The ducks will get you in the end
October 4th, 2012 at 10:00 am by David Farrar
This letter to the editor warns that if same sex marriage leads to an increase in homosexuality, then ducks could take over the world as they always nest in pairs. Jasmin doesn’t want humans to compete with ducks and warns us that the ducks may get us in the end.
Sadly for Jasmin, I think her homeschooled education may have overly romanticsed the duck. I’d heard somewhere that duck sex often involves rape, but didn’t realise quite how bad ducks are in the sex stakes. I relayed my findings over Twitter last night to both amusement and horror.
Around one third of duck sex is duck rape. And we’re often talking gang rape of ducks when a group of drakes will basically subdue a female duck. Wikipedia says:
When they pair off with mating partners, often one or several drakes end up “left out”. This group sometimes targets an isolated female duck, even one of a different species, and proceeds to chase and peck at her until she weakens, at which point the males take turns copulating with the female.
One site makes the point:
They’ll hump any species, any gender, anytime.
Even worse for Jasmine who implied ducks may evolve further as they don’t do same sex stuff, well one Dutch researcher saw a drake ravage another male’s lifeless duck-corpse for seventy-five minutes.
Male Mallards also occasionally chase other male ducks of a different species, and even each other, in the same way. In one documented case of “homosexual necrophilia”, a male Mallard copulated with another male he was chasing after the chased male died upon flying into a glass window.
Sure he may not have married the dead drake at the end of it, but …
Basically ducks are nasty little creatures. I feel rather guilty for all the times I have fed them.
Interesting rep Todd Akin may have been right about females not getting pregnant if they are raped – if he was talking about ducks.
Some vaginas had spiral channels that would impede sex by twisting in the opposite direction to that of the male phallus. Others had as many as eight cul-de-sac pouches en route, that could prevent fertilisation by capturing unwelcome sperm. Moreover, these features were only found in species renowned for forced sex. All other species had simple male and female genitalia.
“These structures are wonderfully devious, sending sperm down the wrong road or impeding penetration,” says Birkhead.
He says that the features demonstrate an evolutionary “arms race” in which control over reproduction alternates between the sexes. If the male develops a longer, more elaborate phallus to force copulation, females wrest back control by developing features to thwart males who rape.
I will agree with Jasmine that we don’t want to live in a planet ruled by our duck overlords.
Incidentally the duck penis is rather large. In some ducks it can stretch to 40 cm or so, which if they were a human would be a 3.5 metre penis.
Many dolphins are also rapists, and like mallards do either gender.
Tags: ducks, homosexuality, same sex marriage
October 4th, 2012 at 10:09 am
David, mate. This is an intervention. You need to get help, soon. We all love you, and will be here for you.Promise me you will think about it. And seek professional help.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:11 am
Home schooled religious nut job programmed to believe in sky pixies. The parents should be charged with abuse!!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:18 am
And of course, Griff doesn’t teach his children ANYTHING that ANYBODY else might not believe or agree with.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:20 am
Come on David. You must have played Runequest. You would know how tough the ducks were.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:27 am
Good on Jasmin for writing something attention getting!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:28 am
David,
She is 14 her prejudices will change as she grows up.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:30 am
Yet another pro-gay marriage piece that mocks the handful of nut-bars (or is this case a child), rather than answers the real criticisms of gay-marriage. This is not debate, it’s tantamount to propaganda. Nice conflation of the Todd Akin saga.
The gay marriage lobby may yet win this battle, but it will NOT be for intellectual reasons.
[DPF: You are being precious and defensive. I did plenty of posts on the issues around same sex marriage, before first reading. but if someone makes a nutty argument, I'm going to mock them for it. It is not an either or choice]
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:38 am
Thanks to decades of turgid social engineering, many people believe that homosexuality is a natural alternative lifestyle, or they’ve been cowed into silence by the fear mongering and name calling of those, who behind a banner of “tolerance” and “diversity” simply seek to silence the truth and abolish moral judgement in any form.
The reality of the typical male homosexual lifestyle – a reality so sordid, shocking and morally repulsive you will never see the truth exposed in everyday media – in fact they avoid these images like the plague. (Places like the Basement Club where the floors need to be routinely scrubbed to remove globs congealed seminal fluid, for example) I doubt 18th century sensualist marquis de Sade could barely countenance the sheer degradation and perversion that occur in places like this virtually around the clock.
