[HN Gopher] Macaques at Japan reserve get first alpha female in ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Macaques at Japan reserve get first alpha female in 70-year history
        
       Author : NotSwift
       Score  : 131 points
       Date   : 2021-08-03 10:33 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | lkrubner wrote:
       | We should expect to see this throughout the world, as the climate
       | crisis intensifies. We should expect to see this especially in
       | intelligent or social species. Game theory predicts that, from
       | the point of view of parents, when the population is expanding it
       | is better to have sons and when the population is shrinking it is
       | better to have daughters. A son might have a lot of children when
       | times are good and zero children when times are bad. A daughter
       | is likely to always have some children, and therefore is a safer
       | bet when things are bad. This shifts the incentives for parents.
       | When population is falling, parents have an incentive to care
       | less about their sons, and to invest more resources in their
       | daughters.
       | 
       | That much is known.
       | 
       | We can also speculate that if daughters are now receiving more
       | investment as children, they are better positioned to go higher
       | in society as they become adults. A general shift in political
       | power, throughout social species, should be expected, as the
       | climate crisis threatens more and more species with extinction.
       | 
       | This might extent to even those species in zoos, as their
       | population usually is not allowed to expand.
        
         | astrojams wrote:
         | Wow this is fascinating. I'd love to read more about this, do
         | you have any links to articles discussing this behavior?
        
         | Blikkentrekker wrote:
         | This like most evolutionary psychology seems like one of those
         | "anything goes" explanations that simply seems like a plausible
         | explanation, but can just as easily be offered to explain
         | falsehoods.
         | 
         | The problem with it is that one can invent a scenario that
         | never happened and asked for an explanation and similar such
         | plausible explanations can be proffered for it, but there's
         | really no way to actually verify and test them.
         | 
         | It can just as easily be explained with " _It is a simple fluke
         | that will repeat itself in another 70 years._ ".
        
         | whatshisface wrote:
         | That makes no sense to me because for every child a daughter
         | has, someone's son had a child. It has to balance out unless
         | someone invents monkey mitosis.
        
           | sizzle wrote:
           | In nature, males can impregnate many females and do not have
           | to necessarily be around to rear their many offspring. So it
           | is advantageous to have many females that can procreate with
           | less males to increase the population size at a higher rate
           | than more males and less females to mate with.
        
           | IanClarke wrote:
           | _A few_ man have _a lot of_ offspring, which is how it makes
           | sense again.
        
           | rainbowzootsuit wrote:
           | Indications from genetic research are that humans may have
           | about twice as many female ancestors as male according to
           | some theory about discrepancy in the "time to most recent
           | common ancestor" for mitochondrial DNA (extrapolating for
           | female ancestors) and the nonrecombining portion of the Y
           | chromosome (extrapolating for male ancestors).
           | 
           | I think the presence discrepancy is reasonably well accepted.
           | 
           | https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/21/11/2047/1147770
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | sandworm101 wrote:
           | >> It has to balance out
           | 
           | It doesn't. In a species with 50/50 split between male and
           | female, the number of males is almost irrelevant to
           | population growth. Take rabbits. If you kill at birth 90% of
           | the males, the population growth won't slow as the limit is
           | the number of babies per-female. The 10% of males that
           | survive simply father more kids via more females. Males can
           | do that. Females cannot. Going one step further, killing all
           | those males increases the resources available to the females.
           | Ironically, culling those males can cause a population to
           | grow faster than if they lived.
        
             | thaumasiotes wrote:
             | > In a species with 50/50 split between male and female,
             | the number of males is almost irrelevant to population
             | growth.
             | 
             | The split between male and female isn't relevant to this.
             | Unless the males are needed to raise the children, the
             | number of males is irrelevant to population growth.
             | 
             | But the average benefit of having a son remains equal to
             | the average benefit of having a daughter; that's _why_ the
             | ratio stays at 50 /50.
        
