Political Crossfire Forums

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2327 Location: Edinburgh

mattwa33193 wrote: Drake wrote: mattwa33193 wrote:
It would be interesting to see what a similar study would show in a city with an extremely large gay population where the level of acceptance isn't so high, like Orlando.

I agree. I think more studies would help.

mattwa33193 wrote:
So far, I haven't seen anything that indicates extreme promiscuity among gays is any more or less of a problem, or any more or less rooted in other pschological issues than it is among heterosexuals. So is it the combination of promiscuity and the "wrong" sexual preference that makes it an issue?

I don't know that the sexual preference makes it any more of an issue. But if we're willing to agree that promiscuity is rooted in psychological issues, can we conclude that gays suffer from these issues to a greater extent than heterosexuals given their higher proclivity towards promiscuity?

If that proved to be the case, I would agree. However, can we agree that one study in San Francisco (or even several studies in San Francisco) doesn't prove that gays are more promiscous than heterosexuals?
Exactly. Statistical inferring anything about an entire population requires a random sample of the entire population, not a specifically selected sample who may (and in this case almost certainly do) deviate from the norm.

Drake · Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 402

Prole wrote:
That said, no, I don't think it is a huge time investment. A married couple might have sex 500 times in a year without seriously disrupting their life; what's to prevent a homosexual from having 500 partners over the course of a lifetime?

Again, time investment is not the issue. Having sex 500 times with a committed partner is not promiscuous, no matter how much time you spend. Having 500 different partners is. These are apples and oranges.

Prole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with FWIW; what does it mean?

Regarding promiscuity being indicative of some other psychological problems, I think that is valid. However, I believe that using sex for attention is more of a psychological problem in females than in males. And I really couldn't make much of an assertion either way without an understanding of gay culture in San Francisco; what does sex mean for those involved?

FWIW=For what it's worth. Sorry.

Maybe I misunderstand your position. Are you willing to accept that promiscuity is not normal?

Are you willing to accept that promiscuity is much more prevalent in the gay community?

I'd be interested to hear some more honest input from UrielsFyre. How would you compare promiscuity in the gay community to that in the heterosexual community?

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 9381

Drake wrote: I'd be interested to hear some more honest input from UrielsFyre. How would you compare promiscuity in the gay community to that in the heterosexual community? I would say that promiscuity is existent across sexualities. Having meaningless sex, with friends or with strangers, is not dependent on sexuality.

I also feel that the reason it is more prevalent in the gay community is twofold. First, as stated earlier, a lot of gay men suffer from extraordinarily low self-esteem due, in part, to the rampant anti-gay messages that we receive. Ask any gay man out there and I assure you that you will find that they have been the victim, multiple times, of homophobic sentiments including, but not limited to, threats of violence and death. Personally, I have received death threats on 3 separate occasions. I have also had my car vandalized and just had horrible things shouted at me for holding my boyfriend's hand in a movie theater.

The barrage of hatred and deprecating messages I received caused me to spiral in to a serious depression. At that time the only thing that made me feel wanted, even for a short period of time, was sex. Knowing that for that time I was wanted, attractive, and desirable helped with the self-esteem...if for nothing more than a few hours.

It became an endless cycle. Feel bad, have sex, feel bad again later. I am sure that I am not the only gay man who has felt that.

The other reason I think it is more prevalent in the gay male community is that it is two men. While this may be a stereotype, I think it is one with merit. Men, on the whole, are more sexual than women. With heterosexual couples, there is a woman there to say "No" sometimes. With gay couples, no woman to say "No" and less likely one of the men will. This is an assumption and stereotype, sure. But, I feel it is highly appropriate.

All in all, the promiscuity of the gay community is not entirely due to gay men simply being horny. There is a psychological component as well; low self-esteem. That self-esteem problem stems partially from the negative messages received from uncaring, and misinformed, people who feel that gay people are not worth the simple respect that everyone deserves.

Drake · Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 402

UrielsFyre wrote: Drake wrote: I'd be interested to hear some more honest input from UrielsFyre. How would you compare promiscuity in the gay community to that in the heterosexual community? I would say that promiscuity is existent across sexualities. Having meaningless sex, with friends or with strangers, is not dependent on sexuality.

I also feel that the reason it is more prevalent in the gay community is twofold. First, as stated earlier, a lot of gay men suffer from extraordinarily low self-esteem due, in part, to the rampant anti-gay messages that we receive. Ask any gay man out there and I assure you that you will find that they have been the victim, multiple times, of homophobic sentiments including, but not limited to, threats of violence and death. Personally, I have received death threats on 3 separate occasions. I have also had my car vandalized and just had horrible things shouted at me for holding my boyfriend's hand in a movie theater.

The barrage of hatred and deprecating messages I received caused me to spiral in to a serious depression. At that time the only thing that made me feel wanted, even for a short period of time, was sex. Knowing that for that time I was wanted, attractive, and desirable helped with the self-esteem...if for nothing more than a few hours.

It became an endless cycle. Feel bad, have sex, feel bad again later. I am sure that I am not the only gay man who has felt that.

The other reason I think it is more prevalent in the gay male community is that it is two men. While this may be a stereotype, I think it is one with merit. Men, on the whole, are more sexual than women. With heterosexual couples, there is a woman there to say "No" sometimes. With gay couples, no woman to say "No" and less likely one of the men will. This is an assumption and stereotype, sure. But, I feel it is highly appropriate.

All in all, the promiscuity of the gay community is not entirely due to gay men simply being horny. There is a psychological component as well; low self-esteem. That self-esteem problem stems partially from the negative messages received from uncaring, and misinformed, people who feel that gay people are not worth the simple respect that everyone deserves.

Well said; I agree. Do you feel that gays using sexual promiscuity to deal with low self-esteem is a problem? Also, do you think gay men have a certain preoccupation with having sex, beyond the issues you mention?

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 9381

Drake wrote: Well said; I agree. Do you feel that gays using sexual promiscuity to deal with low self-esteem is a problem? Also, do you think gay men have a certain preoccupation with having sex, beyond the issues you mention? I think that it is a problem in that anyone, gay or straight, who turns to meaningless sex as a way to deal with self-esteem issues are only finding a temporary fix. They aren't dealing with the causes, only the effects.

Also, I don't think that gay men have any more of a preoccupation with sex than do straight men. To desire sex is a human response independent of sexual orientation.

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2327 Location: Edinburgh

Drake, I think that UrielsFyre is a lot more informed about gay culture than I, so I don't have a lot to add; he summarized it brilliantly.

But to answer your specific questions, no, promiscuity is not by definition normal. Based on simply the data provided by the study, I would not be willing to accept that promiscuity is more prevalent in the gay community, but I am aware that it is for reasons that UrielsFyre mentioned. I do not believe that promiscuity by itself is a problem, but do believe that it is sometimes (and possibly often; I don't know much about the relevant psychology) indicative of other psychological issues. Kind of a "Where there's smoke, there's fire" mentality; but smoke alone isn't really a problem.

Prole watches his own weak analogy snap under its own weight.

I think it is important to always keep in perspective that a some of the problems that homosexuals have, especially male homosexuals, is brought on by intolerence from others. It is ignorant, hateful people who try to find any disconcerting trend and label an entire people which (to some extent) causes those disconcerting trends.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

UrielsFyre wrote: I also feel that the reason it is more prevalent in the gay community is twofold. First, as stated earlier, a lot of gay men suffer from extraordinarily low self-esteem due, in part, to the rampant anti-gay messages that we receive.
Gay men in Frisco are NOT the recipients of "rampant anti-gay messages that we receive." But what they do receive, and can't help but notice, is yes they are in a minority. And that in macro-society most people do not believe homosexuality is 'normal.' However, is it just because of their sexuality that people perceive this? No, like I've said I have not met one gay man who does not display certain personality traits; and the most obvious is spiritual immaturity.

As far as promiscuity is concerned. Life is funny. God has given us many gifts in which to soften our journey and to make life more enjoyable, and hey, even Jesus drank wine (with sinners...oh no!).
But there is a continuity to any of God's gifts:
IF you abuse them, and try to take more pleasure from them than God intended, they will come back to bite you; eating and drinking alcohol too much and too often are primal examples. Sexual promiscuity is a sign of dysfunctional coping with life, and worse bears the distinct attributes of an addiction.

Prole wrote: That said, no, I don't think it is a huge time investment. A married couple might have sex 500 times in a year without seriously disrupting their life; what's to prevent a homosexual from having 500 partners over the course of a lifetime?

Over 'the course of a life time'? A little misleading there. How about up until that point in their life. And without knowing the median age of the group we can't tell.

However, this is why I posted this thread. For Mary-Fairy type liberals, to believe that 'gay sexuality is the equivalent of heterosexuality is shear ignorance.
Newsweek wrote: The statistical evidence would seem to show everything is fine. Married couples say they have sex 68.5 times a year, or slightly more than once a week, according to a 2002 study by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, and the numbers haven't changed much over the past 10 years. And at least according to what people tell researchers, couples who could be classified as Duel Income, No Sex (DINS) are most likely an urban myth: working women appear to have sex just as often as their stay-at-home counterparts. And married people have 6.9 more sexual encounters a year than people who have never been married.
Married Sex

mattwa33193 · Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 904 Location: Miami

Wallie_x wrote: UrielsFyre wrote: I also feel that the reason it is more prevalent in the gay community is twofold. First, as stated earlier, a lot of gay men suffer from extraordinarily low self-esteem due, in part, to the rampant anti-gay messages that we receive.
Gay men in Frisco are NOT the recipients of "rampant anti-gay messages that we receive." But what they do receive, and can't help but notice, is yes they are in a minority. And that in macro-society most people do not believe homosexuality is 'normal.' However, is it just because of their sexuality that people perceive this? No, like I've said I have not met one gay man who does not display certain personality traits; and the most obvious is spiritual immaturity.

As far as promiscuity is concerned. Life is funny. God has given us many gifts in which to soften our journey and to make life more enjoyable, and hey, even Jesus drank wine (with sinners...oh no!).
But there is a continuity to any of God's gifts:
IF you abuse them, and try to take more pleasure from them than God intended, they will come back to bite you; eating and drinking alcohol too much and too often are primal examples. Sexual promiscuity is a sign of dysfunctional coping with life, and worse bears the distinct attributes of an addiction.

Prole wrote: That said, no, I don't think it is a huge time investment. A married couple might have sex 500 times in a year without seriously disrupting their life; what's to prevent a homosexual from having 500 partners over the course of a lifetime?

Over 'the course of a life time'? A little misleading there. How about up until that point in their life. And without knowing the median age of the group we can't tell.

However, this is why I posted this thread. For Mary-Fairy type liberals, to believe that 'gay sexuality is the equivalent of heterosexuality is shear ignorance.
Newsweek wrote: The statistical evidence would seem to show everything is fine. Married couples say they have sex 68.5 times a year, or slightly more than once a week, according to a 2002 study by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, and the numbers haven't changed much over the past 10 years. And at least according to what people tell researchers, couples who could be classified as Duel Income, No Sex (DINS) are most likely an urban myth: working women appear to have sex just as often as their stay-at-home counterparts. And married people have 6.9 more sexual encounters a year than people who have never been married.
Married Sex

People who live in San Francisco have televisions. They have newspapers. They are fully aware that they live in a country where the President feels he can publicly state that he feels that they are inferior to the other citizens he is supposed to be representing.

OK, so what did God tell you is the acceptable number of sexual partners? From the limited information He's given me, it looks like I get to have one about every 30 minutes or so. Probably no more than 4 or 5 a day, though.

I know heterosexuals who have sex with 500 different people a year, and have been doing so for years. That's their lifestyle. Some of them do have underlying issues. Others just really like sex. No diseases, no swarms of locusts leaving their back yards barren, no lightning striking them down. I wouldn't do what they do, and I wouldn't have sex with them, but I understand that their decision to live that way doesn't affect me in any way.

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 9381

Wallie_x wrote: UrielsFyre wrote: I also feel that the reason it is more prevalent in the gay community is twofold. First, as stated earlier, a lot of gay men suffer from extraordinarily low self-esteem due, in part, to the rampant anti-gay messages that we receive.
Gay men in Frisco are NOT the recipients of "rampant anti-gay messages that we receive." But what they do receive, and can't help but notice, is yes they are in a minority. And that in macro-society most people do not believe homosexuality is 'normal.' However, is it just because of their sexuality that people perceive this? No, like I've said I have not met one gay man who does not display certain personality traits; and the most obvious is spiritual immaturity.
And how do you judge spiritual immaturity? Is it simply rejecting your notions that Christianity is true? Or is it something deeper?

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2327 Location: Edinburgh

Are atheism and agnosticism considered mental disorders, Wallie? It strikes me that those who do not accept spirituality of any sort would be the most spiritually immature, yet atheists and agnostics seem to be doing pretty fine.

Do you have some proof that God and "spiritual immaturity" has any factual basis? And how do you judge such things?

Drake · Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 402

mattwa33193 wrote:
I know heterosexuals who have sex with 500 different people a year, and have been doing so for years. That's their lifestyle.

I find this very difficult to believe.

mattwa33193 · Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 904 Location: Miami

Drake wrote: mattwa33193 wrote:
I know heterosexuals who have sex with 500 different people a year, and have been doing so for years. That's their lifestyle.

I find this very difficult to believe.

It's what they do. Go out 2-3 times a week and have sex with 3 or 4 different people every time.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

mattwa33193 wrote: eople who live in San Francisco have televisions. They have newspapers. They are fully aware that they live in a country where the President feels he can publicly state that he feels that they are inferior to the other citizens he is supposed to be representing.

Just where has GWB said such?