If middle NZ ever got a glimpse of what goes on in the heartland of the homosexual movement then their campaign of deception would be finished – if middle NZ ever wake up to the reality of what it is all about – what homosexuals actually do to each other then their sacred cause of sodomy would be forever lost. But in a sense, that is precisely what needs to happen.
The documentary “The Trouble With Gay Men” shown of BBC3, produced and hosted by Simon Fanshawe (a homosexual himself) exposes the sordid truth of the contemporary gay lifestyle.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/apr/21/gayrights.comment
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:44 am
~Oh yeah. Ducks really should be more civilized.~
They’re ducks for fuck’s sake.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:48 am
David, for duck’s sake, what are you taking this morning?
Whatever it is, I want to avoid it.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:48 am
I, for one, welcome our new duck overlords.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:49 am
5th of June is dead duck day, and commorates the posthumous rape of a dead Drake Mallard by a live one.
http://greenvoices.wordpress.com/tag/dead-duck-day/
Keep your backs to the wall, conservatives… buttsex will surely be made compulsory if this is allowed to go through!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:49 am
Gay marriage and the f undies come out with their homophobic justifications all based on the writings of pre science goat herders
Vote:There is no sound reason to ban gays from marriage just religious nuttery
Graham I teach kids to question and how to discriminate between belief and fact. Not to blindly believe in superstitious nonsense. With the modern information world you must look at the reasons behind peoples views as well as the information they give to discriminate between propaganda and reality
October 4th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Who could resist – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhwXVDi496E
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 10:52 am
Sex, Lies and Ducktapes
Vote:How do the genitalia, male and female, shape variations not hinder desired copulation?
It would appear any duck alive – ‘normal’ or anthropomorphically accused ‘rapists’ – is a lucky duck.
Kind of swims or flies in the face of evolutionary ‘survival of the fleetest’ and Occam’s thingie
October 4th, 2012 at 10:55 am
The dead give away is in the focus on butt sex by the nut bars. Probably from their experiences as young boys with the local catholic kiddy fid priest
Vote:Guess what homophobic fundies woman can be gay as well
October 4th, 2012 at 10:58 am
Thanks for the covert propoganda David.
reminds me I haven’t had Duck in a while.
I love it with orange sauce and duck confit in a Cassolet is great.
Urban redneck I hear you, glad you didn’t mention the glory holes!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:02 am
Griff (3,010) Says:
October 4th, 2012 at 10:49 am
Some would say you should be charged with child abuse.
Studies have shown that the best environment for a child to be reared in is in a marriage with their mum and dad who love them and each other, as you well know.
The reality is people fail, not marriage.
More importantly it would seem that you would deny the right of the child to have a mummy and a daddy?
Vote:Surely pure hatred mate, to put the needs of adults before children????
October 4th, 2012 at 11:09 am
Griff at 10:49 am –
Good on you, I teach my daughter to question everything as well. But that’s slightly different to the original implications you made. Have you NEVER imparted any of your own prejudices to your children? Really?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:13 am
I fail to find the meaning behind your post 2cents
Vote:Sane Mummys and daddys is best without doubt. What has that to do with gay marriage or teaching kids the weird views of this 14year old child ?
two sane daddys or two sane mummy’s is still better than weirdo parents that abuse their children by filling their heads with the pathetic dribble that this little girl has been indoctrinated into. FFS evolution is not a belief its as close as a fact as you can get without actually going back in time to watch every second of the assent of life
October 4th, 2012 at 11:13 am
So you highlighted that a homeschooled minor said silly things. Hardy har har. Well done.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:13 am
So Griff your kids don’t catagorise humanists and secular liberalism under religions do they?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:16 am
I’m wondering if this is a real person/letter, or if it’s some liberal taking the piss.
It is interesting that any society that has embraced same-sex marriage has long ago died off though.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:25 am
I seem to recall Andrei mentioning that his daughter was home-schooled.