         | IanClarke wrote:
         | The guys weren't cutting it any more. They were not delivering
         | on the expectations of the group (growing it). Life became too
         | harsh and stressful for them, they are not even mating any
         | more, since the offspring couldn't be fed, so they stop
         | breading with the females. Still: Everyone is disappointed and
         | the males know it, too... affecting their behavior which gets
         | less dominant/aggressive. The females are now in focus, since
         | they procreated more reliably (on average, the old alpha, that
         | had a lot of offspring, is likely dead by now). The shift to a
         | female leader means the population is in trouble and in
         | decline. A crisis manager(female) gets installed.
         | 
         | Note that typically older males mate with (much) younger
         | females: It's no coincidence, that she is that much younger
         | than her male counter parts: She is angry about her mating
         | partners that they have stopped mating (with her). Older
         | females have offspring. The old alpha male, which is dead, has
         | a lot of offspring. The external life conditions just became
         | too harsh, this is not a happy setup. There are 2 strategies,
         | but one is to react on external circumstances (stop
         | procreating), instead of blindly going ahead and having to stem
         | the bill later (starving babies). Apes are intelligent enough
         | for the first, but there are furious women now (including
         | "her").
        
       | tjpnz wrote:
       | I've been there a few times but always referred to it as "Monkey
       | Mountain", never knew it was called Takasakiyama. If you're in
       | Beppu it's well worth a visit.
       | 
       | https://www.japan-guide.com/e/e4703.html
       | 
       | Bear in mind that these are wild animals and that there are days
       | where the park's closed due to no monkeys.
        
         | thaumasiotes wrote:
         | Well, you had to figure it was named _something_ in Japanese,
         | right?
         | 
         | Gao Qi Shan  appears to mean "tall, mountainous mountain".
         | Monkeys aren't mentioned, though the name of the monkey
         | preserve, Gao Qi Shan Zi Ran Dong Wu Yuan  "Mount Takasaki
         | Nature Zoo", does mention animals.
        
       | greyfox wrote:
       | i wonder what implications this has on mating? will she find a
       | mate? Presumably the male would need to dominate her in order to
       | procreate, that does not appear to be the case, currently.
       | 
       | Will she attempt to assume the male role in the mating process?
       | 
       | Lots of questions here around this issue.
        
         | ipspam wrote:
         | Yes. Many. I think the conservators need to leave a strap on
         | with the food, just in case.
        
         | TheAdamAndChe wrote:
         | It would also be interesting to see if the mating strategies
         | and behaviors of the males change too.
         | 
         | Let's hope they are thoroughly monitored and studied.
        
       | Slow_Hand wrote:
       | Hasn't the concept of alphas been discredited/debunked by the
       | originator of the concept? Or is that strictly for wolves?
        
         | Tiktaalik wrote:
         | Maybe "alpha" wolves have been debunked, but there are lots of
         | research that points to matriarchal animal clan organization in
         | other species.
         | 
         | Resident Orcas would be a notable example.
        
         | IanClarke wrote:
         | The originator of the (generic) concept "alpha" (please let us
         | know who this is / who you think this is) has discontinued the
         | term "alpha" (quite an alpha-decision from him, I would say)
         | due to new insights discovered when observing wolves. Alpha
         | does not exist for wolves (presumably)... and in general. To
         | extend just further (why not) the concept gets fully
         | discontinued, due to public pressure, because everything is
         | equal anyway.
        
           | Slow_Hand wrote:
           | You had me until your last sentence. What do you mean that
           | the term is being discontinued due to public pressure? Isn't
           | it natural for concepts to go away if they're found to be
           | inaccurate (ex: phlogiston)? I also don't understand
           | "everything is equal anyway". Could you elaborate?
           | 
           | Since you mention the term in relationship to the public, I
           | actually think that "alpha" as a term to describe someone who
           | is dominant has been doing just fine as a societal meme,
           | despite it being used less among biologists/whomever. In this
           | sense it doesn't seem to be going away at all.
        
         | IntrepidWorm wrote:
         | The concept of alpha, beta, etc in wolves was observed in
         | captivity, and then incorrectly extrapolated to describe wild
         | populations. Now science is finding that if you put a social
         | species in a captive environment with unfamiliar stressors and
         | dissolve the existing natural social groups that would have
         | existed freely, unnatural social hierarchies develop to fill
         | the gap.
        
       | prestigious wrote:
       | That's funny, I keep hearing from largely feminists that "alpha's
       | don't exist in nature, it's a myth"
        
         | fao_ wrote:
         | """In 1970, the book The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an
         | Endangered Species was published, written by David Mech. It was
         | a success. The book helped to popularize the alpha concept,
         | because many people referred to Mech's work.
         | 
         | Mech has written on his website that he repeatedly asked the
         | publisher to stop printing the book because much of the
         | information is outdated -- including the concept behind the
         | alpha wolf. Nevertheless, the book is still being sold."""
         | 
         | https://phys.org/news/2021-04-wolf-dont-alpha-males-females....
        
