Hypocrites R Us???

[+ Lucky]

Several guys seem to be in a dither about Tiger Woods dipping his stick in too many places, yet this is the very place where we tell married men how to find escorts. Sometimes we even encourage them when they need assistance. Then we all discuss the multiple partners we have, and even brag about how many guys we had at one time.

 

So why so hard on Woods? Gay men should be the last people to take pleasure in Tiger's problems. We are probably the least monogamous group on the planet.

A Washington Post columnist discusses the fact that highly successful athletes are rarely unwilling to enjoy the sex that gets thrown at them. Most people I know say that men are not born to be monogamous, that it is our biological destiny to spread the seed, and I see no evidence to contradict that.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

[MsGuy]

"Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn't have to mean public confessions." TW

 

Nothing would make me happier than to witness Woods (& his wife) successfully stare down the media vultures. Truth be told, seeing the scandal mongers eventually slink away frustrated would do my heart good. If TW can pull this off, more power to him.

 

That said, Lucky, it's also in our DNA to be endlessly curious about what other folks are up to. Gossip is hard wired into our behavior; it has a high survival value. Hell, what is the central purpose of this review site if it's not to provide a forum to gossip about escorts?

[+ Lucky]

I thought it was it provide gossip about each other! Seriously, we do not gossip about escorts here, just relate the facts as we see them.

[NYTomcat]

Actually we seem to gossip about everything but escorts. It seems to me the forum is pretty deferential, as it should be, to not gossiping about escorts and their personal issues/lives. Rather we market escorts to each other. Unless we have the odd attack thread I have noticed. Seems rather unproductive but nonetheless intriguing.

 

And yes Lucky I agree we are hypocrites, why should we hold Tiger to any higher standard than we allow ourselves and, as you noted, often fail to acheive. However, he has chosen the limelight for his lifestyle, most of us have not. It comes with a price. But one that I think we all agree is usually too steep. I'd rather see him deal with his private life in private. Prurient interest is fine, until it's just hurtful. We've crossed some lines I'm never sure we will back away from again. Too bad, as much as I like juicy gossip, and I do, I could live with less of it and with a little more... civility.

[+ Charlie]

Actually we seem to gossip about everything but escorts. Rather we market escorts to each other.

 

An astute observation.

[MiamiLooker]

Several guys seem to be in a dither about Tiger Woods dipping his stick in too many places, yet this is the very place where we tell married men how to find escorts. Sometimes we even encourage them when they need assistance.]

 

Are you suggesting that those posters in the other thread that have pointed out the hypocrisy in the Tiger Woods' situation have also encouraged others to cheat on their spouses? You're certainly taking license with your inclusive use of "we".

 

 

Then we all discuss the multiple partners we have, and even brag about how many guys we had at one time.

 

The most I've had at one time is two; certainly not worthy of bragging about.

 

 

Most people I know say that men are not born to be monogamous, that it is our biological destiny to spread the seed, and I see no evidence to contradict that.

 

If that's what you believe, then I hope you're working very hard to remove adultery as an action for divorce. Otherwise, assuming gay marriage is eventually legalized, you're suggesting most gay marriages are doomed from the start. I suppose the attorneys win again.

[josephga]

I hate it when people say that that men are not born to be monogamous. That's saying a person doesn't have free will. A person makes the choice regarding being monogamous or not.

[+ honcho]

Propensity for Polyamory?

 

I'm not a trained geneticist or psychologist, but I"m wondering if there might not be some

genetic predisposition among men which varies from individual to indvidual about the intensity of desire (if not need) for sexual variety. We describe people's sexual preferences on the Kinsey scale, and there seems to be a fair amount of evidence that it is genetically link, and genuinely varies from person to person. Occasionally, I see a biological XX type that reminds me I'm only a 5.9 and not a 6 on the scale ....

 

This is not to directly refute what Joseph-of-Georgia says about lack of free will.

[Guest PWIT]

I'm not a trained geneticist or psychologist, but I"m wondering if there might not be some genetic predisposition among men which varies from individual to indvidual about the intensity of desire (if not need) for sexual variety.

 

Scientists Discover the Monogamy Gene

[justaguy]

Thanks for posting the article. More research is needed, but it gives me a lot to think about.

[NYTomcat]

Actually we seem to gossip about everything but escorts. Rather we market escorts to each other.

 

An astute observation.

