Well that's just not true. We see homoerotic behavior is some animals, not all.
That [anyone] would rely upon animals to 'teach humans' anything betrays its fundamental lack of any moorings or for that matter, of much in the way of common sense. To see this, let us first remember what animals do.
Animals, among other .criminal' activities:
None of these activities inform how we regard cannibalism, murder, gang rape, marriage, the rightful place of the sexes, or incest. What happens in the animal kingdom is irrelevant to what occurs in the human realm.
...
Humans are different from animals in countless ways. Humans speak, write, have a sense of personal history and the history of their culture (and often of other cultures as well). They think about and plan for the future, have theories about what makes the world tick (e.g., believe in God, Evolution, or alien visitors), and devise schemes of how the world 'should be' (e.g., have legal systems and cultural ideals 'everyone is equal', only a man and a woman can be married,'etc.).
...
Humans also change the world in innumerable ways (build roads, buildings, bridges, tunnels), and manipulate the earth for food and entertainment (e.g., horticulture, husbandry, planetary exploration). Animals, as near as we can determine, do none of these things. Even when they 'use tools' (like sticks or rocks), animals display only rudimentary skill at the enterprise. Source
...
If we arbitrarily pick which animal behaviors to value, then any such study from which we get insights for human behavior is a complete waste of time.
Thanks for posting that - I "misplaced" my copy in the computer fixit thing. I'm still searching for stuff I "saved".