I just stopped a gang-rape

of a mallard duck.

For the past several years a couple of mallards would come to our back yard to help themselves for the seeds and corn from the squirrel feeder and to water - while regurgitating mud back into it. (As if there are not enough lakes here).

We saw the couple again a few months ago but since then only a couple of males and a single one. Yes, I think that ducks can be gay, as was recently suggested.

Now I looked outside and saw several ducks pushing and shoving next to the neighboring wall. I walked outside, two males flew out, and then I really had to get close and to clap my hands for the other two males and a female to fly away. They flew together. I don't know if the female will stay with them.

Boy, were they determined.

Well, don't know if the female likes it, but it a part of duck sex:


The sex lives of ducks

By Sally Schloss for WebVet

Rape is not typically something you associate with those darling “duckies” who bob along the surface of the water to the delight of children and adults at the local pond. It’s a shock to discover that male ducks are the rapists of the bird world. Often, a gang of three or four of them attacks a female duck, sometimes resulting in her injury or death. While ducks are not the only species in the Animal Kingdom to display aggressive sexual behavior, they are the most aggressive of bird species.

What could possibly be the reason for such behavior?

http://www.webvet.com/main/article/id/2156/med/0

Normally she would be with her mate who kind of guard here while she is eating. Unless it is a different one, of course.

That was really brutal.

Ducks are like the Taliban.

If there's a female without a mate strong enough to protect her, it means she's a nasty slut who deserves to get gang raped.

Depressing. :(

Wow.

Now Hitler's going to come back to power.

They will kill the female in their efforts sometimes.

They are ducks - they know how to Swim, Eat, Sit on Eggs and Crap.

They do not reason and therefore cannot be aware that what you perceive as "gang rape" is nothing more than the natural order for ducks.

Because females USUALLY choose their mates (who stay with them and help raise the young). But "rape" it is considered by biologists.

http://www.world-science.net/othernews/070501_duck.htm
"De­spite the fact that most wa­ter­fowl form mo­nog­a­mous pairs, forced cop­u­la­tions by oth­er ma­les — the avi­an equiv­a­lent of rape — are com­mon in many wa­ter­fowl,” said Prum."

perhaps 'forced sex' is a better term. A duck cannot reason therefore it doesn't not understand things like 'consent'.

Certainly not the first disagreement about the use of the term:
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/05/01/the-mysterious-inner-workings-of-a-female-duck

Since animals aren’t ever capable of giving informed consent to sex, wouldn’t all non-human animal mating be rape? I’m far more comfortable with the terms “forced mating” and “voluntary mating”. Save the term rape for animals who can consent.

I think "forced copulation’ is usually a more descriptive term of the practice in non-human animals than ‘rape’. ‘Forced copulation’ is a detached, clinical description of a reproductive strategy in certain animal species. But I think only the most far gone evo-psych dope fiend would claim that rape in humans is mostly about a reproductive strategy. There are examples in cases of ‘ethnic cleansing’/genocide of men raping women in part for demographic reasons (but mostly because of power struggles). But I think most of us would agree that in humans, ‘rape’ as a word rarely refers to someone who wants to father a child without the consent of the woman. Sexual thrill, domination, etc… yes, but rarely reproduction.

The word ‘forced copulation’ WOULD squick me when describing humans precisely because it would be an assumption that rape is a reproductive strategy in human beings rather than a tool to subjugate women.

Perhaps there is some 'forcing' by the male ducks on the female ducks but it is NOT rape. It is wrong for scientist to use that term for something that clearly is not rape. Your post describes exactly how I feel. If anything those scientists should be shamed for 'softening' the rape word by associating it with ducks.

Rape is a very brutal, hateful, act that has absolutely NOTHING to do with reproduction or survival of the species. It is one person using sex to show force and aggression on another person. I highly doubt that a woman who has been raped would find any comfort to know that 'ducks do it too'.