Heh, DPF tells us that the Mallards do either gender!! And all I did was point point out that one of Mallards options was to fuck off.
pout, sulk …
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:31 am
Many dolphins are also rapists, and like mallards do either gender.
Hey Trevor!….DPF says……
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:31 am
@ DPF
Defensive? Perhaps. I am opposed to redefining marriage.
Precious?
I don’t think so.
I’m not saying all your posts poke fun. I’m saying that your posts don’t seem to acknowledge any real critiques of gay marriage – critiques most thinking people would be interested in. Especially given we are evaluating the socially revolutionising idea of a man marrying another man. You’ve got 25 articles tagged with gay marriage, none of which looks at the criticisms. Your posts are a mix of “look at the crazies”, “look at Colin Craig, isn’t he crazy” “look at all these right-wingers that support SSM, aren’t we so modern (please still invite use to your parties)”, and then some analytical pieces on polls. But not any real critiques.
Now, you’re not obliged to do this. But if you’re not prepared to post even one critique of a policy that is socially revolutionising, that changes millennia of human social behaviour, you really start to lose credibility as a genuine promoter of debate on the big issues.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:34 am
This is why the eugenicist UN promotes homosexuality to help depopulate the world. The catholic church could feed the world and rebuild third nations by itself and could have done decades ago.
I have just found out that an Australian report found that gay relationships last on average two years because on infidelity and the UN wants to give these failed relationships adoption rights. A direct attack on the family.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:36 am
Fuck-a-duck!!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:39 am
DPF The allegation of duck rape is unfounded. You are trying, illogically, to apply human beliefs and values to ducks. Now what may be unacceptable human behaviour might be socially acceptable to ducks but we will never know.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:49 am
I suspect this letter is a hoax written by somebody who would like to see traditional marriage redefined.
Any proof of it’s authenticity?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:55 am
As Red says. We’re not even told what newspaper it’s in so we can check the authenticity.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:11 pm
Regarding male on male duck sex the answer may lie in the famous answer to the question “How tight is a ducks arse?” It was either Frank Muir or Dennis Norton who responded “They must be watertight or the buggers would sink”
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:13 pm
Actually I don’t have kids as any one who reads KB would know
Vote:Humanism and liberal ideas can be deduced with out “GOD exists therefore” of superstition so no they are not a religious stand point and come under the heading philosophy of life not mumbo jumbo from books written by ignorant pre science goat herders.
That you f undies try to define humanist philosophy as religion is a reflection of your inability to discern reality from superstition. My views are open to new information religious texts worshipper dont have that option with out mental contortions leading to cognitive dissonance.
October 4th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Gay marriage and the f undies come out with their homophobic justifications all based on the writings of pre science goat herders
—
Graham I teach kids to question and how to discriminate between belief and fact. Not to blindly believe in superstitious nonsense.
Irony.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
Scurbboners
Vote:How many times in the gay marriage debate have we had crap from f undies that links to the behaviour of homosexual men?
every time the subject comes up we get gay men do….. there are gay woman as well!
October 4th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
“Homeschooled” that says it all.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
She at least appears to accept evolution, which makes her intellectually more advanced than John Banks or Colin Craig with their “Omnipotent man in the sky with magic” ideas.
I wonder if she’s considered standing in epsom?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
“As Red says. We’re not even told what newspaper it’s in so we can check the authenticity.”
It should be pretty easy to deduce given all the other letters appear to be from North Canterbury on local issues. Not many to choose from.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:28 pm
She at least appears to accept evolution, which makes her intellectually more advanced…
Irony.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:28 pm
Indeed, who could resist – ducks dick.
(Careful, zoological and very NSFW or sensitive souls)
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:30 pm
Oh I’m sorry Griff – I don’t actually make a habit of stalking everybody here on Kiwiblog, because I have, y’know, a LIFE – so I didn’t realise that you don’t have kids. My bad.
“religious texts worshipper”? WTF? I don’t know anybody personally who worships the Bible, the Koran, or any other religious texts for that matter. My Christian friends follow, well, Christ. It appears that you do know such people personally. Interesting.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Fuck me; I was reading this post and saw the comment about Nth Canty letters and looked at the local free rag and there it was.