       | IanClarke wrote:
       | Let's be honest and address the implicitly given analogy to our
       | modern human world. What are the different motivations males and
       | females have in general and why did she end up in this alpha-
       | position, while still lacking a lot of the advantages a male
       | would have (mating _and procreating_ with a lot of females)? It
       | 's because "the other gender" _also_ carries all these
       | (particularly very desirable in one gender) traits in them. I
       | always think of men, which have very attractive daughters, like
       | Billy Ray Cyrus (Miley Cyrus) or Rob Schneider (Elle King), but
       | they themselves can 't profit that much from the interesting
       | looks (nose) and rather even look like a bum, themselves.
       | 
       | So "the other sex" _also_ inevitably carries around all these
       | (attractive) traits (kind of  "reciprocally"), typically: They
       | are there, but don't matter, really. They were inherited and can
       | be passed on, though.
       | 
       | And in this very rare case like this: A female became an alpha.
       | Her masculinity traits, which should rather only exist
       | reciprocally within her (as a female), were coming out so strong,
       | that she beat all the males. Though: No mass-mating (offspring)
       | for her, rather likely: No offspring at all.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | graderjs wrote:
       | This is awesome. To get the top job, she: beat up her own mother;
       | then took on the existing alpha 4x her age, and probably larger;
       | then in the next 'peanut session' he had to backdown and let her
       | eat first; and now she walks with an erect tail and goes and
       | shakes trees for fun--It expresses her power. How cool is that!
       | 
       | It just goes to show, it's never about gender, just about
       | choices, ambition and how brave you choose to be. Fuck yeah!
       | 
       | I wonder if the social dynamics will change under a (nominally?)
       | female leader?
        
         | yomly wrote:
         | I mean we had the Amazonians, Boudica, Cleopatra, Jean D'Arc,
         | Mulan, Wu Zetian...
         | 
         | It's not like if you have a large enough sample size you won't
         | discover alpha females in even the human world when it was
         | dominated by physical violence prior to the invention of the
         | gun.
        
         | billytetrud wrote:
         | It's interesting, but brutal. I wouldn't call this "awesome".
         | Beating up your mother isn't "brave". This is literally a
         | monkey dictatorship. That alpha is probably really shitty to be
         | around.
        
           | Fern_Blossom wrote:
           | Quick search, macaques's lifespans are roughly 20-30 years.
           | The old alpha was 31... so, in human terms (roughly), it's
           | like a 20-ish year old woman beats a man in his 60s-70s...
           | and she's "brave".
        
         | serverholic wrote:
         | We just going to ignore that this was the first one in 70
         | years?
         | 
         | > It just goes to show, it's never about gender, just about
         | choices, ambition and how brave you choose to be.
         | 
         | Then why is this newsworthy?
        
           | graderjs wrote:
           | Because, I suppose, people seem to have forgotten that.
        
             | serverholic wrote:
             | Forgotten what? If gender doesn't matter then why is this
             | newsworthy? And if people forgot something then why did
             | they forget it in the first place?
        
               | IanClarke wrote:
               | Gender doesn't matter, except when it matters. We just
               | seem to not be able to agree where and when it matters.
        
         | prvc wrote:
         | Undoubtedly, the writers at the Guardian were thinking the
         | same. However, one would do well to doubt whether the above
         | described behaviors would be good were they to be performed by
         | humans.
        
           | taeric wrote:
           | I'm struggling to see how physically fighting to get
           | dominance can possibly be portrayed as a good thing. :(
           | 
           | Noteworthy and circumstances make it a good story. But... It
           | seems to fly in the face of modern sensibilities.
        
         | thaumasiotes wrote:
         | > then took on the existing alpha 4x her age, and probably
         | larger;
         | 
         | Beating up someone four times your own age is only challenging
         | if you're a child.
        
