Are there any animals that mate for life?

[ladymuttly1.livejournal.com]

So I was reading a paranormal romance novel yesterday called "Slave to Sensation*" and the male hero is an Alpha Leopard who is the leader of his pack, has made a treaty with the wolves, protects the younger members, runs a construction business and is an all around okay guy. When I got to the point where I realized that Lucas was a leopard I found myself cursing. LEOPARDS don't run packs. They don't mate for life. They don't seem to have alphas. AAARGH. 

I blame Laurell. Before Laurell decided wereleopards were sexy and turned them into people with fur and with no discernible relationship to a real leopard I don't remember authors blatantly ignoring the characteristics of the animal. Now it seems that paranormal authors have decided that weres are people with fur. Am I wrong? Have I become hypersensitive thanks to the badness that is LKH?

Also-since most authors seem to be too lazy to find animals that do take just one mate I thought we could help them out. Swans are commonly thought to be monogamous. Are there any other animals out there?

Comments

[gwynethfar.livejournal.com]

Mourning doves. They remain monogamous until one of the pair dies, IIRC.

Also, some types of Penguins.

[maladaptive.livejournal.com]

Gibbons. Mandarin ducks. Several types of fish (some species of angelfish in particular). Geese. Swans actually are monogamous, too, though they have a fairly low 'divorce' rate (mute swans, anyway, which are the species I'm most familiar with). I just wanted to edit and be a pedant because I think swan breeding strategies are pretty cool, especially homosexual ones. /nerd

There's quite a few monogamous species out there-- they're just generally not charismatic megafauna so people don't write books about them.

[ladymuttly1.livejournal.com]

I just read an article that says that black swans cheat-a lot. One in six cygnets is the product of an illicit encounter.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Myth-of-Monogamous-Swans-25965.shtml

[orthent.livejournal.com]

...I think swan breeding strategies are pretty cool, especially homosexual ones. /nerd

IIRC, Konrad Lorenz described a male/male/female OT3 among his greylag geese...

[daphne-gateau.livejournal.com]

Beavers!! Zomg and it would be so cute. :D I would totally read a paranormal featuring beavers. Okay, I might be alone in that series but beavers are awesome. :D

[daphne-gateau.livejournal.com]

I had to double check on these guys before I posted. ;)

Also some otters. Otters people! So cute and funny. I want a were-otter. :) Beaver and otter society would be fairly comical and lack a lot of angst and bloodthrisy-ness. Maybe this is why they don't get the love?

[deadroman.livejournal.com]

Storks pick one mate for life. :) They always return to the same nesting site. There's a pair of storks just down the street from me and have been using the same nest (utop an old unused telephone pole) for years.

[oh-hay-britney.livejournal.com]

Uhmm...yeah, maybe I'm wrong, but aren't weres people with fur? Isn't that the whole idea? I always understood it as being that a werecreature is a sort of species unto itself, ie. lacking a lot of the characteristics of the animal they take the shape of.

They ARE usually people first and back when she gave a shit about worldbuilding, LKH often demonstrated that their social tendencies are heavily infulenced by both sides of their nature. I mean, even if the leopard tendency is to run solo, it would still make sense to the human to group with their own kind. It's in OUR nature to want to do so, even if it's not in a leopard's.

I don't think you can compare a were too closely with its wild counterpart. Whole different animal, if you'll pardon the pun.

[easol.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but you could still have stuff like a wereleopard being very insistent on having its own space, maybe a high apartment shared with no roomies. Being rather distant emotionally even if it feels the social need to be involved with others of its kind.

I mean, you cannot base a human social structure on an animal social structure (packs, alpha male, alpha female) if the animals HAVE no social structure, y'know? They could HAVE a social structure, but it would not be a pack.

[cicipsychobunny.livejournal.com]

but aren't weres people with fur? Isn't that the whole idea?

Not when Laurell has continually run plots like, "the wolves can't handle democracy because their inner wolves don't get it" and "the tigers act this way just like in the wild".

[ever-obsessed.livejournal.com]

As someone who loves the concept of different versions of were-animals (I am that nerd who owns those huge reference books about mythological aspects of shape-shifting and animal worship in ancient and modern culture, and that woman who will read any take on werewolves in fiction), I think my issue isn't that she comes up with such concepts, it's that SHE DOES IT SO VERY BADLY.

Wolves are a social creature, are defined and most well known for it. It's why I'm such a freaking nerd for them, and just for the idea of them. When I read a new take of werewolves, I want to see how they interact, how the human aspects and the animal aspects connect and seperate, how the heirarchy works and how the two alphas interact with each other and the rest of the groups. Leopards are solitary, as are most other big cats except for lions - and when I see anybody (fanfic or other) who uses such a concept, I want to see how they apply that solitary feeling not only to their animal selves but also in their daily human lives. LKH introduces these concepts wrong (leopards are solitary!) but then never even fleshes out the dynamics!

This, more than anything else, is what pisses me off about how she uses the ideas.

Like, the swans.

Yeah, there's a history of feathered shape-shifters (most famous probably being Zeus getting it on with Leda) but once again, she fails at actually using them.

Plus, you know, what are they going to do, peck you to death?

And, of course, there's another thing - how many of these guys are in this area anyway?

It sounds like one big oversexed zoo, okay, LKH?

(Dear Richard, please go find ourself an alpha female who compliments and equals you - I don't have time to write this shit with how involved I am with Heroes right now, okay?)