Its concerned with actual accuracy. And I guess we should throw the OP in jail for attempting to describe what they see? Cause I'm surre everyone knows the terms "forced copulation". Scientists don't EVER attach moral associations to words..which is what you are doing. Just because your political beliefs tell you that there can't be involuntary mating in the animal kingdom doesn't mean it doesn't occur. Can I ask you something? Homosexual behavior occurs in nature...even though some people don't think it occurs. Should scientists call this behavior "reproductively harmful" behavior?
As for someone's claim that behavior in the animal kingdom never gets labelled with human type names..WRONG! There is behavior that is labelled as cheating, stealing, sabotage, etc...in fact there is quite a bit in sociobiology that parallels human behavior.
Oh and your argument about consent? There are humans that are in capable of giving consent. Unconcious/vegetative/ people of low intelligence (and of course under age is considered incapable of making sound judgement here). Are you going to claim they can't be raped?
You need to separate out your emotional reaction to the act of rape from the non-judgemental use of "rape like" behavior term by scientists. AND I want you to think about why its "bad" for scientists to label something descriptively in one case "rape" but wouldn't be acceptable to label homosexual behavior as "damaging reproductively".
Political correctness does alot of harm in science I have found.
BTW, you may not like it..but some biologists do argue that even in humans rape is a evolutionary strategy (google Thornhill and Thornhill "The evolution of rape"). I personally don't agree with this theory but its a scientifically valid question to ask.
Science is not about what is politically expedient to talk about.

I have a degree in biology - environmental sciences. And guess what - I raised the same challenged when it was called rape. It is a violent, hateful act that can traumatize a woman for a long time. An emotional baggage she is forced to carry due to someone's hurtful actions. Something i highly doubt that a duck can feel.

As for humans that are incapable of giving consent - saying "NO" to sex is not simply a word that is spoken - it's actions that are done - pushing a person away, turning your head away from the person, tightening up of the body. Perhaps the person cannot say "no" but there are many other ways of implying it. In the book "The World According to Garp", An attacker cut off the tongue of Ellen James because he thought she couldn't testify if she couldn't speak. However, without a tongue she was still able to find many other ways to testify.

Homosexuality is nothing more than a descriptive term of 2 members of the same sex who copulate. Sure, in human terms there is much more depth to the description but in the animal kingdoms there are a wide variety of animals that have sexual relations in a variety of forms.

Rape is a violent term and although I have never been raped, you do not need to experience to understand the violent hateful nature of it. Scientists can say all they want but seriously - would you walk up to a woman who was rape and say "Cheer up - ducks get raped too"

I would think as a woman first you might understand it. The poster I replied to had a perfect summary of it - with animals it is not rape, it is forced copulation. Ducks do not have the range of emotions that a human experiences.

in this topic. I see how offense can be taken by the choice of words and I did some Googling. I thought to myself, surely the scientific community knows the vast difference between a sexual reproductive habit of a waterfowl and the violent controlling behavior of humans, right? And surely, they'd see how an emotionally charged word like "rape" can stir emotions.

As I said, this thread is clearly not the first time ever in history that a person has taken issue with this terminology:

http://membracid.wordpress.com/2007/05/01/its-not-rape-damn-it/">It's not rape, dammit!

http://www.cedarcreek.umn.edu/biblio/fulltext/t1261.pdf">Often this behavior has been called "rape" in the bird literature, but we feel that it is best to avoid this controversial term

Rape and "forced copualtion" are very different.

Which for all I can come up with is an infant or someone who is brain dead, like Teri Schiavo was.

Even then, either of these groups have some form of adult that is either a parent, legal guardian or caretaker and THEY are the voice for consent. Would it be ok to rape an infant or someone braindead simply because they are unable to say or do anything that implies "NO". I highly doubt it because the legal guardian (whichever they are of those 3 terms) would be that voice. If they were there they would say "NO" and if not they would go thru the process to prosecute the one committing the rape. Even in the case of incest, there is still a governing body out there that will represent the one that cannot say "no" simply because he/she is incapable of doing so.

It is a hateful term. I wouldn't be suprised if the scientist that coined this term of 'rape' within species like duck is probably a man. I realize that men can be raped but normally it's the women that suffer the most from this abuse.

1. It presupposes a separation between animals and humans which does not exist. Humans are animals and humans give consent, therefore at least some animals give consent.

2. We have observed and documented what consent behavior looks like in any number of species. For example, when a female nurse shark consents to mating she cups her pelvic fins and permits the male to bite her caudal fins and pull her into shallow water in order to more effectively penetrate her.

If she doesn't want to mate, she flies away.

It's a pretty basic yes/no issue for them.

than it is rape.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x7609757

At the creek I walk beside sometimes, the male ducks push the females under water over and over again. Female ducks must be relieved when mating season is over, if they live that long.

;)

:yoiks: