Gay Stereotypes

[+ Gar1eth]

There has long been a stereotype - partially true- about gay males being extremely promiscuous. Everyone of course can point to friends of theirs who have been committed couples for years. I think in the early days of the gay rights movement possibly promiscuity might have been considered one of the few rights/privileges we had. The straights had taken away or prevented us from experiencing so much of their normal life. How else to explain all the partying, smoking, drinking, and drug use. If the straights were rejecting us on a routine basis, hating us, denying out rights - and especially not recognizing that we had the capacity to form deep emotional bonds with others- then out of frustration due to constant non acceptance why shouldn't some of us act like eternal teenagers where the only thing of importance is the next new experience.

 

So but now we are slowly gaining more and more acceptance. We can even marry in several states and countries- is this/ has this/will this ( along with the AIDs. crisis) push our culture to more maturity/stability?

 

 

Gman

[+ honcho]

My guess is that a fair amount of the difference of promiscuity between gay and straight men is due to a difference

of in the eagerness of their partners to consumate sexual interest earlier in the association cycle.

 

I.e. if straight women were as willing/driven to hope into bed with guys they found visually appealing, then there would

likely be a greater degree of promiscuity in straight men.

 

Can't say whether the difference is by nature (testorone driven mania) or nurture (societal expectations, peer (dis-)approval ...

[+ Gar1eth]

My guess is that a fair amount of the difference of promiscuity between gay and straight men is due to a difference

of in the eagerness of their partners to consumate sexual interest earlier in the association cycle.

 

I.e. if straight women were as willing/driven to hope into bed with guys they found visually appealing, then there would

likely be a greater degree of promiscuity in straight men.

 

Can't say whether the difference is by nature (testorone driven mania) or nurture (societal expectations, peer (dis-)approval ...

 

You bring up an interesting point. So is pregnancy possibly the reason. We know that as much as we have sex ( well to be more truthful ) as much as people other than I have sex with other males, pregnancy is one thing we don't have to worry about.

 

Gman

[+ deej]

You bring up an interesting point. So is pregnancy possibly the reason. We know that as much as we have sex ( well to be more truthful ) as much as people other than I have sex with other males, pregnancy is one thing we don't have to worry about.

 

Some have suggested that.

 

More likely, for many generations parents have socialized little girls to be "good girls", to "save it" for their marriage bed. But they socialize little boys to be horn dogs and "get some". In some communities, it's common even to have fathers taking their young sons to brothels for their first lay.

 

When the boys (who have been socialized to "get some") like other boys (who have also been socialized to "get some"), the getting gets kinda easy and frequent.

[Guest]

So but now we are slowly gaining more and more acceptance. We can even marry in several states and countries- is this/ has this/will this ( along with the AIDs. crisis) push our culture to more maturity/stability?

 

I don't see monogamy as "more mature." In my mind, in fact, I think of it as a bit silly. I've been living with my domestic partner for over a decade. We have an agreement that it's OK to have one-time sex with other guys. I don't see that as being unfaithful. I would feel it to be unfaithful if he repeatedly saw the same guy, because then there's an attachment. We don't rub it in each others' faces, but I know he hooks up with other guys from time to time, and he knows I do (including escorts--not in our house, of course). Men are biologically driven to enjoy sex with as many partners as possible. I feel that an insistence on monogamy would most often lead to resentment and jealousy. Sex with different guys (or gals, if one is heterosexual) is one of life's greatest pleasures. I believe that to deny that is unhealthy, sad, and most likely unsustainable.

[leigh.bess.toad]

I don't see monogamy as "more mature." In my mind, in fact, I think of it as a bit silly. I've been living with my domestic partner for over a decade. We have an agreement that it's OK to have one-time sex with other guys. I don't see that as being unfaithful. I would feel it to be unfaithful if he repeatedly saw the same guy, because then there's an attachment. We don't rub it in each others' faces, but I know he hooks up with other guys from time to time, and he knows I do (including escorts--not in our house, of course). Men are biologically driven to enjoy sex with as many partners as possible. I feel that an insistence on monogamy would most often lead to resentment and jealousy. Sex with different guys (or gals, if one is heterosexual) is one of life's greatest pleasures. I believe that to deny that is unhealthy, sad, and most likely unsustainable.