         | lm28469 wrote:
         | > beat up her own mother
         | 
         | > just about choices and how brave you choose to be
         | 
         | Reminds me of Hollywood directors who think "alpha" women
         | characters have to be regular women with all the traits of
         | "toxic masculinity"
        
           | runawaybottle wrote:
           | Bill Burr always had a good joke about inclusivity in
           | politics, where the gist of it is - just because you have a
           | woman, or a minority as your leader, doesn't also mean that a
           | woman or minority won't be a corrupt piece of shit.
           | 
           | You'll just have diversity in corruption, nothing will truly
           | change, so don't just blindly support these current
           | ideologies.
        
             | tpush wrote:
             | Corruption and diversity are obviously orthogonal issues
             | which I think everyone recognizes, so I'm not sure what
             | point Bill Burr was trying to make. Women being just as
             | corrupt as men is kind of irrelevant for any diversity
             | policy; Burr's joke isn't illuminating much here.
        
               | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
               | He's attacking the "women-are-wonderful" bias which most
               | people aren't cognizant of. You see lowlifes like the
               | woman who assaulted the teenager last year over a phone
               | hide behind their gender and act like their bad behavior
               | is an impossibility.
        
               | tpush wrote:
               | I'm sure people with those biases exist, however Burr is
               | willfully conflating these people with any diversity
               | initiative or outreach; that's both unfounded and
               | ignorant, and seems like the kind of joke that you laugh
               | about until you think deeper on it for like 5 minutes.
        
               | lliamander wrote:
               | Several world leaders, including former President Barak
               | Obama, have said there would be less wars if women ruled
               | the world. I've seen diversity initiatives justified on
               | the basis that women would make better leaders because
               | they are more "empathetic".
               | 
               | Burr is right in targeting a belief with a high-degree of
               | traction, and that includes among people involved in DEI
               | initiatives.
        
               | runawaybottle wrote:
               | Just read the comment below yours. People actually
               | believe that there is something qualitatively different
               | about gender with respect to the job.
               | 
               | 'The world would be better if women ran it' or 'The world
               | would be better if men ran it', none of these beliefs use
               | objective criteria, yet it is one of the more dominant
               | themes in the current zeitgeist.
        
             | mikepurvis wrote:
             | Maybe, but be careful that this argument is circulated in
             | good faith and not just as a cover for getting another dude
             | over the line into the job. Especially if it's a job that
             | has _never_ been done by a woman, so you really don 't know
             | how they might do it better.
             | 
             | For example, it's been widely observed that on the whole,
             | countries with female leadership understood and managed
             | COVID better than the rest-- acting sooner, more
             | decisively, and in a way that both started and stayed
             | aligned to the evolving scientific understanding. A
             | sprinkling of articles across varying dates:
             | 
             | https://www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2020/04/13
             | /...
             | 
             | https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-31/women
             | -...
             | 
             | https://www.usnews.com/news/best-
             | countries/articles/2021-03-...
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | That's why I love Chrisjen Avasarala, in The Expanse! But
           | does her potty mouth count as "toxic masculinity"?
           | 
           | https://expanse.fandom.com/wiki/Chrisjen_Avasarala_(TV)
           | 
           | >A master politician and maneuverer, she achieved one of the
           | highest ranks in UN government without ever standing for
           | election. She manipulates those in the highest seats of power
           | through careful cultivation of relationships with their
           | spouses, friends, and staff nearest to them. [...]
           | 
           | >Avasarala's personality is often one of clashing traits. She
           | is erudite and elegant, always properly and beautifully
           | dressed, but is also notorious for her use of foul language
           | and profanity, and was described by Bobbie as cursing "like a
           | trucker". She has been shown to be cold and ruthless one
           | moment, as she tortures a prisoner for information or
           | manipulates her close friend DeGraaf into ruining his career
           | for her political gain, while she is warm and maternal the
           | next, playing with her grandson or giving Errinwright a
           | chance to redeem himself. She is shrewd and intelligent,
           | knows her way around people, and is also an astute and
           | remorseless deceiver, often lying to advance her goals, such
           | as when she pretended to know Captain Yvgeny to convince
           | Sorrento-Gillis to do what she wanted, or attributed fake
           | quotes to the deceased Admiral Souther and called him her
           | friend, while in truth they barely spoke to each other.
        
           | Blikkentrekker wrote:
           | What example are you thinking of?
        