Prole wrote: Are atheism and agnosticism considered mental disorders, Wallie? It strikes me that those who do not accept spirituality of any sort would be the most spiritually immature, yet atheists and agnostics seem to be doing pretty fine.

Do you have some proof that God and "spiritual immaturity" has any factual basis? And how do you judge such things?

Spiritual immaturity has little to do with one's beliefs. Being spiritually immature has everything to do with a person attempting to dictate to reality what he/she wants out of life instead of having some humility and listen to what life is trying to teach them. Life is an excellent teacher, provided one takes the time to listen. Life will not allow you to take more pleasure out than God allows without consequence, or like I said, it will come back and bite you.

A large majority of gays also display other psychological aberrations indicative of what should be defined as spiritual immaturity, but in psychology such a definition is not used. Chiefly, a large percentage of gays display being very self-absorbed, coupled with a petty sort of narcissism. The latter really shows when inner tension arises, especially when hurt emotionally.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

Zoot wrote: Basically, people are whole, not split in two, but have two invisible alien unicorns floating above their heads - one that makes people love, and the other that makes people molest children. And the invisible alien unicorns, they're the ones... One of the invisible alien unicorns tries to get the person to love and serve the invisible alien dragon, which very much loves the person and created all of the world with magic...

This is so inane that I won't even bother.

thefranzkafkafront · Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:59 pm Post subject:

Weve been through this before wallie, like it or not both your definitons of noramlity and morals and subjective.

Simply becuase
1. they are not innate
2. they have to objective external referance point.

Secondly if homosexuality is unnatural why
Is it
A. Physically possible
and why dose it B occur in nature.

mattwa33193 · Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 904 Location: Miami

Wallie_x wrote: mattwa33193 wrote: eople who live in San Francisco have televisions. They have newspapers. They are fully aware that they live in a country where the President feels he can publicly state that he feels that they are inferior to the other citizens he is supposed to be representing.

Just where has GWB said such?.

His position on gay marriage makes it clear. Calling for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, due to the nature of the Constitution, means that he recognizes that gay people do in fact have the right to get married but that he wants to prohibit it anyway. The Constitution is designed to remain silent on rights that people don't have.

StrangerWitCandy · Joined: 02 Feb 2005 Posts: 5706 Location: Fairfax, VA

mattwa33193 wrote: Wallie_x wrote: mattwa33193 wrote: eople who live in San Francisco have televisions. They have newspapers. They are fully aware that they live in a country where the President feels he can publicly state that he feels that they are inferior to the other citizens he is supposed to be representing.

Just where has GWB said such?.

His position on gay marriage makes it clear. Calling for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, due to the nature of the Constitution, means that he recognizes that gay people do in fact have the right to get married but that he wants to prohibit it anyway. The Constitution is designed to remain silent on rights that people don't have.

Exactly. Hence the need for him to amend it, because it currently isn't serving his agenda.

mattwa33193 · Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 904 Location: Miami

StrangerWitCandy wrote: mattwa33193 wrote: Wallie_x wrote: mattwa33193 wrote: eople who live in San Francisco have televisions. They have newspapers. They are fully aware that they live in a country where the President feels he can publicly state that he feels that they are inferior to the other citizens he is supposed to be representing.

Just where has GWB said such?.

His position on gay marriage makes it clear. Calling for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, due to the nature of the Constitution, means that he recognizes that gay people do in fact have the right to get married but that he wants to prohibit it anyway. The Constitution is designed to remain silent on rights that people don't have.

Exactly. Hence the need for him to amend it, because it currently isn't serving his agenda.

I can't tell if you support him ammending the Constitution, or oppose it.

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5632 Location: Fulton, Ks

Wallie_x wrote: Zoot wrote: Basically, people are whole, not split in two, but have two invisible alien unicorns floating above their heads - one that makes people love, and the other that makes people molest children. And the invisible alien unicorns, they're the ones... One of the invisible alien unicorns tries to get the person to love and serve the invisible alien dragon, which very much loves the person and created all of the world with magic...

This is so inane that I won't even bother.

How much different is what you said than what he said? Really think about it.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

The Underground wrote: How much different is what you said than what he said? Really think about it.

How much different? Really? The idea of the spiritual dichotomy of human nature has been expounded by some of the brightest minds to gift humanity. So what your saying is:

1) their is no spiritual dichotomy, it is all subjective interpretation.
2) the literary classics are antiquated hogwash so lets not mention them.

mattwa33193 wrote: Calling for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage,

This belongs in its own thread. Moreover, the idea is just more secular existential hogwash. Gays have no right to define their unions as a 'marriage' period. That right is for those whom God has given the responsibility to procreate the human species.