No sooner had gay rights campaigners finished celebrating after the Commons vote victory on gay marriage than another fight for equality reared its head.
Apparently, some television programmes haven’t been representing homosexuality properly.
No, not EastEnders, Coronation Street or even CBeebies.
It seems the blame for this one lays with the legendary Sir David Attenborough and his highly-regarded nature documentaries.
You’ve really got to be joking!
One of the only things worth watching on the BBC and you get this nonsense.
In all honesty, who cares?
Can’t we just enjoy some of the world’s amazing sights of nature without someone having to release some kind of statement to the media?
I’m sure some people only do it for their 15 minutes of fame.
The argument goes that because we’re not told about gay animals in nature programmes, we’ll all assume that it can’t be possible.
Dr Brett Mills, of the University of East Anglia, is the man who started the whole debate after analysing the way in which animals are described in TV voiceovers.
As part of his thesis he cited a scene in the documentary The Life of Mammals, where two chimps embraced.
The narration described the scene as an act of friendly affection, but Dr Mills says that the audience should be given ‘alternatives’, i.e the chimps could be gay.
Other programmes studied included The Life of Birds and Life in the Freezer.
He reckons nature shows perpetuate the notion that animal relationships are predominantly heterosexual.
Dr Mills said: ‘The central role in documentary stories of pairing, mating and raising offspring commonly rests on assumptions of heterosexuality within the animal kingdom.’
What garbage! People don’t need to be given ‘alternatives’ when watching wildlife programmes.
I have absolutely no problem with equal rights, but for the life of me I can’t see what this whole debate has got to do with animals on TV. Can you?