 

A different take on that though comes from the straight world. Much to the surprise of the entire LGBTQ community in Richmond, when the Supreme Court opened in new session last month, our local newspaper, the severely arch-conservative Richmond Times-Dispatch (aka the Times Disgrace), had an editorial in favor of marriage equality. Mind you, this is a paper that the next time they endorse a democrat for president will be the first time they endorse a democrat. But this paragraph sort of bears on the topic, I think:

 

"Gay marriage does not undermine traditional marriage, any more than allowing gay couples to open joint banking accounts undermines traditional banking. The true threat to marriage lies elsewhere, in a rising tide of illegitimacy that has spread from the underclass to the middle. Social conservatives, who have railed so long against the bathhouse culture of a small segment of the gay community, should be happy that homosexuals want to enter into lifelong monogamy."

[Diverdan]

Lee,

Most interesting comment from your local paper... thanks for sharing.. maybe there is hope after all... advocacy, even if miss-placed, or based on error, may in fact help some to understand what this conversation is all about... LOVE, and COMMITMENT available to all.

DD

[leigh.bess.toad]

Lee,

Most interesting comment from your local paper... thanks for sharing.. maybe there is hope after all... advocacy, even if miss-placed, or based on error, may in fact help some to understand what this conversation is all about... LOVE, and COMMITMENT available to all.

DD

 

If anyone wants to read the entire editorial, here's the link:

 

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/rtd-opinion/2012/oct/08/tdopin01-for-equality-ar-2265042/

 

The last paragraph was also great:

 

"Seven lower courts have ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. So should the Supreme Court. Striking down both DOMA and racial preferences would help ensure that all men and women not only are created equal — but are treated that way, too."

 

Coming from this paper, jaws have had to be restored to their full and upright position. We NEVER saw it coming. I can't confirm this but I believe they were in favor of the constitutional ban which was passed in Virginia in 2006. This ban is among the most restrictive in the country. Now for the them to argue in favor of marriage equality, it shows how far we've come in such a short period of time. We lost that vote in 2006 57%-43%. So maybe there is hope that in the next few years, even a place like Virginia could see equality.

[tyro]

Encouraging news indeed.

T

[Guest]

Lee,

Most interesting comment from your local paper... thanks for sharing.. maybe there is hope after all... advocacy, even if miss-placed, or based on error, may in fact help some to understand what this conversation is all about... LOVE, and COMMITMENT available to all.

DD

 

Well, I must voice some objection over the implication that because my partner and I have an open (to a point) relationship, that there's any lack of love or commitment. We fully support and love each other. While I fully understand that probably a majority of women, and an unknown percentage of men, can't fathom commitment without sexual monogamy, we almost feel the opposite way. I can't imagine committing myself to someone if that were to mean cutting myself off sexually to anyone else on a permanent basis. I'd rather stay single. I feel empowered by the fact that my partner can have sex with other guys, but chooses to stay with me. When I had a serious injury that left me seriously disabled for several months, I never doubted his commitment, or thought he wouldn't take care of me. Even if either of us became permanently disabled, I know we'd stay together. And I'd be happy to know he could get the occasional snogging on the side.

[RockHard]

Well, you know what they say about stereotypes.

 

I know quite a few very good-looking straight men who are having much more sex than I ever did, and with multiple partners. One hot guy in particular, with a very large cock, never suffers from young, hot, sexy model types throwing their tits in his face and begging him to fuck them. The bottom line is, if you're hot and you're horny (no matter your age or gender), sex is there for you, 24/7, if that's the life you wish to have.

 

The chub guys, the less attractive, the small-dicked, and those without a personality have less exalted opportunities. Life has never been fair. And where there's a will, there's a way.

 

Regardless of my personal theology, I've never been convinced that monogamy is for everyone. I realize and understand why stability matters in a society, and I also see the benefits of a committed relationship. But I think these are choices. If two guys choose monogamy, then I support them. If other guys choose a committed relationship but also choose to fuck around, I support them, too. If other guys prefer to remain single (like myself), then why not play the field? The only reason I don't have more sex, I'm less horny these days. And I hate forcing it.

 

On the other hand, if I unexpectedly fell in love again, and I fell in love with a guy who wanted/needed a monogamous commitment and/or a marriage, I doubt I would think twice about giving the man I love what he wants. Because, IMO, that's one way I define love.

 

I'm just not sure how I would deal with the share-money thing. I worked too hard for what I've built to not appreciate the value of a pre-nup.

[+ Gar1eth]

As one of the chubs who can almost never get sex much less a date without a business arrangement with an escort- I won't offer my feelings on monogamy or relationships One thing I don't understand from the Richmond Editorial. It speaks of problems/illegitimacy in marriage coming from below. But actually if you look at history, it was the nobles playing around which I think translates to the country club set nowadays ( or at least if nowadays were the '50's). I have no idea about the rates of adultery in the middle and lower classes, but it was definitely known in the upper.

 

Gman