Published in the Northern Outlook, October 3 p.5
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
The most troubling part is that the poor lad has been taught that Evolution is true. Simple child abuse!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:49 pm
So does this Jasmine exist and did she mean what she said?
Or is it just another deceit like the Peter Burns comment on Whale’s blog.
IOW is it just another cowardly progressive intent on discrediting Christians and homeschooling?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
My views are open to new information religious texts worshipper dont have that option with out mental contortions leading to cognitive dissonance.
Go read a book on George Muller and then you can tell me about evidence. Until you do, I’ll talk about cognitive dissonance.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
Her views are less extreme than TrueblueNZ or NZ Conservative. If they’re genuine, then I see no reason to assume Jasmin is not..?
Homeschooling – for those who wish to keep their children away from dirty homosexuals at any cost?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
This actually sounds like satire to me, written by a very smart 14 year old if so.
Yeesh David, what is your obsession with the homosexual agenda?
In NZ homosexuals have full legal rights. Lets leave it there, because two dudes shacking up ain’t a marriage and never will be, ever.
Homosexuals are people too, talented, yada yada yada, but there is no need to smash the agenda into everyone’s faces, you know?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 2:44 pm
Once the Ducks have been lined up,in a row,we then shoot them regardless of aberrant behaviour.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
DPF,
I vote for this as your post of the year.
Regards
Swan
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
a fairly obvious spoof letter, and cleverer is a word, in case anyone was wondering.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
“Incidentally the duck penis is rather large.” Still can’t see, “he’s hung like a duck” catching on.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
As soon as I read the letter in the image, I guessed it would be a pretext to make a dig about homeschooling.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 4:50 pm
St Hubbins
Why on earth would you necessarily make that connection? What have homeschooling, sects, brainwashing & waterfowl got in common?
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 5:12 pm
This actually sounds like satire to me, written by a very smart 14 year old if so.
She seems to be making fun of people who support same-sex marriage. But it seems no one “gets” here sense of humour here.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
How many times have the f undies posted homosexuality as men and anal get you filthy consevonutter minds of butt sex woman can be homos and they dont do butt sex any more than hetros
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 5:48 pm
Griff
It’s an absolute fixation with the more loopy of the God Squad. There’s a hard core of them who couldn’t write down a recipe for a sponge cake without making some reference to sodomy.
Probably repressed desire.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 9:36 pm
Gee, the fundies seem to have carried out quite a bit of ‘research’ on gay life style including glory holes, globbing seminal fluid on the floors of gay bars and debauch sexual lifestyles. Thank god for the internet eh.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
Gee, the fundies seem to have carried out quite a bit of ‘research’ on gay life style including glory holes, globbing seminal fluid on the floors of gay bars and debauch sexual lifestyles. Thank god for the internet eh.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 9:40 pm
God I wish I could do it twice in a row still!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
@UpandComer 1:46 pm
No, they fucking don’t. They can’t marry and they can’t adopt as a couple. So the law still discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation.
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 9:56 pm
“No, they fucking don’t.”
That’s good toadie, that’s very good!
Vote:October 4th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
Serious evidence of homosexual rape amongst animals:
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 9:12 am
This reminds me of the Alan Moore song “Sinister Ducks.” Ho hum. The Homespanking Lobby still seems as raving right as ever- although they used to be the educational arm of the Christian Heritage Party when it was still in existence. Well done, though, David.
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 9:31 am
toad (3,436) at 9:50 pm:
But toad, when the Civil Union Bill was introduced in 2004, the over-whelming consensus from MPs at the time was that Civil Unions were a perfectly acceptable alternative to marriage. So far as I am aware, a couple who undertake a civil union have the same legal rights as a couple who marry (other than being able to adopt).
So what’s the problem with not being able to marry?
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 9:41 am
Part of your answer is hidden in your own question – in the parentheses…
(The other part of the problem is the very existence of a double standard in the laws of our land – all citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others.)
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 9:51 am
OK, I understand about not being able to adopt. But apart from that one issue, again I ask – what’s the problem with not being able to marry?
If people in a civil union were able to adopt, would you then be happy? Or would you still be seeking that they be allowed to marry? If so, why?