 

Thank you Charlie. But as Lucky's thread has shown, this is a much more supportive and inviting site than many others (Long live the Dutchess). Instead of Bitchy cat fights (which we all enjoy from time to time, Thank you to those who know who you are.) Its a pleasure to come on and read, learn and experience this little world of Hooville (Thanks for the name Lucky and Cooper's history lesson, I never knew that was your invention, Kudos)

[Guest greatness]

a good perspective...

 

well said..

 

I hate it when people say that that men are not born to be monogamous. That's saying a person doesn't have free will. A person makes the choice regarding being monogamous or not.

[+ Lucky]

I think that most men are as monogamous as they know how to be.

[+ Oliver]

... Its a pleasure to come on and read, learn and experience this little world of Hooville (Thanks for the name Lucky and Cooper's history lesson ...

 

NYTom - come join us at the end of March. You sound like someone we all would like to meet.

[NYTomcat]

NYTom - come join us at the end of March. You sound like someone we all would like to meet.

 

Ok still the Newbie here, so what is at the end of March. and where do I sign Up LOL. Is that the infamous Lucky's hooville get together? and PS thanks for the invite Oliver, I think?

[Guest alanm]

Tiger's Image

 

Tiger's behavior is news because of his clean public image, and his status as the best player in his sport.

 

If tennis' Rodger Federer or baseball's Albert Pujols were caught in

the same situation that would be news too. It is true that neither Federer nor Pujols have captured the attention of general public the way Tiger has, even before the events of the last week.

[+ Oliver]

Ok still the Newbie here, so what is at the end of March. and where do I sign Up LOL. Is that the infamous Lucky's hooville get together? and PS thanks for the invite Oliver, I think?

According to Cooper's post in the thread on "New Posters":

... Lucky coined the term "Hooville" and has brought many members closer together. Each year he and Oliver host a Hooville gathering in Palm Springs. This has become an excellent opportunity for members and escorts to finally meet the faces behind those user names and share some common interests ...

 

This year's event will be March 27 & 28. Please try to make it - I think you will have a good time. We do!

[NYTomcat]

According to Cooper's post in the thread on "New Posters":

 

 

This year's event will be March 27 & 28. Please try to make it - I think you will have a good time. We do!

 

My Hooville education continues. I'm gonna re-work my schedule and see if I can't make that happen. and early, A little birdie tells me advance reservations are highly recommended (thanks). Thanks for the invite Oliver and the heads up. It would be a pleasure to meet the faces behind this little family. Now back to the thread, I didn't mean to hijack Lucky's point on our hypocritical natures and monogamy.

[MsGuy]

Now back to the thread, I didn't mean to hijack Lucky's point on our hypocritical natures and monogamy.

 

On this board threads are often even less monogamous than boyfriends. Usually the OP will let you know if you're wandering too far off topic.

[+ Oliver]

... Now back to the thread, I didn't mean to hijack Lucky's point on our hypocritical natures and monogamy ...

 

I think we both did that. Sorry, Lucky.

[+ Lucky]

Old Faithful

 

LOL...it was all for a good cause. I know that you all remained faithful to the thread, and that brings up a point not being discussed here. Can one be faithful while at the same time being non-monogamous?

 

Today, my 27th anniversary, I think indicates my fidelity. My heart has always belonged to one, even though I have definitely not been monogamous, something we have mutually agreed on.

[+ Oliver]

Fidelity and Monogamy

 

... Can one be faithful while at the same time being non-monogamous? I was and you are!

 

Today, my 27th anniversary, I think indicates my fidelity ...

 

Congratulations - to both of you on #27! As we have discussed before - there is a difference between fidelity and monogamy, and one can have the former without latter.

[Guest DuchessIvanaKizznhugg]

Break out the bubbly......

 

Congratulations, Lucky.

27 years is a milestone for ANY relationship, gay, straight, or otherwise.

I think it speaks to the strength of commitment to an agreeable outcome, and that besides all the other good things like communication and shared interests, etc, a healthy does of LUCK is also involved.

 

In answer to your question, yes to faithful/non-monogamous.

As gay men, I have particular concerns with why we would want to feel the need to adopt behaviour (monogamy) that is so central to the power of the Church. I'm at a loss as to why it's held up as the ideal......especially when compared to reality.

 

Congratulations once again. Cheers to you both!

http://i965.photobucket.com/albums/ae139/DuchessIvanaKizznhugg/Humour/3004659752_f9e6f5dfc9_o.jpg

[+ Charlie]

Happy Anniversary! I have never been able to understand why sexual monogamy should be the standard for faithfulness in a gay relationship.

[Romann]

Congratulations to both of you! Relationships are what you make of them and if it works, it works!

 

http://www.jhocy.com/graphics/anniversary4.gif