Animal sexual behaviour however, is proving to be false as, "most hormones don’t influence behaviour directly. Rather, they affect thinking and emotions in variable ways (Azar, 40)." There is much more involved in sexual behaviour in the mammalian animal than oxytocin and vasopressin can explain. It is often assumed that animals do not have sex for pleasure, or alternatively that humans, pigs, bonoboes (and perhaps dolphins and one or two more species of primates) are the only species that do. This is sometimes stated as "animals mate only for reproduction". This view is considered a misconception by some scholars. Jonathan Balcombe argues that
Political Animals and Animal Politics posed by these conflicts. His mixed account, he claims, provides a form of justice appropriate for thinking about human and nonhuman individuals and collectives in the Anthropocene. Driessen explores ways in which nonhuman animals might be understood to be engaging in political deliberation. His claim is empirical rather than normative, as he presents nonhuman animals as already being in political dialogue with humans; rather than arguing that rights should be extended to animals, he calls for a recognition of how interactions with animals have always been political. This is particularly noticeable, he argues, when humans are involved in the development