I like Gibbons
I like the ones that poop coffee beans
E: I have been informed this is not in fact a monkey, but a civet. I change my answer to a fez-wearing Capuchin.
Spamming the same comment I already made: If monkey is to be used as a scientific term instead of just a colloquial one, then apes are necessarily monkeys because everything they’re descended from is a monkey. Without apes included, “monkey” is paraphyletic. Apes and Old World monkeys are more closely related to each other than either are to New World monkeys.
Colloquially, "monkey" is already used to refer to apes all the time, so the linguistic argument is just a matter of preference and either usage is fine.
Spamming the same comment I already made: If monkey is to be used as a scientific term instead of just a colloquial one, then apes are necessarily monkeys because everything they’re descended from is a monkey. Without apes included, “monkey” is paraphyletic. Apes and Old World monkeys are more closely related to each other than either are to New World monkeys.
Colloquially, “monkey” is already used to refer to apes all the time, so the linguistic argument is just a matter of preference and either usage is fine.
It’s true that there are still plenty of groups that are paraphyletic because the relationships are still being determined, but the lowest category that includes all tailed monkeys is Simiiformes, which does include apes. To my knowledge, scientists tend to avoid quibbling about the term “monkey” these days, in part because tons of non-scientists use it to refer to apes regularly anyways.
I guess I don’t really agree with that binary, because the language of literally millions of people like the OP already doesn’t actually clash at all with the classification reality. It’s mainly people with outdated knowledge of biology or who insist on there being one true definition of some words that get peeved when apes get called monkeys. The linguistic battle is essentially already lost for a large segment of the population and was arbitrary anyways.
I'm partial to Geladas. They're terrifying, but also have complex social structures!
TY for sharing, spent an interesting 20 minutes looking them up!
Black crested macaques are very cute, theyre the only monkey who tries to befriend its own reflection instead of attack it. They have plentiful food resources so are super chill and nonaggressive for the most part. They also extensively use facial expressions for communication! Second place is orangutan because big wise monke
im more of a great ape guy but..
-
Spider Monkeys
-
Marmosets
-
Mandrills
edit: didnt even realize gibbons werent monkeys! shame
Spamming the same comment I already made: If monkey is to be used as a scientific term instead of just a colloquial one, then apes are necessarily monkeys because everything they’re descended from is a monkey. Without apes included, “monkey” is paraphyletic. Apes and Old World monkeys are more closely related to each other than either are to New World monkeys.
Colloquially, “monkey” is already used to refer to apes all the time, so the linguistic argument is just a matter of preference and either usage is fine.
I'm not sure if theres an actual scientific basis for this but the simplest way ive found to think of it is that monkeys have tails and great apes don't. Their size misled me but i totally get why gibbons dont count. Spider monkeys are cooler anyway lol.
Gibbons are what they call “lesser apes” which is frankly offensive because they’re pretty great, too. But there is a species of macaque, which are unambiguously considered monkeys by most modern people, that also has no tail. In fact, it used to sometimes be called the Barbary ape.
Hm..I looked it up and your little friends do in fact have tails, they are just nubs to the point of being vestigial. But I can appreciate your larger point that in the colloquial understanding, we’re all just monkeys trying our best.
-