I have to go read the Silver Wolf again.

[oh-hay-britney.livejournal.com]

Silver Wolf was exquisite. *.*

[orthent.livejournal.com]

Plus, you know, what are they going to do, peck you to death?

Reputedly, a swan can break your arm with a blow from its wing. They only look delicate.

[rhicat.livejournal.com]

I have to friend you just on the basis of this post alone. And your library ;-)

[moonsinger.livejournal.com]

Silver Wolf?

[graesea.livejournal.com]

I don't know about swans, but I've had some run-ins with geese - those suckers can back down a rottweiler! *l*

The best guard dogs I ever had were a pair of blue-eyed chinese geese. They ate all the bugs from the garden, fertilized as they snacked, and no one entered the yard until they were penned.

[jeza-red.livejournal.com]

"Plus, you know, what are they going to do, peck you to death?"

well, actually kinda yeah^^" One "peck" from a pissed off swan can be enough to break humans' scull.

My father have a farm with a bigass pond and there's a pair of swans living there... and they're so "not-to-piss-off" birds>_<

They're beautiful though^^

[dameruth.livejournal.com]

There are some species of voles (http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreview&ARTICLEID_CHAR=40B4E251-2B35-221B-637BC34C34291A50) that are *really* monogamous . . . but they wouldn't make for very sexy weres, either. Could give a whole new meaning to the nickname "Pit of Voles," though! XD

Random other comments: anyone who thinks swans are wussies has never been around them. They're like giant geese with EXTRA attitude.

RE: weres as people-with-fur . . . I can see blending human and animal characterstics with weres, no problem, but the idea of social leopards gives me indigestion, too. If you want social feline weres, go for lions, I say.

[saucyirishlass.livejournal.com]

but they wouldn't make for very sexy weres

Well, I wouldn't have really pegged rats for very sexy weres, either...

[saucyirishlass.livejournal.com]

There's a bit from Wikipedia that I found interesting about the difference between social monogamy and sexual monogamy:

The great majority of socially monogamous species engage in extra-pair copulations, making them sexually non-monogamous. For example, while over 90% of birds are socially monogamous, "on average, 30 percent or more of the baby birds in any nest [are] sired by someone other than the resident male."

Also, some species of bats are monogamous.

[easol.livejournal.com]

You'd think werebats would be an obvious choice.

[moonsinger.livejournal.com]

Eagles take one mate.

[quizzicalsphinx.livejournal.com]

Twinkies. Twinkies mate for life. Tom Robbins says so.

[mizmalice.livejournal.com]

What are twinkies?

[kd-lalala.livejournal.com]

That actually reminds me, you know who does animal relationships better than LKH?

This guy, Bill Holbrook: http://www.kevinandkell.com/

Granted that's for comedic purposes for the most part, but he definitely does better classifying than LKH. For instance there's one point where a tiger dumps her lion boyfriend because he keeps sitting back and expecting her to hunt for him XD

[morriganscrow.livejournal.com]

I'm waiting for the werelemmings - the ones who, when there are too many of them, commit mass suicide off the nearest multi-storey building.

[knowthyself.livejournal.com]

I hope Anita would become one of those. BEST BOOK EVER.

[jeza-red.livejournal.com]

*rises her hand* I have another question.

Just how MANY of shapeshifters lives in Saint Louis?? Because there's already a bigass pack of wolfs, leopards, mucho lots of rats, lions, hyenas, swans and tigers. Did I miss something?

First - how big IS that city?

Shapeshifters in the city, besides swans and rats, are all carnivores. Wolfs, leopards, lions, hyenas and tigers - come on, those are the top level predators, I can't imagine them living in the same city all nice and peaceful-__- Lions and hyenas? They're natural enemies, damnit! A standoff between wolf and leopard? Pwease! I understand that those are people in the first place, but LKH shows us time after time how strong their instincts are! Fighting for the territory is the most natural thing in the world and she just... ignores it-__-

Second - where are all the were-humans? You know, the plain everyday people?

[easol.livejournal.com]

The werehumans aren't SEXY or POWERFUL and the Doomcrotch holds no sway over them, therefore they are utterly inconsequential.

[slayra.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I can't say how many paranormal romances I've read where the were-something-or-other is desperately trying to find his/her mate. Like I pointed out, in some post, somewhere (I was ranting about LKH's dumbness in having "mates" in the were-world) most animals in the world aren't monogamous. Wolves certainly aren't, and most felines, if all, aren't either. So I really don't see where the "mate for life" enters in all this story. Like I said in that long ago post, the only creature in all of this mess (of were-animals) that can eventually mate for life is... humans.

Unfortunately, it was not only LKH that made that "mate" thing popular... Sherrilyn Kenyon uses it in spades. All her were-animals have a "mate".

One thing I don't understand in LKH's little zoo of werecreatures is why the freaking wolves are the strongest... in nature, most of the other species of animals she describes (leopards, panthers, lions and tigers) could kick a wolf's ass in a second. Heck, even Hyenas could beat a wolf's ass. So, shouldn't those lycanthropes be ALL stronger than the werewolves???? That particular bit annoys me to no end. Really. :p

[orthent.livejournal.com]

One thing I don't understand in LKH's little zoo of werecreatures is why the freaking wolves are the strongest... in nature, most of the other species of animals she describes (leopards, panthers, lions and tigers) could kick a wolf's ass in a second.

Hell, even in medieval beast-fables, little Renart pwns big, dumb Ysengrim every time.