           | graderjs wrote:
           | Totally! Agree that feminists and modern women aspiring to
           | adopt male traits rather than embracing innate female goddess
           | energy and power is stupid, especially when they, at the same
           | time, "stand against" how "toxic" men are.
           | 
           | But then again, some of those traits you pretend are toxic,
           | are actually just awesome, and work in the human world. So
           | why should "man" or "woman" polarity have dibs on that stuff?
           | That gendering of traits is the fucking stupid thing I think.
           | Anyone can choose to do anything. Don't trust people who
           | devalue choice, they're the ones that love to try to deflect
           | blame and responsibility onto anyone but themselves.
           | 
           | But yeah, the human world is pretty fucked up as a whole,
           | male and female, because we're all full of ape brain shit, of
           | which you're no better being human, too.
        
             | fooperdupes wrote:
             | True progress is the freedom for everyone to be an asshole.
        
               | graderjs wrote:
               | Tongue in cheek but totally true. If everyone has a voice
               | and feels like they can express it (everyone "carries a
               | gun" so to speak) yeah that is a pretty good
               | approximation of true progress.
        
               | hypertele-Xii wrote:
               | Assholes are so underappreciated they're used for
               | slander. It's an anatomical device that controls
               | defecation; Keeping poop at bay while you go about your
               | business.
               | 
               | Stop calling evil "asshole" and you might find your
               | pooping becomes a little easier, as that part of your
               | body is no longer equivocated with _malice._
        
               | vnchr wrote:
               | There's an advocate for everything these days.
        
               | Fern_Blossom wrote:
               | Wait... are you serious? Please tell me you're being
               | funny... oh God... that's where we're at nowadays... I
               | think this is a sincere statement...
        
               | hypertele-Xii wrote:
               | Yeah, sincerely. Language shapes thought. An asshole
               | shouldn't be a measure of malice. It's a very useful
               | organ with an important job. Just like you wouldn't call
               | a badly behaving individual "nigger", "gay", nor
               | "retard", you shouldn't call them "dick", "asshole", nor
               | "cunt" neither.
               | 
               | Just call it what it is. By its true name. Actually say
               | the thing you mean. Words exist. Deprecate outdated
               | idioms and try evolving.
        
             | ookdatnog wrote:
             | > Agree that feminists and modern women aspiring to adopt
             | male traits rather than embracing innate female goddess
             | energy and power is stupid
             | 
             | "Agree that"? What are you on about? The parent comment
             | can't remotely be interpreted to be saying this.
             | 
             | > ... especially when they, at the same time, "stand
             | against" how "toxic" men are.
             | 
             | The term "toxic masculinity" does not imply "masculinity =
             | toxic".
             | 
             | Rather, our culture associates certain (often positive)
             | traits with what it means to "be a (real) man", such as
             | strength, protectiveness, ambition, decisiveness,
             | confidence, courage etc.
             | 
             | "Toxic masculinity" is the cancerous behavior you get when
             | men overshoot in trying to display these qualities, such as
             | authoritarian behavior stemming from an obsession with
             | being perceived as strong; being incapable of letting
             | others shine due to seeing everything as a zero-sum
             | competition; being unreasonably stubborn and unwilling to
             | change their mind out of a desire to be perceived as
             | decisive and confident; pointless risk-seeking behavior
             | potentially putting others at risk etc.
        
               | tasogare wrote:
               | > The term "toxic masculinity" does not imply
               | "masculinity = toxic".
               | 
               | It totally does, this is why those two words are used in
               | that expression. The plan is to skew the meaning of
               | masculinity by making the colloquation widely used
               | enough, until it's automatically associated with toxicity
               | even when that word is not present.
        
               | Joeboy wrote:
               | > The term "toxic masculinity" does not imply
               | "masculinity = toxic".
               | 
               | It totally does though, whether that's the intention or
               | not. If I talk about "greedy Frenchmen", that
               | _technically_ just means, the (perhaps tiny) subset of
               | Frenchmen who are greedy, but in practice, through a
               | quirk of language, it also communicates an idea about
               | Frenchmen being greedy.
               | 
               | Hopefully, "greedy Frenchmen" is not an expression that
               | pushes anybody's buttons too much, but I think most
               | people will be able to think of comparable "[Adjective]
               | [Noun]" examples that illustrate the problem more
               | vividly.
        
         | turing_complete wrote:
         | I am really not sure if this comment is ironic or not. It reads
         | like it has to be, but today you never know.
        