And come on, there are loads of double standards in the laws of our land, and you know it – there is discrimination on race, age, and sex woven throughout our laws.
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 10:03 am
No, Yes, and because the problem is the very existence of a double standard in the laws of our land – all citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others.
Correct – so we should try to fix the things that are wrong.
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 10:11 am
I’m sorry, RRM. You can say “because its a double standard” but that still doesn’t explain WHAT ACTUAL PROBLEM is caused to same-sex couples by the fact that they can’t marry?
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 10:19 am
A double standard is a problem.
Any other couple would be issued a marriage license, but you’re not allowed one – just because.
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 10:25 am
But if the issue is real physical impediments – then can you tell me WHAT ACTUAL PROBLEM would be caused to heterosexual married couples if gay couples were allowed to get married?
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 10:56 am
Hmmm, sorry, I’m still not convince by your “just because it’s a double standard”.
To answer your second question:
My answer is, none that I can think of. My position on this issue is probably a bit different to that of some other commentators on Kiwiblog. I tend to look at homosexual marriage in much the same way as I look at people who sleep together before they are married. I PERSONALLY consider it wrong – by which I mean, it is wrong when measured against my own personal morals and ethics. I also believe that such issues do tend to lead to the degradation of society in small, subtle ways (I am of the opinion, for example, that the proliferation of people sleeping together and living together before marriage is one reason why divorce and separation is so common in this country – and only a fool would argue that ever-increasing rates of divorce and separation are not harmful to our society. Likewise, I believe that opening the door to homosexual marriage will lead inevitably towards the question of same-sex couples adopting – and THAT is something I am firmly opposed to. Not because it will harm my own comfy little marriage or my own comfy little family, but because I believe it will harm the most vulnerable people involved – the children who are adopted).
However, I recognise that many other people will not feel the same.
If I’m asked my opinion about homosexual marriage, or about people sleeping together before they are married, then I’ll give it – I believe it to be wrong, as I explained above. So, if asked to register my opinion through means of a vote, I would vote against such things. Would I go out and actively campaign against them, however? No, I wouldn’t. I will be sad if homosexual marriage is legalised, just as I am sad that people choose to sleep together and live together before marriage, because of my own personal moral and ethical beliefs – but I won’t actively campaign against such things.
I’m sorry, though, same-sex couples being allowed to adopt IS something I feel considerably more strongly about.
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 12:57 pm
> the poor lad has been taught that Evolution is true
The writer is a girl and she says she doesn’t believe in evolution.
Vote:October 5th, 2012 at 1:34 pm
Yes, same here. If anything had happened to my partner, despite the fact that I had lived with him for the last five years and helped to bring up his daughter, I would have been unable to adopt her automatically, given the existence of adoption discrimination. Canada and the United Kingdom have gotten there before us, as have Tasmania, Western Australia, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory; added to which, surrogacy, IVF, fostering and guardianship are already open to LGBT couples.
Vote:October 6th, 2012 at 12:24 am
Griff, people who claim to be rational careful thinkers and yet at the same time engage in such poor reasoning that they can only insult people show they can even recognise the contradiction in there own writings.
I was brought up an agnostic educated a liberal, I rejected this in my late teens. Through university I probably had by religious beliefs questioned attacked and subjected to skepticism more than any secular liberal I have ever met has.
I am willing to bet I have read far more of the leading thinkers critical of my beliefs than you ever have of yours.
Vote:October 6th, 2012 at 1:22 am
MF, it doesnt matter how often you have had your beliefs questioned, for some reason you keep coming back to a belief in something for which there is no evidence. So it cant be because of rational thought, leaving it open to anyone else to presume the real reason. Perhaps you like the idea of god, it makes you feel good. Maybe you dont like not having an “answer to all questions”. Maybe you like the feeling of superiority you get from the knowledge that your god made you more moral than others, a better person.
No matter how much you WANT something to be true, it doesnt make it true.
And when you use the word secular in that way, all you do is prove you dont understand what it means. Its as if you think atheists have to provide evidence for their non-belief.
Vote:October 6th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
I seem to recall a raving right US conspiracy theorist called Desmond Duck. I wonder if this young woman’s fowl canards (:)) against marriage equality are related to him?
Vote: