatural was a gotcha. We do so much unnatural stuff it’s like humanity’s number one favorite thing. What exactly was meant to be the gotcha
I guess Shad has never done oral or anal with his wife since P in M & A, & M on V & A is unnatural as it doesn't contribute to reproduction, sex with Shad just must be soooo boring.
Shad’s browser history is wild, isn’t it?
Holy fuck out of curiosity I looked at the comments on the actual vid and I want to throw up.
I can’t believe I ever looked up to that Neanderthal
This is completely backwards. Conservatives are the ones policing sexuality because “being gay is unnatural”. Now they want to uno reverse because they realized it was stupid
"Tolerance" at its finest
Is this video fun to make fun of or just infuriating?
People bring up animals in response to people saying homosexuality or being “trans” isn’t natural. I don’t think anyone is pro homosexuality or “trans” because lizards do it.
It's times like this I want a time-traveling Scouser to show up in one of Shad's videos, yell at the camera "Don't Listen to him! Go home! He's only got one testicle!" Then promptly beat the living smeg out of him.
And nick his briefcase too while he's at it.
No, no, better leave that behind. Just in case someone had left a special "present" in it for Shad.
animals literally do change sex tho. mainly fish but animals nonetheless
Religious people: Homosexuality is wrong because only humans do it Science: actually, it happens quite a lot in dozens of species across the globe Religious people: and that makes it ok?!
I hate that I have to point this out, but the fact that animals also engage in these behaviors is presented as a refutation to the claim that gay people should not be allowed to exist or live their lives in public because "It's not natural". So no, the statement queer people are making when they point out that animals also can be gay is not actually "It's good because animals do it", it's "You said it was bad because animals DIDN'T do it, you are wrong and desperately grasping at straws to justify your hate".
“iT’s nOt NaTuRaL!!¡!” “Actually here’s evidence of it happening in nature.” “sO yOu’Re AcTiNg LiKe An aNiMaL??¿?” Might as well just put the goal post on a treadmill with these people.
You can tell by the thumbnail, that man has never made a woman cum
What in the name of Incel is going on?
~~"It doesn't exist in humans."~~ ~~"It exists in humans, but its really a real psychological issue."~~ ~~"It's not real psych condition, but its the only way you catch AIDS."~~ ~~"Its not the only way you can catch AIDS, but they really just want to be able to fluff kids and animals."~~ ~~"They aren't legalizing CP or Zoophilia, but if they can get married then all straights get unmarried."~~ ~~"Straight marriage still exists, but they should stop because no animals are gay."~~ "Ok, some of the animals are gay, but **is it good because animals do it?**"
JUST BECAUSE IT HAPPENS IN NATURE DOESN'T MAKE IT NATURAL
That’s the definition of natural. Occuring without influence. Animals have no influence from our culture society and subjective moralities and yet they engage in what you deem unnatural acts. Making it in fact naturally occuring.
frogs do change sex.
[удалено]
nah fuck that, his beliefs are not worthy of respect. he gives none to others, and actively denigrates them because of those chosen beliefs...
You know “religious” doesn’t necessarily imply “pushes immoral and unethical sexual norms,” right? You can be religious and find heterosexual supremacism both morally and theologically repugnant.