           | doitLP wrote:
           | It is not. Look at poster's other comments.
        
           | taeric wrote:
           | With most of the responses, I am also not clear on this.
        
           | IanClarke wrote:
           | I read it as ironic.
           | 
           | If it is not then: Wow.
           | 
           | Ridiculous statement: "It just goes to show, it's never about
           | gender, just about choices, ambition and how brave you choose
           | to be."
           | 
           | Followed by: "Fuck yeah!"
           | 
           | --> Ironic in my world, but "the other side ("feminists")
           | seem to have adapted to also address / talk to
           | (deceive/decept) 'more conservative' people with their
           | speech. We try to include/reach each other.
        
       | AutumnCurtain wrote:
       | Interesting that she's "walking the walk" in terms of dominance
       | behaviors too. It would be fascinating to study whether she
       | underwent significant hormonal changes after taking leadership or
       | whether she had a different hormonal makeup compared to the
       | average female "follower" even prior to her takeover.
        
       | rory wrote:
       | This is all the more impressive because macaques generally
       | display strong sexual dimorphism in size (males are ~45% bigger
       | on average than females, vs. more like ~15% in humans). I wonder
       | how big Yakei is.
        
         | prvc wrote:
         | Well, the law of large numbers makes it understandable.
        
         | clairity wrote:
         | it's strength, both psychological and physical, that correlates
         | most closely with dominance, not size or gender/sex, though
         | those of course tend to correlate with physical strength. a
         | nice property of sexual reproduction (as opposed to asexual) is
         | that you get two chances at having generalized strength in
         | parents, as opposed to one, which correlates with greater
         | family fitness and offspring survival.
         | 
         | this is probably the biggest misconception in mainstream
         | discussions of gender/sex and power (and part of what makes
         | them so tiresome), which threads through everything from
         | affirmative action to sexual harassment to lgbt rights.
         | multidimensional strength fosters dominance, not just
         | gender/sex or simply size. the dominant (or submissive) gender
         | can be performed by either sex. this is foundational for
         | understanding power dynamics (whether sexual, political,
         | economic, social, religious, or anything else).
        
           | yann2 wrote:
           | Ok go read about Gandhi now.
        
         | elliekelly wrote:
         | I think the article said she's 10kg but it didn't say the size
         | of the former alpha male. I wish they had mentioned the size
         | difference for comparison, that's interesting!
        
           | gambiting wrote:
           | Well it does say that she roughed up the previous alpha male,
           | so presumably she's at least similar in size/strength.
        
             | tokai wrote:
             | She's also 22 years younger than him.
        
               | eadmund wrote:
               | You inspired me to the lifespan of Japanese macaques, and
               | it is 27 years; the previous alpha male was 31 years old,
               | which suggests to me that he must have been pretty over
               | the hill.
               | 
               | Given that she is smaller than the average male macaque,
               | I imagine that this is not a terribly stable situation.
        
               | ipspam wrote:
               | Interesting. What are the odds they can set up a
               | livestream so we can watch macaque fight club? I love a
               | good underdog.
        
               | erhk wrote:
               | I heard yakei was doping, and that she had metal studs
               | implanted in her knuckles
        
               | Blikkentrekker wrote:
               | A good point; it's entirely possible that this is only a
               | very temporary challenger, who will soon be challenged
               | again, and be defeated.
        
               | labster wrote:
               | There should be an anime adaptation of this story:
               | Sukeban Saru
        
           | rory wrote:
           | Oh wow I missed that, thanks for catching. Given these are
           | Japanese macaques, it looks like typical m/f size difference
           | is more like ~32%, not ~45%, and 10kg puts her larger than
           | the average female, but smaller than the average male. Would
           | be interested in the former alpha males size too, but it's
           | probably safe to assume he was bigger!
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_macaque
        
       | vfclists wrote:
       | Too much estrogen in the water the males are drinking. They have
       | become soy boys.
       | 
       | They have become afflicted with the ills of the Western world.
       | 
       | Serious
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | juanani wrote:
       | How dare they and this forum. How dare you all assume they
       | identify as a she. Tsk tsk, where have all the decent folk gone?
       | What a sexist article, shame it's even on the front page. Where
       | are all our precious ethics researchers and the twitter mob?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-05 23:02 UTC)