Comments on: Traditional Norms, Animal-style

By: The Bird That Dare Not Speak Its Name | The Loom | Discover Magazine

The Bird That Dare Not Speak Its Name | The Loom | Discover Magazine — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:34:00 +0000

[...] very tempting to see human virtues in animals–imagining, say, that penguins love traditional (American) norms. I wouldn’t suggest look to the Penduline Tit for a role model for being a good parent. But [...]

By: Bangbus

Bangbus — Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:03:25 +0000

Mary, you are absolutely correct. Again I point to the recent post at Pharyngula (although it might be easier to say, yes, I saw the movie 4 days ago and that is EXACTLY what was stated in it. However, I’m just not as FUNNY as PZ Myers is!

“Let’s just remember that it is a seasonal monogamy–they get different breeding partners in different breeding seasons. This apparently justifies the practice of the Republican leadership in cashing in their old wives for new trophies. Penguins do it, so why not Newts”?

By: inwit

inwit — Wed, 21 Sep 2005 12:23:40 +0000

The description of the mite genus Adactylidium in that essay of Gould’s that daen quoted from is even more graphic:

“[S]ix to nine eggs hatch within the body of a female Adactylidium. The larvae feed on their mother’s body, literally devouring her from inside. Two days later, the offspring reach maturity, and the single male copulates with all his sisters. By this time, the mother’s tissues have disintegrated, and her body space is a mass of adult mites, their feces, and their discarded larval and nymphal skeletons. The offspring then cut holes through their mother’s body wall and emerge.”

By: Jonesy

Jonesy — Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:41:43 +0000

I have to wonder how much of the reason for Medved sayng this is that he’s just being a troll. He knows he’s going to get attention from “liberals”, and he knows its going to annoy, so thats why he says it. These people (Medved, Coulter, Limbaugh…) don’t care whether theyre being rational or not, they just want attention and want to get a rise out of the other side.

By: Gerry L

Gerry L — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 05:32:40 +0000

At the Oregon Zoo we have a male Humboldt penguin who shows no interest in girl penguins or boys. But he is quite attracted to human footwear.

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:08:12 +0000

Donald Kennedy, Science editor, “Emperors on the Ice, Science, September 2″, used the movie as an evangelistic opportunity also:

“By all means see March of the Penguins. Better still, you can accomplish a good work by inviting an advocate for ‘intelligent design’ to accompany you. After the show, buy him or her a beer, and ask for an explanation of just what the Designer had in mind here.”

By: hoopman

hoopman — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 06:44:59 +0000

Babbler, thanks for the enlightening link. Nice to see that not all conservatives spew nonsensical Republican rhetoric. Yeah, those Penguins were lucky to have such a wonderful “designer”.

By: Babbler

Babbler — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 05:24:00 +0000

George Will wrote about "March of the Penguins" (& "Grizzly Man") a few weeks ago, and seems to have dawn a different conclusion: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/26/AR2005082601486.html

By: hoopman

hoopman — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 05:07:51 +0000

“Let’s just remember that it is a seasonal monogamy—they get different breeding partners in different breeding seasons. This apparently justifies the practice of the Republican leadership in cashing in their old wives for new trophies. Penguins do it, so why not Newts”?

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 04:48:54 +0000

These are excellent (and hilarious) examples of the dangers of drawing too much inspiration from the mating habits of other species. Didn’t that penguin movie mention something about the penguins choosing a new mate every breeding season? I could have sworn I remembered hearing that, although how anyone finds conservative Christian values in that or anything else in the movie is beyond me. The conservative reaction to this movie amazes me.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:36:08 +0000

Equally heartwarming are the swans of the Boston Public Garden http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/08/12/thou_art_no_romeo/

By: daen

daen — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:35:46 +0000

Another example from “The Panda’s Thumb” by Stephen Jay Gould concerning Acarophenax tribolii, a species of mite: “Fifteen eggs, including but a single male, develop within the mother’s body. The male emerges within his mother’s shell, copulates with all his sisters and dies before birth.”

By: linguist

linguist — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:42:25 +0000

Well put! I get so sick of people trying to draw parallels between human social behavior and the behavior of animals. For instance, there's this story, in which the "gay" penguins at a zoo in Germany, were obviously proving that their nesting instincts were stronger than the lack of females by adopting rocks as egg substitutes. When zoo officials tried to bring in more females, gay rights groups objected and the zoo backed down! http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1284769.html

By: cats

cats — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:24:36 +0000

“passionately affirms traditional norms like monogamy, sacrifice and child rearing”?

yes, Michael Medved will be shocked if he can see the mating hobits of chimps…

By: Scott Belyea

Scott Belyea — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:12:46 +0000

Well, now, that’s just the way they were designed … who are we to question it??

“…that ends with the male somersaulting onto the venomous fangs of his mate”

Kinky!!

When I saw that comment by Medved, it struck me as a stunning example of seeing what you want to see coupled with a lack of knowledge/perspective. Thanks for the counter-examples, of which there could of course be many more.

Including some human examples. I have a cousin who … no, no, better not …

By: hoopman

hoopman — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:58:31 +0000

Or, as PZ Myers said over at Pharyngula, “It was a movie about pitiless Darwinian circumstances. Drop the egg, it freezes and the embryo dies. Newborn chick wanders away, it freezes and dies. One parent dies of predation or weather, the other has to abandon the young to starve, freeze, and die. As an inspiration to conservative Republican ruthlessness, I can see it…but Intelligent Design? No way”. And I might add – inept, clumsy predators attack the chicks while mothers and fathers stand by and do nothing to help. And understand, these are NOT predators that the larger penguins had anything to fear from a personal standpoint of survival. Any one of them could have taken a run at these birds and they would have flown off in terror, let alone if several of them had combined efforts. In fact, several DO combine such an effort in keeping a chickless mother from trying to “steal” a chick from another in the colony, so it’s not such a momumental leap that they would do such a thing to protect chicks from predators.